The line played (2...d5 3.exd5 exf4) is a great, uncomplicated practical choice, and I have also scored well with 2...d5 3.exd5 c6.
I do not gibvve a damn if the engine says "equal"- I get a rational position where it's easy to play actively as Black.
What do you think about playing 2...d5 3.exd5 e4, pushing forward instead of taking the f4 pawn? I have faced it a couple of times as white, but i never faced someone taking my f4 pawn as part of falkbeer gambit.
The line played (2...d5 3.exd5 exf4) is a great, uncomplicated practical choice, and I have also scored well with 2...d5 3.exd5 c6.
I do not gibvve a damn if the engine says "equal"- I get a rational position where it's easy to play actively as Black.
What do you think about playing 2...d5 3.exd5 e4, pushing forward instead of taking the f4 pawn? I have faced it a couple of times as white, but i never faced someone taking my f4 pawn as part of falkbeer gambit.
I asked the same on comment #17.
The line played (2...d5 3.exd5 exf4) is a great, uncomplicated practical choice, and I have also scored well with 2...d5 3.exd5 c6.
I do not gibvve a damn if the engine says "equal"- I get a rational position where it's easy to play actively as Black.
What do you think about playing 2...d5 3.exd5 e4, pushing forward instead of taking the f4 pawn? I have faced it a couple of times as white, but i never faced someone taking my f4 pawn as part of falkbeer gambit.
This is the old way to handle the position. It may work fine against a weak player (pretty much like any dubious line), but objectively speaking, Black has problems after 4.d3.
Still, you can find a few games between very strong players featuring 3...e4, but all of them are short games (rapid & blitz).
Firstly, I should say that 5.Ke2 is terrible and after such a mistake as 4. c4, white must play 5.g3 ...fg 6.Nf3. I think there's a refutation.
There's no point in playing Bg4+ and black's bishop belongs on f5, because that is the diagonal white is weak on and that's the refutation.
Firstly, I should say that 5.Ke2 is terrible and after such a mistake as 4. c4, white must play 5.g3 ...fg 6.Nf3. I think there's a refutation.
There's no point in playing Bg4+ and black's bishop belongs on f5, because that is the diagonal white is weak on and that's the refutation.
The first one is beginner's level: after 6...g2+ Black emerges a whole rook up for nothing. 5.Ke2 is forced.
Second one, the bishop stands absolutely great at g4.
What do you think about playing 2...d5 3.exd5 e4, pushing forward instead of taking the f4 pawn? I have faced it a couple of times as white, but i never faced someone taking my f4 pawn as part of falkbeer gambit.
This is the old way to handle the position. It may work fine against a weak player (pretty much like any dubious line), but objectively speaking, Black has problems after 4.d3.
Hm, i got some analysis to do to find out what kind of problems black has after 4. d3. In my last game i played 4. Nc3. I lost the game but i don't think it was because of my opening choice but a blunder later on.
If you wish to defeat the Kings Gambit don't play 2. ... d5. In the line shown Black should conmsider playing 5. ... c6!?
I disagree. The line played (2...d5 3.exd5 exf4) is a great, uncomplicated practical choice, and I have also scored well with 2...d5 3.exd5 c6.
I do not gibvve a damn if the engine says "equal"- I get a rational position where it's easy to play actively as Black.
+1, I play those lines too
Oh, and i also played a3 online for a good chunk of time. What matters isn't whether or not you get a winning position out of the opening, but a position you're comfortable with playing. @ponz111