|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-04-02 | | drukenknight: here is one line we are discussing: 1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf 3 Nf3 g5 4 h4 g5 5 Ne5 Qe7 6 Nxg4 h5 7 Nf2 d5 |
|
Oct-07-02
 | | Sneaky: druken, I was looking at this line and wondering if white could play 6.d4 instead of 6.Nxg4 So I played against my computer and it went like this: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Qe7 6. d4 d6 7. Nxg4 Qxe4+ 8. Qe2 Qxe2+ 9. Bxe2 Bf5 10. c3 Be4 11. O-O Be7 12. h5 In my opinion, White is doing fine here. Although Black's play might be improved upon: the computer is a little greedy--well, a LOT greedy actually... later in the game it was forced to give the pawn back with interest. (It ended up beating me, but that's beside the point!) |
|
Oct-07-02
| | Sneaky: Hey look what I found. Three games that start like my game with the computer E Friedman vs D Davydov, 1991, A David vs Sherzer, 1992, and Holger Beuchler vs M Heidenfeld, 1995 All three were drawn. |
|
| Oct-23-02 | | drukenknight: NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, play the Muzio. This is IN Kings Gambit where white sacks the N on f3. Usual move order is 1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 4 h4 g4 5 Bc4 When I play Kings gambit I either put the N on e5 (Kieseretsky) or sack him on f7 via g5 (Alagier) but dont leave him on f3 (Muzio). NEVER NEVER NEVER. They say the Muzio is unsound. Here are two amusing examples to further confuse you: 1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 d5 4 e5 g5 5 h4 g4 6 Ng5? h3 1 e4 e5 2 f4 d6 3 Nf3 exf4 4 d4 g5 5 h4 g4 6 Ng5 h3 Aaaaagh! I hate when that happens. |
|
Oct-24-02
 | | Honza Cervenka: In the Muzio gambit (or Poleiro gambit) white doesn't play 4.h4 but 4.Bc4 g4 5.O-O!? Another interesting possibility is MacDonnell gambit where white plays 5.Nc3 instead of 5.O-O. |
|
| Oct-24-02 | | drukenknight: right, I was confusing that with the Kieseretsky and Alagier. |
|
| Oct-24-02 | | refutor: muzio is playable if you know what you're doing...obviously it's not perfectly sound or we'd see it at the grandmaster level, but it's probably as sound as the cochrane gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Nxe4 d6 4.Nxf7?!) which was played in a famous game v. kramnik (i believe by topalov) but it's not in the database. with a little bit of preparation it's a good occasional weapon AFAIC |
|
| Oct-24-02 | | refutor: here's the cochrane gambit i was talking about [Event "XVI Ciudad de Linares 99"]
[Site "Linares ESP"]
[Date "1999.??.??"]
[White "Topalov, V"]
[Black "Kramnik, V"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "2700"]
[BlackElo "2751"]
[ECO "C42"]
[Round "8"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nxf7 Kxf7 5. Nc3 c5 6. Bc4+ Be6 7. Bxe6+ Kxe6
8. d4 Kf7 9. dxc5 Nc6 10. Qe2 Qd7 11. Be3 dxc5 12. f4 Re8 13. e5 Ng4 14. Rd1 Qf5
15. O-O h5 16. Bc1 Nd4 17. Qc4+ Kg6 18. h3 Nh6 19. Nb5 a6 20. Nxd4 cxd4 21. Qxd4 Rc8
22. Qb6+ Kh7 23. Qxb7 Rxc2 24. Be3 Qg6 25. Rc1 Rxc1 26. Rxc1 Nf5 27. Bf2 h4 28. Rc7 Ng3
29. Kh2 Nf1+ 30. Kg1 Qb1 31. Bxh4 Bc5+ 1/2-1/2 |
|
Oct-24-02
 | | chessgames.com: Added to database, thanks refutor: Topalov vs Kramnik, 1999 |
|
| Oct-24-02 | | Danilomagalhaes: See Greco games with this opening. There are some miniatures very nice to study. But, if black defenses well, it can win the game easily. Unfortunately, there is only one Greco's game that he plays the King's gambit being black... |
|
| Oct-24-02 | | drukenknight: The cochrane gambit that you show above, you can do a similar thing in reverse in the Philidors defense, see like this game, that appears in Tartokover's work: L Steiner vs Alekhine, 1936 |
|
Oct-24-02
| | Honza Cervenka: It is difficult to say whether Muzio gambit is totally correct but white has very good chances in that variation. Problem is that black must not play 4...g4 after 4.Bc4. He can gain good play after 4...Bg7. It is the reason why is 4.h4 considered more logical and better move than 4.Bc4 as white resigns from destroying of black pawn chain. The line 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. Bc4 Bg7 5. h4 h6 is very good for black. See for example Adolf Anderssen vs G Neumann, 1866 |
|
| Nov-02-02 | | Danilomagalhaes: For me, just a big mistake can be a wrong move in King´s gambit. The attack possibilities for both are equal. That´s why I think that you can only use the King´s Gambit if you are sure of the lines and variations your oponent can use against you. |
|
| Oct-20-03 | | drukenknight: Hey if you guys thought that Alek v Strazlins game was funny I guarantee this will be way more funnier. Kings Gambit (traditional line, w/ insane 5...g3?!)
1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 4 h4 g4 5 Ng5 g3?! 6 Qh5 Qe7 7 Bc4 d5 8 Bxd5 Nf6 9 Bxf7+ Kd8 10 Nd6+ Kd7 11 Qb5+ c6 12 Nc5+ Kd6 13 e5+ Kc7 (not 13..Kxe5??) 14 Qc4 =?? Play these moves out quick, otherwise you will see the stupid mistake right away. |
|
| May-30-04 | | ruylopez900: I find that h4 is to weakening for an already weakened kingside. I prefer Bc4 to put pressure on f7, later on counter attacks are possible against the pawn chain, but right now its not doing any harm. |
|
| May-30-04 | | BiLL RobeRTiE: h4 may be weakening, but it's the only way to avoid a significant disadvantage if Black plays correctly. Besides, if you're playing the King's Gambit, you shouldn't be worried about trifling concerns such as a weakened kingside! |
|
| May-30-04 | | ruylopez900: <Bill> I have never had trouble w/ the Bc4 lines of the Kings Gambit. As for the games I used to play h4 I found it would get picked off by the Black Queen, g3-Qh2+ and then those connected "passed"/advanced pawns would kill me. |
|
| May-30-04 | | BiLL RobeRTiE: Whatever works for you...4. Bc4 Bg7 is very good for Black though ;) |
|
| May-30-04 | | OneBadDog: The King's Gambit is an honorable opening. |
|
| May-31-04 | | ruylopez900: <?=#?doubt your right, but the Opening Explorer may put it in perspective. After 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g4 the move 4.Bc4 scores 51% for White and 39% for Black. 4.h4 scores 45.8% for White and 40% for Black. Needless to say, not What I expected. But after Blacks best reply, things are back to even. 4...Bg7 is 45% to each side while 4...g4 gives White 45% and Black 40%. |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | russep: Anyone know any good books on how to play the king's gambit? |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | drukenknight: russep: I would probably steer you away from books on this one opening. The ones I have seen tend to go very deep into certain variations, w/o helping you get through all the stupid/interesting moves that happen before you get 20 moves deep into, say Alagiar variation. Of course they will do more than one variation, but the problem remains. The 7 or 8 major variations can be found in many good books (such as Tartakove's 500 Master Games). I would suggest going through games in this data base. Perhaps you can start w/ one variation and look at all those games. Or perhaps you can start w/ one player e.g. Spassky, or Anderssen or whomever. |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | russep: ok thanks i will consider that |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | drukenknight: FOr instance, ask your self which variation to you prefer: ALgair, Muzio, or Kiseretsky variation? these all seem to come about after a similar series of moves. (purists can argue the latter pt.) Or do you not have a preference? Or do you not know? I am trying to figure out what your experience level is... |
|
| Dec-22-04 | | refutor: <books on the king's gambit> an excellent book on the ideas of the king's gambit, but not going into variations is santasiere's "the romantic king's gambit". i highly recommend it not just to get a feel for the opening, but to play over some enjoyable games. NN even plays a minor role ;) |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
