Your analysis in The Fascinating King's Gambit still holds in my opinion. But instead of 11.Ng3?, White should play 11.Qd2! intending 11...0-0 12.Qg5. When the queens are exchanged, there is not the slightest reason why Black's fewer pawn islands should be a factor. White's center may well be more important. A refutation of the King's Bishop Gambit this Black line is certainly not.

I had a brief look at "1.  e4 e5 2.  f4 exf4 3.  Nf3 g5 4.  Bc4 Nc6 5.  O-O d6 6.  d4 h6 7.  c3 Bg7 8.  Qa4 Bd7 9.  Qb3 Na5 10.  Bxf7 Ke7 11.  Qa3 Kxf7 12.  Qxa5"

and one idea that popped up is 12...Kg6!?

Black has the bishop pair, a slight space advantage and better development, plus that White is left with the wrong bishop and pawns on c3+d4, which makes the light squares a potential long term weakness.

White has an extra centre pawn and potential counter-chances vs Black's king.


So, consolidating the king with 12...Kg6 should have a higher priority than trying to strike back with 12...c5.

I don't remember if we've discussed Kg6, but if it hasn't been mentioned before you could start a new thread for it, if you're interested?

Edit: After a closer look, I think 12...Kg6! is at least an edge for Black.
The good news is that Shaw's strange line vs my mainline is still okay for White. I prefer the Bd3-idea, but your Qd2-g5 also looks okay, though I'd prefer to have the queens on the board.

TalJechin wrote on 04/19/14 at 13:49:15:

12...Kg6 indeed may be a good idea. But I am not sure whether it is stronger than, say, 8...Kf8, which also parries the direct threats, postponing the decision how to disrupt White's center to the future.

In these and similar lines in the Hanstein Gambit, I find it difficult to come to final conclusions. The analysis never ends in move 15 or 17, it's closer to 30 or so. Engines dislike the Hanstein, they fail to see the [OTB] merits of a pawn center. My 1986 book Das neue Königsgambit recommended the Hanstein/Muzio, as it appeared sound enough for my OTB play. Would I still recommend it, if I were in John Shaw's place and had a readership of PC owners, some of whom even play correspondence chess, or visit the truth-obsessed chesspub site? Hard to say.

As I see it, the fans of 3.Nf3 should regard the Kieseritzky Gambit as their first choice, while 3.Bc4 players can follow your main line. For both groups the Hanstein remains worth a look, as a fallback option, maybe to surprise an opponent. There is 8.Qa4, and there are other lines which are relatively unexplored. - John Shaw hasn't really studied the Hanstein, but still he claimed to have refuted 3.Bc4. This gap will hopefully be filled in the 2nd edition. Then would be a better moment to take a closer look at the Hanstein.