White generally gets an advantage if Black doesn't try to keep the pawn, open f-file, central majority. The Muzio Gambit is good for Black, but Black can play safer with 4... Bg7 and just be better. Bc4 is not a very good move. White can do better with h4 or Nc3 but g5 is a good move regardless. There are other good moves. Be7, Nf6 is the modern Cunningham. It's not bad but it seems to be playing into White's hands allowing the big center. The entire point of the gambit is to trade the f-pawn for the e-pawn. If you'd rather have your f-pawn don't play the King's Gambit.
Why do people play 3: ...g5 in the king's gambit?
Sort:
Mar 8, 2016
0
#3
It's the opposite. If black plays passively he will be worse. He needs to take the material with a theoretical advantage. White will get compensation, but the material is just as (if not more) important.
It's way better to (in your words) to lack an f- pawn than e-pawn.
Okay, so black wants to keep his f pawn. What other options does black have? I am not trying to re-invent the wheel and bust the king's gambit again, I just wonder what the safest way to face it is. The main problem I have is that after this position is reached:
Most can forget about using words like "compensation" or "material". It's just a tactical fight with people trying to checkmate each other and while that's one way to go, I would like to be able to avoid it. The point is that white made a premature f pawn advance and I would like to punish him for it without making solid concessions of my own as is required by 3: ...g5. After this move I would rather have the white pieces.
I wonder if there exist variations that are frustratingly quiet for white and make very aggressive and sacrificial king's gambit players uncomfortable because they hoped the game would end before move 25. It's not about what the engine evaluates or what the best moves are, just different playable options.
Mar 8, 2016
0
#5
If black loses his f-pawn, then he's worse, because
- He has one center pawn, and white has two. That meanst more central control for white
- White gets a lead in development
The only way to really guard the f-pawn is to play g5--now or later.
In the line you posted, white can just play something like d3 and will pick up the f4 pawn.
Yes, white has opened the e1-h4 diagonal. But black can't take advantage of it! If white gets to castle (which he usually does) then white's king is feeling great! Meanwhile, white has better central control and more development.
So it is critical for black to keep the pawn, the only compensation he has for lack of development and lack of central control.
Mar 8, 2016
0
#6
2.d5 is an option to start with. Or 4.d6 followed by Bg7 and h6 if you dont want to walk into the Muzio. I play Kings Gambit every chance I get and the formation with pawns on d6-h6-g5-f4 and Bishop on g7 is probably the hardest to crack. Black can defend the Muzio but has to be accurate.
I will do some research of my own as well. My problem is that after the Muzio gambit is reached, white just has to make some book sacrifices and it looks very impressive and he's okay. But black has the very, very difficult task of proving that material > king safety.
Simply put, because g5 is the best move in the position. It holds on to the important pawn and doesn't allow white to develop a piece (Bxf4) on its best square. Not a single doubt about it. If you're black and you face this often, you must study a lot of theory. I am not sure what your level is, but I would advise you to play the Falkbeer Countergambit instead. It is a sound opening and black usually gets a very pleasant position after the first few moves.
If you know your opponent is going to play for the Muzio best is 4... Bg7. Black is actually just better in that line. Look at some games in that line and see how it goes. You have to play accurately, h6, d6, Nf6, (the formation Strangemover suggested) and you defend everything whether or not White goes for h4. That said, the Muzio is not so good for White as people on this thread are suggesting; if you learn the theory White will be lucky to draw. There's abosultely nothing wrong with the Cunningham line you suggested first either; just pick a Defense and go with it. An early d5 but not the Falkbeer is played a lot at the high levels when the KG is trotted out at all these days; that's also how Spassky has met the KG with the Black pieces in some games I've seen and he's one of the opening's heroes. There's a ton of good ways to play Black in these lines.
Mar 8, 2016
0
#13
There is also my own choice, Nimzowitsch's 1. e4 e5 2. f4 ef 3. Nf3 Nf6, the idea being 4. e5 Nh5!
The knight is surprisingly difficult to dislodge or to take advantage of. It protects the f4 pawn without incurring any structural weaknesses.
If the Nf3 moves away, then in many cases Qh4 (+) is a great answer.
If white plays h3, in many variations the g3 square becomes available for the knight, with advantage.
There are cases when even with the pawn on h2 you can score a quick win with ...Ng3+ - either because it wins the h1 rook, or because a heavy piece can later checkmate along the h-file (provided we have a bishop on the a7-g1 diagonal)
It's really not easy for white to regain his pawn and keep a good position.
Other solid options for black (and of course you should know a bit of theory as there are some fine tactical points to pay attention to) are 1. e4 e5 2. f4 Bc5!
And even - 1. e4 e5 2. f4 ef 3. Nf3 d6 (which I don't know and never play) has been recommended, if memory serves...
You could check out games in these variations to see how play generally develops for both sides. The game is typically a bit on the tactical side - as is to be expected when the forces clash in the center early in the game (1. e4 e5 - you said it all) - and the player who isn't shy of calculating and does it better - would generally win.
Such a theoretical idea of "black should be better" or "black should punish white in the opening" is out of the question. A computer may give black here -0.20 - but so what? There's a whole game to be played, and it's pretty rich. Every result is possible.
Find a line which you like, or maybe two of them, and acquire experience, after watching some games in it.
Mar 8, 2016
0
#14
After 3.Nf3 I do the solid 3...Ne7 with 4...d5 stuff.
If you know all the theory, then 3...g5 is great.
This is the position to which I am referring.
I understand that it's supposed to be a very reasonable move. However, it doesn't seem to make a lot of logical sense.
I don't understand what black has to play for after 3: ...g5
In the king's gambit, white says, "I will sacrifice a pawn and my king safety for quick development of my pieces and an attack on your king."
Now it seems the logical reply would be,
"Okay, I see you've opened up your king for almost no compensation, so I'll just play solid and you'll find you'll feel silly for playing 2: f4."
Instead, I usually see this ridiculous line:
Ridiculous for white? No, ridiculous for black! How can black allow this? It doesn't make any sense. Black is giving white all the compensation in the world for a pawn and a knight. Instead of replying with a logical reply, black says:
"Okay, you sacrifice a pawn and your king safety for development and an attack on my king? I will compromise my king safety and development as much as possible and hold onto my extra pawn for dear life. I DARE YOU TO ATTACK ME."
Just... what is this? Why do people like to play this way? White clearly just gave himself a disavantage in the position for absolutely no reason and for some reason it is popular for players with the black pieces to respond by giving themselves a similar disadvantage and playing directly into white's hands.
Surely, if black just develops and castles in a manner similar to this:
Isn't it much more of a nightmare for white to handle?
With 3: ...g5, you have a sharp game with chances for both sides and at some times a line memorization battle.
But after some solid moves from black white is just a pawn and king safety down for almost no compensation.
So I wonder if somebody can explain why I keep seeing this 3: ...g5 move and also what white is playing for if black plays something else. Maybe the position isn't as bad as it seems. I admit, it does seem very annoying that black lacks his e pawn. But I would still rather lack an e pawn than an f pawn.