It loses by force...
Why don't people play the Philidor counter-gambit
Sort:
SeparateHornet1 wrote:
That isn’t a forced line
Black has no sensible deviation. What do you suggest? Anything other than what I have in my line is a complete admission that the gambit is stupid and leads to a really bad position nonetheless.
Nov 2, 2020
0
#6
im currently playing an im with it. will update the game here later
I guess most players are too stupid to understand how it is good.
Even engines are "stupid"!
But not you, fine!
Nov 3, 2020
0
#9
I would also play the Philidor counter gambit, but there's a small problem...
it loses
Jan 1, 2021
0
#10
Hi,
My first recommendation is to not believe the sweeping statements.
This gambit remains largely misunderstood even by strong modern players. I recently wrote an article on it in New in Chess Yearbook.
After 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6! things are, in fact, far from clear. With some engine-assistance, White can probably demonstrate an advantage, as he can in many openings, but in a real game, it isn’t easy at all.
4.exf5 is probably the simplest way to play for White, but even here it requires precise understanding of move orders and nuances after 4...e4 5.Ng5 Bxf5. White’s best is the natural 4.Bc4 and after 4...Nc6 (the only move) 5.Ng5 Nh6 the most precise is 6.d5! with a big space advantage for White.
Still, without help from an engine running in the background, it is difficult to see what is going on exactly and in fact Steinitz and other strong analysts believed this position to be entirely OK for Black. Modern engines evaluate it more deeply and rate it as very good for White, but without serious preparation, it’s easy to stumble.
In practice, the gambit is perfectly playable up until 2300 level, as I’ve experienced myself in numerous games.
This is the Philidor Counter-gambit. I am wondering why people don't play it as often. I don't see how it's so bad. If you have any ideas why please comment on it then.