banning gambits in the opening

I believe that unrated players should be banned from forums. It is unfair to make comments without publicly declaring your level of inability in the subject under discussion

Statistical analysis has been done on some of the gambits. For example in the King's Gambit it has been shown that White wins 50% of the games. Some of the other gambits also show good percentages, the Evans Gambit for example. I personally like to play the Icelandic Gambit and get good results. The Icelandic Gambit is a gambit that Black plays against White. There are many gambits both named and unnamed that Black can throw against white so gambits are not a one sided thing that only White can attack with.  The OP has good reason to dislike gambits if he is a low rated player but instead of banning them he needs to learn how to play against them. My own theory is that if the player who wins the Pawn tries to hold onto the Pawn he gets a bad position because then his game becomes too defensive. The best idea in gambit play is to give back the Pawn right away or possibly play a counter gambit such as the Falkbeer Counter Gambit in the King's Gambit. All in all, between good players  gambits make for fun games with lots of action. So maybe its the OP who should be banned from chess, not gambits!

I believe that capturing the enemy's queen should be banned. It gives players an unfair advantage. I also believe that checkmates should be banned. They also give players an unfair advantage. 

That makes no sense whatsoever.

King's gambit used to be extra good. Now the theory has dealt a huge blow on it. But queen's gambit is still one of the most powerful weapons in openings.

Good suggestion by the OP actually, but a bit unfair on White. So he should get to decide whether or not en passant is allowed, but he doesn't have to make his announcement before the game starts, he can wait as long as he wants.

BTW - is that pawns in a cup from the café, or small chess pieces roaming around somewhere between Benin, Ghana and Burkina Faso?

How much of that 50% is against much lower rated opposition and amateur games?  Obviously a 1500 who studied the games of Morphy and Anderssen respectively (and together since they played against each other) and read Shaw's book would have an advantage over a 1300 who at best has a superficial understanding. 

Maybe the King's Gambit is better than its reputation:

a) Strong grandmasters who used this line as White:

b) Other notable players:

3. Statistics
White scores above average (57%).
White performs Elo 2041 against an opposition of Elo 1992 (+49).
Black performs Elo 1962 against an opposition of Elo 2011 (-49).
White wins: 13885 (=49%), Draws: 5124 (=18%), Black wins: 9596 (=34%)
The drawing quote is very low. (3% quick draws, < 20 Moves)

White wins are shorter than average (33).
Black wins are shorter than average (34).
Draws are shorter than average (35).

Higher than 33% (since there are three possible outcomes win, lose, or draw 49% is excellent) but again context is everything.  Many KG games are rapid or blitz, and some are against much lower rated players. 

Very interesting information. Greco is another player whose games would be of interest to KG players. I'm an intermediate player and use KG sometimes but lately have moved on. Maybe I'll go back to it. Most of the people who I play at my level aren't very knowledgeable about openings but they are good tactics players. I may go back and study some of the masters mentioned above and then give the KG another try. 

Pawnstogo is just trolling... as usual.

My wife keeps telling me over and over again that I am a genius. Guess what? I believe her......

there is this gambit called "the banned gambit" : 1.e4 d6 2.d4 a5 3.Nc3 Ra6 it sacs a rook for a bishop

This aged well