A real amature queen sac gambit !!!

A game played between to  players at my local club which I thought was a very creative showdown played by a much lower rated player.

Great game.

Black is winning easily on the final position, and moves 10-14 by both sides are almost all big mistakes.

I won't comment about the first moves, since there are quite a few people who consider playing nonsense in the opening as "fun".

 http://www.chesscafe.com/Tim/kibb.htm nuff said.

I am curious however why did black agree to a draw in the final positon ?

 Time trouble.

Harding's analyses and suggestions had been trash since the late seventies, when he began writing about chess. I deeply regret having bought a few of his books in the past.

Haha.

Now that I think about it I've never really heard of any famous books from him is he atleast someone of my level can learn from ? 

Mostly they are old fashion theory books.

He suggests a lot of original ideas, but since he was not a strong player, he could not check his ideas using something resembling an engine, and he was everything but objective, I'd dare to say that none of his older opening books is worth something currently.

Say, you don't have a photogra-- er, eidetic memory, do you?

Yes indeed- up to move seven and a half.

White's gambit is ultimately unsound, but it might work against an unsuspected Black.

Here, after 10.Be6? everything is pretty irrelevant- Black is easily winning after 10...Nc6, 10...Na6, 10...Qh5 or almost any REASONABLE move.

As played in the game, white can resign after 12...Nc6 (which is not exactly a difficult move to find).

pfren, Dana McK did extensive analysis and I think his conclusion is that the gambit is indeed sound.

re: "White's gambit is ultimately unsound"

haha