Sicilian Wing Gambit and Black plays 3 ... d5. Poof, it all disappears for White.
Naw .... Smith Morra is sound. The sacked d pawn opens the file - controlled by White
I read where SF now prefers White in the Schlechter Defense to the Danish, this after deeper searches improved White's play. 1. Nf3 leaving some tactics is my choice but perhaps f3 is practically better to ensure a Draw.
Thanks, I'm looking into the Smith-Morra again now. I can see the strategic similarities to the Danish, so makes sense to have both in my repertoire. I have been playing London a lot recently as white, but I'm finding I'm having the same kinds of middle games over and over, so a change would spice things up a bit.
From time to time, one sees gambits suggested to beginners in order to practice tactics and taking advantage of a time advantage. Do you completely disagree with such advice, or is it just some particular gambits that are inappropriate?
The answer is what would you recommend black to play?
Are you going advise to look at some quack book to buy?
If intent is basics and getting into middle game, an example would be 1 e4 2e5 3 d4 exd4 3 c3 d5
…
... what would you recommend black to play? Are you going advise to look at some quack book to buy? If intent is basics and getting into middle game, an example would be 1 e4 2e5 3 d4 exd4 3 c3 d5
I don't know why I would be obliged to tell people how to react to the Danish. I am no expert, but I believe that I have seen books that approve of your suggestion. One example is First Steps 1 e4 e5. I do not remember anyone accusing GM John Emms of being a "quack".
Sicilian Wing Gambit and Black plays 3 ... d5. Poof, it all disappears for White.
Naw .... Smith Morra is sound. The sacked d pawn opens the file - controlled by White
I read where SF now prefers White in the Schlechter Defense to the Danish, this after deeper searches improved White's play. 1. Nf3 leaving some tactics is my choice but perhaps f3 is practically better to ensure a Draw.
I'm happy to take up Mustang Mate's challenge about the Sicilian Wing Gambit, will anyone else also do that?
"... When you first begin serious competition, play sharp openings so that you can strengthen your tactics. ... Since tactics are such an integral part of the game, getting better at them means improving overall, so work on your weaknesses and see if you can minimize them! Gambits are great to play when you and your opponents are not advanced players. The reason is clear: you often get a 'free' attack and your opponents probably don’t have the technique to win up a pawn anyway if you misplay the position and lose the initiative. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627052239/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman16.pdf
I suppose one might think that it is in line with NM Heisman's advice for "not advanced players" to use the Danish Gambit. And GM John Nunn once wrote:
"... the Danish Gambit, 3 c3, perhaps deserves more respect than it usually receives. …"
However, that was about two decades ago, and, even then, the quote did not convey an impression of much respect for the Danish from the chess world generally. We often hear from beginners having a lot of initial fun with this or that opening, and I suppose that there is not too much harm in that, but I fear that many of those players are destined to face an unsettling necessity for a major adjustment after advancing to the point where one encounters lots of opponents who know how to respond. It might be better to go for something like the 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 exd4 6 cxd4 Bb4+ 7 Nc3 Nxe4 line suggested in My First Chess Opening Repertoire for White.
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9033.pdf
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/vincent-moret/
Eventually, one will also start encountering players who know how to respond to that, but, one could then adjust to some sort of modification involving d3, without discarding everything.
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9037.pdf
Do you want to play safe all of your life, or try something where you might lose more than you win?
Losing a game of chess is trivial - unless you're playing for a team.
FROM NOW: anyone who responds, commits to playing one (1) Danish Gambit in their next few games, and this includes pfren.
… 3...d5 is indeed a fine way to get into a regular game, and have an equal ending (or probably, the slightly better side of an equal ending).
You can also look at 3...Qe7, which leaves Black with a slight advantage without many complications, ...
A little over two decades ago, GM Gabor Kallai wrote that 3...Qe7 was "less good" than 3...d5.
"... and White's attack unfolds because of the further tempi Black has to lose with his queen" - GM Gabor Kallai (1997)
"Improving players" should skip such crap openings if they really want to improve.
I have always thought the Danish was sound.
Even after this line, I still consider white's position very playable:
Danish and smith morra gambit till I die
Beautiful. I would like to buy you a beer!
I've now added a follow-up video with an example game using the Smith-Morra. I had a lot of fun playing this one, and will now use it as part of my repertoire.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626195205/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen102.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626183418/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen105.pdf