Albin Counter-Gambit: A miniature

This game is a little strange:

1. My opponent, who has Diamond membership and therefore access to better database facilities than I (I only have use of a free database, elsewhere) plays down a theoretically bad line. It should be noted that my opponent did not play this game in an off-hand fashion: chat was turned off before I got to the board and he only played a couple of moves per day.

2. Upon reaching the natural conclusion of this inferior variation (you don't have to be Bobby Fischer to work out where it is going) promptly resigns. Fair enough you might say, as Black wins 100% in my database from the final position... but then on second thoughts, why play this line in the first place, if you don't have some proposed improvement? I'm feeling a little robbed that I didn't get to play out a juicy position, I guess. 

Anyway, to the game in hand, your thoughts and comments are appreciated.

monster d-prawn you got there. look at it go! kool game also.

A different opponent (in the same tournament), played the same way, losing material. He, by contrast, put up a hell of a fight, nearly turning the tables (at one point I was so short of moves, I thought I would lose).This game was played in an off-hand manner, both players moving within 2 minutes:

http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=28494257

That's one of the reasons i love gambits.  I've never tried albin, but i really struggle with black in queen's pawn games, so maybe this is an option for me down the road a ways, at least against queen's gambit.  Qa4 looks like it was smashed out in frustration.  At first it looks dangerous, but after the calm Nc6 white probably said "oh yeah, Nc6 works doesn't it." Nice game prawn. 

So you're mad the first guy resigned?

"So you're mad the first guy resigned?"

Not a bit of it, "bemused" is the word I would choose. It must be fairly obvious to a player of my opponent's strength what the "start position" for the game will be when the theory runs out... why choose that variation if you are the sort of player that is scared of wild positions or being materially behind? makes no sense to me. Also, take a look at the final position in the first game.... I don't think it's that bad for White, certainly Black has to prove the win.

This game was played in the same thematic tournament: "albin". My opponent plays on from exactly the same position from which my opponent in post #1 resigns (the first 10 moves are the same). Having grabbed the rook in the corner my Queen has to wriggle out before it becomes trapped. Again, no engine analysis available, so you'll have to suffer my synthetic analysis. All comments welcome.

4 e3 is a bad move.

Agreed, in the database I use White has 14 fourth move alternatives, 4. e3 being the third most played one.  

4. Nf3 is the most popular and probably best move, and a very natural move, however I've had this exact variation four times in eleven games. The move must appeal to a lot of players.

I believe e3 is also called the lasker trap.  Oddly enough, it's pretty well known, in that it shouldn't be tried, but damn the torpedos.

Yes, the Lasker trap:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasker_Trap

"In an 1899 consultation game in Moscow, Blumenfeld, Boyarkow, and Falk playing White against Lasker tried 6.Qa4+?, but Black wins after this move also."

LOL, it's not just we patzers who fall foul of the Lasker trap.