Sacrificial Question

I played a game in which my opponent who was rated fairly close to myself, around 1600, on the site where the game was played, made a weird Bishop sacrifice in the opening. Losing the Bishop  for a pawn, especially when he was aready down the gambited pawn, I feel lost him the game (and not any brilliant play on my part). But I'm curious if this sac in something known or if anyone experienced it (though KGs aren't that popular) or just something spur-of-the-moment that my opponent tried:

.

Looks like the sort of thing I might try for fun, which explains why I'm significantly below 1600.  Preventing castling while leaving the king pawnless like that might be worth a bishop, but he didn't have a proper follow-up attack.  Notice that his dark-squared bishop didn't budge until move 22, and his b1 knight never moved at all.  Queen + knight can't do it on their own when you still have all your pieces.

So, you think this is a speculative sacrifice of potential value?  I only know of a few openings that gambit pieces (and I play most of them) for initiative and an attack. Most of these attacks can be neutralized with good counterplay. 

That's what I'm thinking too, but then again people say the same thing about the Muzio.

It's much worse than a Muzio. The bishop sac is sometimes playable but never ever when e5 and g5 are inaccessible for the knight.

I've used a Bxf7+ sac in some KG lines (notably the Double Muzio), but it isn't appropriate here.  With d6 played, not already having castled (and thus not having a rook already on the f-file), and not having played d4 (which, along with you having played g5, means not being able to easily bring out the queenside bishop) means there's nothing white can immediately do to follow up the sacrifice.  Without being able to act fast to capitalize, Bxf7+ is just a blunder.

What time control?

That's how I saw it too as I was playing.  It was just a blitz game - 4/2. As White in the Double Muzio, even when I lose, I usually feel I had good chances.   I'd never encountered this sac before and just thought that it can't be possibly be good unless Black just caves in, as all Black has to do its to trade down, then counterpunch.  Thanks.

Sorry. I didn't mean to offend anyone.

That's where my computer is.

You can talk to me. Stand on your tiptoes.

You know any?

The sac doesn't make much sense in this exact position, and makes even less sense when you see White's next few moves. White didn't even try to get any initiative for the material. 

You won pretty cleanly. Be aware that there are more dangerous Bxf7 sacs out there in the King's Gambit. But also, be aware that the way to refute such a sac is to do just as you did, take the material if you don't see a concrete way for your opponent to gain an edge. Hang on to the material as long as you can still develop, and look for forcing lines that lead to wins for you. 

And remember:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9We2XsVZfc

Don't be afraid of no ghosts.

Feufollet, and after 14...Ne5 followed by Qc8 or Qd7, what idea do you have? You've sacked almost all of your material.

yet female is his middle name... go figure.

Even there, Nc6 looks fine to me. Where is White's attack?

just playing around with configurations...