|Dec-13-09|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Is anyone keeping a collection of White disasters in the King's Gambit? Here's one.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||HeMateMe: after many losses online, blitz, playing black against the kings gambit, I started to play the kings gambit declined: 1. e4...e4, 2. f4...B-c5. The professionals dont play it, but it works at lower levels. White can't open up the game so quickly, and black gets that nice Bishop bearing down on the a7--g1 diagonal, blocks him from kings side castling.|
Also, its not so tactical as most Kings Gambit games, so you don't eat up so much time on king safety, etc.
|Dec-15-09|| ||Albertan: You think this game is bad how about this game?
[White "Sommer, Wolfgang"]
[Black "Schmidt Schaeffer, Sebastian"]
[EventType "swiss (rapid)"]
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. e5 Qh4+ 4. Ke2 Bc5 5. d3 Qf2# 0-1
|Feb-21-11|| ||theodor: hi, guys. I dont remember having heard anything about my compatriot Kolarov, that's why I'm in this room. this is the level of the quality of the norvegian champion! Carlsen has a lot to do, following omerta's rules!|
|Mar-02-13|| ||TheTamale: <Albertan>, the game you cite above strains credulity, to put it mildly! Somehow White managed to find the only move that would lose on the spot. Maybe it was a mental slip; he decided to play 5. d4, but as he was making the move he imagined some problem with it and set it down on d3 instead. What a god-awful game!|
Also, 3) e5 is a god-awful innovation.
|May-12-15|| ||zanzibar: According to Lombardy <In this game, both sides cruise to a common theoretical position (move 8)>|
The losing move, though not apparent on first sight, is 9.Nxg4??
History repeats itself, as they say, and an earlier example (over 100 years earlier!) is found here:
Von Der Lasa vs Staunton, 1853