rubbish annotations

The Lesson: don't waste your time showing something great to a jackass. It will only bray and kick and never understand anything or do anything constructive.

Nice game.

I really like what blake78613 noted about encouraging annotations.  A game will usually (though not always) reflect one's skill and so will annotations.  Calling one's annotations stupid is no more helpful than calling a particular move stupid. It generates ill-will with no benefit. The annotations, even if they aren't particularly deep, help us understand the players thought process, and I think, it's often the thought process that gets us into trouble and needs the most improvement. 

Also, I greatly enjoyed the Tal-Lutikov game. Thanks to Fezzik for posting it.

Tal was actually White in that game Kintoki, and he won against the Elephant's, but still it's an interesting game to go through. He didn't exactly have an easy time off it.

I don't think anyone here is saying that the Elephant's gambit is an opening on a par with the Sicilian defense in soundness, we are discussing whether it is playable.

Every dog has his day

 fifth: its tal.

If your opponent can't refute it, it's sound.  Can you refute it?  

Does anyone play 3.Nxe5 against it ? It seems to me to be the more critical line.

Atos isnt nxe5 the one adolf anderssen cam up with?

Maybe, not sure about the history. 3. exd5 is played more often but 3. Nxe5 scores a little better. I played Nxe5 on the few occasions when I faced it as White. When I played it as Black I had a feel that the Black has some initiative for the pawn in 3. ...exd5, although the White is still better with patient play.

d5 should be listed as d5? in all annotations. White ends up with a huge advantage. End of story.