Why the heck should someone play f5 in this position😂
Don't play the Englund Gambit
Sort:
This is why playing by the book or principals is bad, throw out the book and customize it. I've found englund fun to play with a bishop sac on f2 after.
"Don't play the Englund Gambit"
Do not play any gambit at all. Gambits are great to overrun weak opponents which you should beat anyway, but against stronger opponents you often end up a pawn down in a lost endgame.
Nov 8, 2021
0
#6
True.. even the Evans' Gambit is basically refuted - you return the pawn, and White has 3 lone pawns 'pawn islands'...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phZ_fAGlBVo
---
Another advice for beginners - don't accept gambits - it's the quality of the pieces that matters, not they quantity. - I never accept them - I either play whatever I want, or play a counter-gambit, or decline the gambit.
#6
I advice to accept gambits: you will lose some games, but you will learn how to defend.
That's nice
Nov 9, 2021
0
#11
How likely is it that the position would end up like that, I don't LOVE the englund gambit but its not the best thing either
Nov 9, 2021
0
#12
Solmyr1234 wrote:
Englund Gambit - It doesn't only look stupid !
Dude, it's not like every englund gambit will end up like that
i have seen hambleton wreck good titled players with the englund gambit
I beat someone using englund gambit after accidentally premoving e5 (it was bullet so i was holding the piece above the square)
Nov 9, 2021
0
#15
I just like spiking my opponents for playing the London System. I don’t recommend the Englund Gambit either but openings don’t predict winners at our level; blunders and tactics do.
I like it for speed chess but actually caught somebody in a 30 minute rapid game funny enough.
https://www.chess.com/game/live/18517258653
https://www.chess.com/game/live/16433163541
https://www.chess.com/game/live/13764124559
https://www.chess.com/game/live/9604553475
tygxc wrote:
"Don't play the Englund Gambit"
Do not play any gambit at all. Gambits are great to overrun weak opponents which you should beat anyway, but against stronger opponents you often end up a pawn down in a lost endgame.
I strongly disagree with that. The gods have placed the middlegame before the endgame. (Who said that? Probably Tartakower.) And in the middlegame, that pawn matters less than initiative and a lead in development.
The best gambits, like the Smith-Morra, the Evans or the King's are playable even against grandmasters. And in the amateur levels, they are completely fine.
That said, the Englund is not one of the best gambits. Black is winning back the pawn, but loses tempi in the process, so it is relativaly easy for white to get the initiative and a better position. That is exactly the opposite of what any gambit player would want.
Nov 10, 2021
0
#17
The Englund is sadly way too popular... I contend people who play it should be considered prime candidates for a block...
Nov 11, 2021
0
#19
Sack_o_Potatoes wrote:
Solmyr1234 wrote:
Englund Gambit - It doesn't only look stupid !
Dude, it's not like every englund gambit will end up like that
Are you from Idaho? I had to ask, sorry. here you go:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6xpEh1AK6A&t=299s
IM Rosen's knowledge about this fruit is outstanding.
---
And here's my "Sac-o-Potatoes" game [named after opponent's pieces]
Just joking with you, I really love this nickname - sac-o-potatoes, you're so cool.
That game was played when I still played e4 - my heart was young - I was still only 37.
Nowadays I'm almost middle-aged, so I play d4. 82 is the new 74:
---
By following opening principles, you can beat it.
If you want to get aggressive against d4, play Budapest Gambit, Benko Gambit, or Classical Dutch.