Why I love king's gambit

The line Tipsy is talking about is the entire reason why Fischer created the move 3…d6.

Black use to play 3…g5 trying to defend the f4 pawn, It was proven to not be as good because White could respond with h4.

As a result, players started doing preventative measures against h4 by playing the move 3…h6.

The downside of h6 was it was non-developing move so white side players managed to get good game by playing d4 and trying to develop in center.

This is why Fischer claimed the move 3…d6 was high class waiting move because he was trying to see what move white plays than counter what they was doing accordingly.

The 3…d6 is a mixture of the 3…h6 & 3…g5 lines with hindsight especially that is what Fischer was going for.

———————————

I could play 3…d6, but I found playing d6 sooner on move 2 was more venomous in a trappy sort of way.

Tons of people fall for it

I think the reason people fall for it is because they are envisioning the above position.

They just over look the fact Black doesn’t need to take which is often how they fall prey to the move order change up.

The in between move gets them all the time.

Here is a game showcasing the 4. d4 line which has some over lap to line Tipsy is showing. I’m using Fischer line to achieve it with twist.

I didn't tried yet. As amateur, I've always used queens gambit.

White was simply playing nonsense.

Either 4.d4 g5 5.g3!, or 4.Bc4 g5 5.h4! are the right ways to create play. Or finally 4.Bc4 h6! 5.h4! and a lot of theory goes in this line.

@Compadre_J I've got out a shovel and dug up my collection of KG books (I really, really should get out more) and discover that very few books suggest 3. Nc3 against your line. 3. Nc3 is favoured by Glazkov & Estrin vol. 2 (1982), Johansson (2004), and Kalinichenko (2009). It's mentioned as a sideline to 3. Nf3 in Wall (1996) and Bangiev (1998). Meanwhile, 3. Nf3 is the only line/is recommended in Thimann (1974), Korchnoi and Zak (1974/1986), Wall (1986), Gallagher (1992), Soltis (1993), Raingruber and Maser (1995), and Johansson (1998). The 2..., d6 line doesn't seem to get a mention at all in two recent-ish well-respected books: I can't see anything about it in either McDonald (1998) or Shaw (2013).

So perhaps something depends on which books the booked-up King's Gambiteer has actually read.

Probably all your Nc3 KG players just switched to the vienna. If I wanted to play some e4/f4 gambit I'd just play Nc3 first...

Even this version isn't so bad really -

Truthfully, I have never faced 3.Nc3. I have also never been afraid of it.

I think it would be great move for White.

However, I wouldn’t call the position a Kings Gambit any more. It would definitely be a Vienna Gambit.

I think it would be Vienna Gambit: Max Lange Defense.

The line would transpose.

Most people King Gambit players like playing 3.Nf3 to keep the position more into a Kings Gambit style of position.

Keep in mind, The move 2…d6 which I play isn’t forced by Black. If I (playing as Black) felt like the move 2…d6 was harming my position, I could just play main move order and still reach Fischer Defense.

The Kings Gambit can’t escape facing the Fischer Defense. The Fischer Defense is a solid challenging line vs. KG.

I play 2…d6 as a round about way to get into Fischer Defense while attempting to set a trap.

The only real drawback is if a person playing as Black favored playing a Bc5 line vs. the Vienna.

If you like playing Bc5 vs. Vienna, The move order I am suggesting might throw you off.

I, personally, don’t play Bc5 against the Vienna.

So I am not getting move order tricked or getting thrown off.

Your saying White is playing nonsense, but it’s not really the case at all.

Your going to see 5.d4 way more vs. 5.h4.

It’s the main move really.

The move 5.h4 is a side line in comparison.

The above position is an extremely common landing pad for Black.

———————————

Play against the Kings Gambit 10 times.

You will reach the above position at least 8 times out of 10.

- 5 times - white players will play 7.c3.

- 2 times - white players will play 7.Nc3.

- 1 time - white player will play 7.g3.

———————————

If I remember correctly, Black is supposed to do Nh5 plan in h4 line.

Something like above.

Here is a game I lost:

If you look at 1st - 7 moves, we can see a similar position

Basically, White played 7.h3 instead of 7.c3 or 7.Nc3.

Doesn’t look like move h3 is better vs. other moves.

Move 9. Kh1 doesn’t seem great either.

I think I started losing the thread of the game when I played 9…c6, but black position doesn’t seem horrible.

Black was winning till move 17 or something!

I missed the skewer on my Rooks, but white didn’t have some magic winning line.

White was struggling a pretty long time.

what about e4 e5 f4 Bc5 (it is tricky to deal with)

King's Gambit sucks play Queen's Gambit it's safer, King's Gambit is too risky and you push you're F pawn????? That's just a disaster waiting to happen, unless you studied it......

(You lliterally lost on our 3rd game becuase of king's gambit).

Calling the KG "garbage" is a bit harsh. I think most of us know that, with best play, white can at least get a draw. Of course, who wants that with the white pieces? But most of us don't actually execute "best play" in our games.

That being said, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Schallopp defense in the KGA. This is one of the most annoying lines for white to face, especially on the intermediate level. Black's knight on h5 looks stupidly placed, as it's undefended and prone to a discovered attack by white's queen if the Nf3 knight moves. But the knight defends the f4 pawn, and any time white's f3 knight moves, black has Qh4+.

Check out this game from a Titled Tuesday last year:

https://www.chess.com/games/view/16632963

The Schallop is fine, but this game doesn't click to me.

I guess Black was on autopilot when he played 5...g6, as this is the move John Shaw gives in his book against 5.Be2. Here it's not necessary, and Black's absolute priority should have been destroying some of white's center with 5...d6.

And after 5.d4 g6, white should stop these annoying ...d6 ideas with the strange-looking but quite typical 6.Qe2, also preparing 0-0-0.

Genrally, Black should have dropped in ...d6 some moves earlier, and white seemed to me completely unfamiliar with the opening.

A lot of "theorists" say the King's Gambit is losing when black knows what they're doing, but somehow Spassky got seven wins in the seven games he played; beating Furman, Seirawan, Bronstein, Fischer, and Karpov. Don't be afraid to try it if you like to attack.

Ive sacrificed my bishop like probably 4 times to attack using the KG, and all lead to checkmate.

What do you play in the below position?

I agree with most of what you say. But this wasn't meant as an instructive game, just an example of how problematic the line can be for white to deal with, and especially in fast time controls. And this was a 3 minute blitz game.

Here's another example with David Bronstein vs an amateur in a simul in 1941. Bronstein, of course, was one of the best players of the 20th century and a challenger for the World Championship. Bronstein wins with a neat tactic in the end, but actually blunders with 6...dxe5, allowing white the tactic 7.Bxf7, etc. Again, not very instructive, but it's fun to see how tricky these types of positions can be, even for top players.

yea I did but I've studied hours about the Kings Gambit after that

*falkbeer *left the chat

(Vienna gambit crying in the corner)