KINGS GAMMIT REFUTED
Sort:
Amplebeee
Mar 24, 2017
0
#1
E4 E5 , F4 ExF4 , Nf3 G5, Nc3 G4 , Ne5 Nc6 , NxG4 Qg4check , Nf2 Bc5
whites passive play is forced here and black has to blunder for white to equalize !!!!
Does white have a win otherwise.
E4 E5 , F4 ExF4 , Nf3 G5 , H3 Nc6 , NC3 NF6. How does white form a winning line here aswell.
BLACKS WINNING HERE otherwise b3 =Nh5
First line: d4! =
If Bxd4 (best) Qf3.
The position is complex but about equal: for example Nb4 Bd3.
If black is careless he could be worse.
In the 2nd line h3 is super rare. h4 is better.
Mar 24, 2017
0
#3
im gonna note that h4 for later analysis! Because that would refute Qh4.
And Qh4s my novelty for refuting it in the fist place , and the use of my g knight.
Mar 24, 2017
0
#5
I know you guys will probably find it passive, but I just play 2. Bc5 and avoid all that usually. Although I've played it before, I'm not fond of playing g5 and pushing my kingside pawns early. Not really an aggressive player and sort of prefer tame openings
Mar 24, 2017
0
#7
it does because im threatening mate with bishop c5. and after d4 im forced to take with the bishop .
Mar 25, 2017
0
#8
In the 1960's Bobby Fischer, after losing as Black to Boris Spassky's King's Gambit, wrote a famous article for Chess Life called, "The King's Gambit is Busted!"
So instead of "Refuted" here, shouldn't you say "King's Gambit Re-Busted"?
logozar wrote:
First line: d4! =
If Bxd4 (best) Qf3.
The position is complex but about equal: for example Nb4 Bd3.
If black is careless he could be worse.
In the 2nd line h3 is super rare. h4 is better.
As for "In the 2nd line h3 is super rare. h4 is better", 4.h4 probably is even better than 4.Bc4, but tastes differ, of course
logozar wrote:
With proper play 2...Bc5 should also equalize.
After 2.f4 Bc5, it's Black (and not White) who has to care to equalize. I've read many times and I agree that the only way to put some problems for White in the King's Gambit is to accept the gambit.
MickinMD wrote:
In the 1960's Bobby Fischer, after losing as Black to Boris Spassky's King's Gambit, wrote a famous article for Chess Life called, "The King's Gambit is Busted!"
So instead of "Refuted" here, shouldn't you say "King's Gambit Re-Busted"?
Even when analyzing deeply the position after 2.f4 ef 3.Nf3 with the 3200+ ELO engines, no one could say for sure which is the best way for Black here, but according to engines' "opinion" - these seem to be 3. ... g5, 3. ... d6 and 3. ... Nf6.
After losing in the Kieseritzky gambit to Boris Spassky, Bobby Fischer must have been too impressed from the lost game (although he had quite a decent position as for the opening phase) to say that "3. ... d6 refutes the King's gambit".
Yes, agree, 3. ... d6 does not allow Nf3-e5 - and for that reason, Bobby Fischer once again confirmed that 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 is quite good for White, in spite of the fact that some players say that the 5.Ne5 is a "bad move".
Just for comparison - when taking the same engine's evaluation (with the time control 40 moves/40 hours) of the position after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 (Schliemann gambit in the Ruy Lopez) - the evaluation is -0.37 as for Black, and when taking the same engine's evaluation (with the same time control) after 1.e4 e5 2.f4, it's -0.29 as for White.
Now the question: whis is "refuted" more - the Schliemann gambit in the Ruy Lopez, or the King's gambit?
Mar 26, 2017
0
#12
yes d6 according to "rybka 1.0 beta" is the move after Ne2.
a violation of the fairplay on chess.com.
over the board its open season..
and the variation in the spanish game can absolutely be refuted.. ACCURACY , coldhard calculation and posistional understanding is required , a mean endgame aswell.
Mar 26, 2017
0
#13
In the late 1980s, I played the "bust" line of Fischer's in a USCF postal game and got seriously beaten. I think improvements have been made over the years.
Mar 26, 2017
0
#14
I would like to state that if an opening system is regarded as refuted on GM level that doesn´t neccesarily mean that it should not be played on amateurs level any more.
You need to study enormous amounts of variations to be really able to refute the Kings Gambit. I doubt that there are many amateurs who are ready to spend that much time on learning opening theory to do that.
Mar 26, 2017
0
#15
alexm2310 wrote:
MickinMD wrote:
In the 1960's Bobby Fischer, after losing as Black to Boris Spassky's King's Gambit, wrote a famous article for Chess Life called, "The King's Gambit is Busted!"
So instead of "Refuted" here, shouldn't you say "King's Gambit Re-Busted"?
What about Kings Gambit Re-refuted?
that comes from E4 E5 ,NC3 F5 , E takes F5
This is a "reversed King's gambit", just if we would imagine playing 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef in the position where Black has already moved Nb8-c6 - that influences greatly evaluation of the position.
Even the "semi-correct" (at least it is considered so) Latvian gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 looks more favorable for Black than 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 f5
Amplebeee wrote:
yes d6 according to "rybka 1.0 beta" is the move after Ne2.
a violation of the fairplay on chess.com.
over the board its open season..
and the variation in the spanish game can absolutely be refuted.. ACCURACY , coldhard calculation and posistional understanding is required , a mean endgame aswell.
Are you messing with people here?
3...f5 in the Ruy Lopez is a good move!
4.exf5 is basically unplayable, as 4...e4 offers black at least equality if not an advantage. If white doesn't take on f5, black can take on e4 which opens the f file for his rook, as well as gives black a 2 vs 1 central pawn majority.
The big problem is that we not always can understand clearly which move refers to what position ..... If a person writes 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5 - then it is easy to guess that f7-f5 refers to the Ruy Lopez; if a person writes 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 - then it is easy to guess that f7-f5 refers not to the Ruy Lopez ... if a person writes a mess, it's easy to see that it is a mess, but it is difficult to understand what was meant by that mess
Morphysrevenges wrote:
what's a gammit?
Obviously the "Gambit" was meant ...