There is no such thing as the King's Gambit against the Sicilian. 1. e4 c5 2. f4 is called the Grand Prix.
A chess secret...
Sort:
Apr 2, 2009
0
#3
Oh brother Loomis you are such a downer. Always negative. What does that have to do with anything?
It's still a KG setup whether you want to call it Grand Prix or not.
Also BTW. If I want to call it KG vs Sicilian I don't believe there are any rules against this. Who got to decide it was called the Grand Prix, and why do I have to adhere to that name? If chess is a game of creativity, I'm calling it whatever I want.
this is called the Grand Prix attack. :)
You can call it whatever you want, but that doesnt make it that opening.
1. e4 c5 2. f4 is called: grand prix attack :)
Apr 2, 2009
0
#5
You say this like I don't know about the Grand Prix. I've been playing chess for about 7 years now and a pretty solid player.... I know what it is called...but it has nothing to do with the post.
immortalgamer wrote:
You say this like I don't know about the Grand Prix. I've been playing chess for about 7 years now and a pretty solid player.... I know what it is called...but it has nothing to do with the post.
Sure, but it has everything to do with the game IN your post AND the fact you SAY that since chess is about creativity , you can call it anything you want.
Apr 2, 2009
0
#7
That's a cool idea immortalgamer, in a tournament I joined some time ago I decided to play the same opening against every player, to try master an opening, then I realised this opening didn't really suit me (Scandinavian defence) Now I'm like a nomad, picking through the various attacks and defences until, one day, maybe tomorrow, maybe in 20 years, I will find the opening that suits me best!
That is not a Kings Gambit opening but if you wish to call it that thats ok too.
Apr 2, 2009
0
#9
I agree you can...if you ever travel outside of the area you are in you will find other people call certain openings by different names. Does that make them wrong? No. Who really cares what the names of openings are? The only thing that matters is if you can play them or not.
immortalgamer wrote:
Oh brother Loomis you are such a downer. Always negative. What does that have to do with anything?
It's still a KG setup whether you want to call it Grand Prix or not.
Also BTW. If I want to call it KG vs Sicilian I don't believe there are any rules against this. Who got to decide it was called the Grand Prix, and why do I have to adhere to that name? If chess is a game of creativity, I'm calling it whatever I want.
You can do that? Cool, let me try: If chess is a game of creativity, I say Rooks can jump over up to two peices.
1. Rxh8#
Be careful in trying the f4 move immediately against the Sicilian, the Tal Gambit 2... d5 is known to be strong for Black.
Apr 2, 2009
0
#12
jacc123456 wrote:
You say you're a solid player??? Solid on what???
Certanly is not chess. And don't even try to throw that comment about your 2000 rating...cause i've seen your live chess rating as well, and it was 1700.
Do you know what that means?
I do.
Why the anomisity? I didn't throw my correspondence rating around. But I believe I can give anyone a solid game.
Also I only posted that game for the bishop move at the end. Any game where I have a true exclamation move I like to share it. I agree he didn't seem to know what he was doing.
Immo, as you know I dont always agree with some points you have made in the past, BUT I cant understand the negative feedback from some .You are keen to share your thoughts and ideas, almost always entertaining, and good for the site, and us fellow chess players in general.
keep up the good work the majority here like it.
nice game. Im not a fan of the KG or the queens gambit for that matter. Im really working on my black game right now and I prefer the slav and the Kings pawn game I think its called. Im
wasnt finished w/ that oops...... anyways Im kinda doin the same thing I guess [trying to perfect/master an opening] but Ive chose to focus on two openings since as black my first move is a response to whites first move. which is usually either a Kpawn, Qpawn or the occasional knight.
Apr 2, 2009
0
#16
jacc123456 wrote:
You say you're a solid player??? Solid on what???
Certanly is not chess. And don't even try to throw that comment about your 2000 rating...cause i've seen your live chess rating as well, and it was 1700.
Do you know what that means?
I do.
Implying what exactly? Why don't you keep your comments to yourself until you can think of something constructive to say? You're not exactly Gary Kasparov let's face it.
Apr 2, 2009
0
#17
I usually always try to play QG or any variation involving the King's Pawn. I am learning more though and try to use them too these days. 
12... d5. Is the turning point, Seems like a senseless sacrifice to me. But could not second guess my betters' move.
The opening 1. e4 c5 2. f4 is called the McDonnell attack. The main weakness in this opening is when black plays 2. ... d5.
When you play do you play the same opening each time? When I first started playing I didn't know anything about openings, and just played using the basic rules of the opening to see my way through. Now that I've matured a bit in my chess, I've started to actually learn openings. Understand I could recognize, play, and name many different openings, but I haven't mastered any!
So I started a new chapter in my chess life. I want to just master 1 opening. The KG. Maybe I will never become a master of chess, but I know I can master 1 opening.
To do this requires a lot of playing of the opening in question. I play the KG against everything (KG vs Sicilian or French, or Khan, or Queens pawn, or pirc.) I want to dive into it.
Because I've started to become proficient at it (not mastered by any means), I've seen my game potential rise.
Here is an example of a KG game I played recently. I played a new move for myself Ne2 instead of the regular Nf4 to see what would happen.