I am having some problems with this gambit. Should the pawn in accepted? It seems that the pawn sac is dubious, but I have seen quite a number of games with 2...b6. What is the best continuation?

I do not play this because of: 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4
a) 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 (4.e5 Nc6 5.d4 Bf5) Qxd5 5.Nf3 e6
b) 3.d4 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.Bb5+ (5.a3 Qxd5; 5.c4 bxc3 6.Nxc3 Nxd5) Bd7 6.Bc4 Bg4 7.f3 Bf5
in both lines White's compensation is vague.

3.c4!? might be an alternative - I think we've discussed it in some thread here already...

After 3.c4 I think 3. ... e5 is strong as you already stated in another thread. You said that it is more difficult to counter in the center than usually in the wing gambit but the opening of Hector-Kudrin,1989 looked convincing to me. As white has wasted a tempo with 3.c4, there is no direct need for quick counterplay.

Some weeks ago I discovered some new ideas in the wing gambit and since then I have played some games with it online.
The outcomes were mixed, but my overall score is not worse than with the open sicilian.

I discovered an old post from MNb where he wrote about the gambit:


MNb wrote on 01/27/06 at 20:39:32:

For this reason and for fun I have tried to make the Sicilian Wing Gambit work. As one might expect I found theory wanting. Here are two problem lines: 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 (Nf6 5.axb4 Nxd5 6.d4!?) 5.Nf3 e6 (e5 6.c4 or 6.Bb2 gives White decent compensation) 6.axb4 Bxb4 and White's best chance might be 7.Bb2 Nf6 8.Nc3 Qd8 9.Bc4 o-o 10.o-o, but I don't think it is enough. 3.d4 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 (Qxd5 5.Nf3 or even 5.c4 is less clear now) 5.Bb5+ Bd7 6.Bc4 Bf5 and Abelleyro-Arregui, Villa Ballester 1993, was better for Black.

I think he is right when saying that white gets decent compensation with 3.a3 d5 4.ed5: Qd5: 5.Nf3 e5 6.c4!, this is very much fun for white, at least in blitz!

I found a game by Ruslan Sherbakov where he beat 5. ... e6 :

[Event "Pune op"]
[Site "Pune"]
[Date "2004.09.03"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Sherbakov,Ruslan"]
[Black "Das,Arghyadip"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "B20"]
1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bb2 Nf6 7.Bd3 Nc6 8.0-0 Be7
9.Re1 0-0 10.Ne5 Bd7 11.axb4 Nxb4 12.Nc3 Qd4 13.Be4 Qb6 14.Nxd7 Nxd7 15.Bxh7+ Kxh7 16.Qh5+ Kg8 17.Na4 Qd6 18.Bxg7 Kxg7 19.Qg4+ Kf6 20.Nc3 Nc5 21.Re3 Qc6 22.Qf4+ Kg6 23.Rg3+ Kh7 24.Qg4  
1-0

An excellent attacking game!
BTW, does Ruslan visit the forum from time to time? Perhaps he could share some thoughts about that game!
To me that looks as if white gets quite some pressure for the pawn with this Bb2,Bd3,Re1,Ne5- plan.

The variation I found least comfortable for white is 3.a3 d5 4.ed5: Nf6!?
Now white can restore material equality by 5.ab4: Nd5: 6.c3, but somehow that is ugly.
MNb, how should white continue after 5.d4 Nb4: ?

4...Nf6 5.axb4 Nxd5 6.d4 Nxb4 7.c3 Nd5 8.c4 (or development first: 8.Nf3 and 9.Bd3) Nf6 9.Ba3 with pressure.
That Sjerbakov game is nice indeed, but does not prove yet, that White has enough. There is 19...Kh6 to refute and 12...Qd6 13.Ne4 Qc7 looks safer.
That having said, Sjerbakov's play indeed seems to offer better practical chances than 6.axb4 at once.

I tried your suggestion 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cb4: 3.a3 d5 4.ed5: Nf6 5.ab4: Nd5: 6.d4
on the internet but there was an opponent who gave me a hard time with 6. ... e5!? and now 7.de5: Bb4:+ 8.c3 Nc3: 9.Qd8:+ Kd8: 10.Bd2 Nd5 =+ or 7.c3 ed4: 8.Qd4: Nc6 9.Bb5 Be7 10.Nf3 0-0 11.Bc6: bc6: and the bishop pair gives black a slight advantage.

Try 7.c3 exd4 8.Qxd4 Nc6 9.Bb5 next time, like Rossetto-Sanguinetti, Sao Paulo 1957.

I already adressed that variation in my post, see above.  ;)

Sorry for superficial reading. I agree, 6...e5 looks good. It might actually answer the initial question!

What happened to the line 2. Nf3 d6 3. b4? A few years ago I read that this was definitely thought to be an improvement on 2. b4, but now I can't find anything on the line. Did it die out, or am I just not looking hard enough (which is likely)?

After 1 e4 c5 2 b4 cxb4 3 a3 d5 4 exd5 Qxd5 5 Nf3 e5 6 axb4 Bxb4 I have tried the wild 7 Ra3!? For a discussion, see http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1238112. It's a precise line like the Muzio but has rich tactical rewards and throws the game wide open. Black has lots of opportunities to go wrong.

A club game I played went: 7.. axb4 8 Bxa3 Nc6 9 Nc3 Qd8? 10 Nb5 Nge7 11 Nd6 Kf8 12 Bc4 Qa5 13 Qa1 f6 14 0-0 g6 15 d4 exd4 16 Nxc8 Rxc8 17 Nxd4! Qh5 18 Ne6+ 1-0 Not very precise but it illustrates the possibilities.

In the new Kaissiber 29 there is an interesting analysis of 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cb4: 3.a3 d5 4.ed5: Qd5: 5.Nf3 e5 6.Bb2 Nc6 7.c4 and 6.c4!?

Perhaps white's chances are good even objectively, but in practise they are enormous. There are games by IM Anatoli Zajarnyi who beat several strong GMs in that line (in tournament games), and some strong young Ukrainian players also tried the line.

In the meantime, are there any new ideas about 5. ... e6 or 4. ... Nd5 (see posts above)?

I also wonder what is the best against 3. ... ba3: , 4.d4, 4.Na3: or even 4.Ba3:

FightingDragon wrote on 10/09/07 at 19:05:50:

In the new Kaissiber 29 there is an interesting analysis of 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cb4: 3.a3 d5 4.ed5: Qd5: 5.Nf3 e5 6.Bb2 Nc6 7.c4 and 6.c4!? Perhaps white's chances are good even objectively, but in practise they are enormous. There are games by IM Anatoli Zajarnyi who beat several strong GMs in that line (in tournament games), and some strong young Ukrainian players also tried the line. In the meantime, are there any new ideas about 5. ... e6 or 4. ... Nd5 (see posts above)?

When I analysed this variation (5...e5) one or two years ago I came to the same conclusion, but failed to find something against 5...e6.

@MNb: do you have something to say about 3. ... ba3: ?

I started playing the gambit again in internet games and found out that some people like to decline with
2. ... b6.
2 good ways to counter that:

- 3.bc5: bc5: 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.Rb1 g6 6.g3! with a closed sicilian setup where the b-file (and the unprotected Nc6) are useful for white. In the right moment Nb5 might be annoying.

- 3-5 as above 6.Bc4!? with a kind of GrandPrix-attack.

Not really. As long as White has problems after 5...e6, I think it a waste of time to delve into 3...bxa3. Schwarz in his 1983 booklet on the Wing Gambit recommended 4.Nxa3. He gives 4.Bxa3 d6! 5.d4 Nf6 6.Bd3 Nc6 7.Nf3 Bg4 =+Mestrovic-Matulovic, Zagreb 1968 and 5...Nc6 6.Nf3 g6 Capablanca-Black, New York 1911. After 4.d4 he recommends e6 5.Bd3 d5, which looks like the Delayed Wing Gambit 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b4.
Schwarz' main line runs 4.Nxa3 d6 5.d4 Nf6 6.Bd3 e5 (g6!?) 7.Ne2 Be7 8.0-0 with f2-f4 to follow.

MNb wrote on 01/05/07 at 20:23:18:

I do not play this because of: 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 a) 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 (4.e5 Nc6 5.d4 Bf5) Qxd5 5.Nf3 e6 b) 3.d4 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.Bb5+ (5.a3 Qxd5; 5.c4 bxc3 6.Nxc3 Nxd5) Bd7 6.Bc4 Bg4 7.f3 Bf5 in both lines White's compensation is vague.

White can play

1.e4 c5 2.b4 bxc 3.a3 d5 Qxd5 5. Bb2 (The Marienbad Variation originally played Rudolph Spielmann v Samisch 1925.) e5 and Spielmann played 6. axb However  6.Nf3 Nc6 7.c4 is the Zajarnyi Gambit. This line needs investigation. possibly black could try 5.... Nc6 and if 6.Nf3 then 6..e6

However when white follows this move order he cannot play the Nanu Gambit. 1.e4 c5 2.b4 bxc 3. a3 d5 4.exd Qxd5 5. Nf3 e5 6. c4

As I see the situation White cannot reach the Nanu Gambit unless black cooperates by playing 5..e5 instead of the better move e6. however some analysis is required to draw the fangs of the Zajarnyi Gambit

To add to my previous posting. I shall order Richard Pallisers book on the anti-sicilians today. I have seen so many reviews saying how good it is.

I am writing an article for Australian Correspondence Chess Quarterly on the Sicilian wing Gambit. However I have at least a month to complete the article. So far I have not been able to obtain a copy of "The Gambiteer" yet so I will not finish my article until it comes to hand.

The weather here has been up to 42 degrees celsius. It has been difficult to do anything energetic. So in between watching the cricket on television I have been checking out the analysis given in Kaissiber number 29.  

When it is completed I shall post it to this forum.  

As stated in Kaissiber 29 the "Gambiteer" doesn't even mention 3. ... ba3:  which may say a lot about the quality of the book...  :-X

Wind's analysis in Kaissiber is very interesting, but still I think white has problems after both 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cb4: 3.a3 d5 4.ed5: Nf6!
and 4. ... Qd5: 5.Nf3 e6!?

I fear that 5.Bb2 is not the solution to the problem as apart from 5. ... Nc6 black can also play 5. ... Bg4!? when the compensation for the pawn is not clear.

Will you address 4. ... Nf6 and 5. ... e6 in your article?

FightingDragon wrote on 01/15/08 at 05:07:08:

As stated in Kaissiber 29 the "Gambiteer" doesn't even mention 3. ... ba3:  which may say a lot about the quality of the book...  :-X Wind's analysis in Kaissiber is very interesting, but still I think white has problems after both 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cb4: 3.a3 d5 4.ed5: Nf6! and 4. ... Qd5: 5.Nf3 e6!? I fear that 5.Bb2 is not the solution to the problem as apart from 5. ... Nc6 black can also play 5. ... Bg4!? when the compensation for the pawn is not clear. Will you address 4. ... Nf6 and 5. ... e6 in your article?

The point of my article is to warn black players that there are new ideas in the Sicilian wing Gambit and that they need to be ready for them. I shall try and incorporate all the good ideas other people come up with. Even if I have to say "unexplored but interesting are"

I used to play the Sicilian Wing Gambit sometimes
and scoring 2 wins and 2 draws in serious games even.

But...
1.e4 c5 2.b4 cb 3.a3 d5 4.ed Qxd5 5.Nf3 Bg4 6.ab
Now in one game 6..Bxf3 7.Qxf3 Qxf3 8.gf lead to a draw

6... Nc6 is a problem for white
I think it was played by Jeremy Silman
any ideas for white  ?

In Madrid a few players are playing 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 (e6/d6) 3.b4

I believe it was supposed to be playable even after 2...Nc6.

Palliser does not mention this possibility. So I am not impressed.

After playing some of his suggestions, even less. I am starting to think one should work out its own lines against this anti-whatever. Playing 'as recommended in such and such book' is going to add points to the semi-professional players that play such cheapos!

This interesting thread was mentioned in the recent topic "Wing Gambit game", worth a bump.

Two critical lines were mentioned in this topic:
A. 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.axb4 Nxd5
Here MNb mentioned 6.d4 Nxb4 7.c3 Nd5 8.c4 Nf6 9.Ba3, but agreed with FightingDragon that 6...e5 looks strong.
The chesspub guide mentions 6.b5 as in Rewitz-Rasmussen, 1996 and 6.Nf3 as in Kodentsov-Van Assendelft, 2000 and is happy with White's chances. I see no reason to disagree.
B. 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 e6
I quite like 6.d4 here from Tartakower-Luckis, 1938 which looks like a logical move given that Black didn't claim a bigger share of the centre with 5...e5.
6.d4 Nc6 7.Bd3 Nf6 8.0-0 Bd6 9.axb4 (or 8...Bd7 9.c4) I think White has sufficient compensation for the pawn.
Still, 6.Bb2 scores decently for White, the most recent example being van Dongen-Hekhuis, 2009.

I've been playing the winggambit for about 3 years now with a record of +25 -2 =10 all against higher rated opponents. I've found almost all the literature out there on the wing gambit (I haven't seen the Kaissber article  :'() have very minimal coverage because they think it is so dubious as to be unnecessary to cover it.

I will say as the white player, I have never happier than when I see 2... b6 because it is extremely easy for white to get an advantage. Suffice it to say, the most testing line imo has already been mentioned by others: 1. e4 c5 2. b4 cxb4 3. a3 d5 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. Nf3 e5 where white now has a choice of 6. Bb2 6. c4 and what Davies considers his mainline in the Gambiteer 6. axb4?! (I consider this move highly dubious!). I might also add this line above is the line where I have all my losses and draws from... so when I said no other line posses me problems... I wasn't joking :) I'm sure this is most the critical line. It is easy for black to get his pieces out and catch up on development (not to mention harder to fall for tricks).

In any case, outside of 2... b6 I think white can't prove an advantage but can equality. The trade is black will be in uncomfortable territory where white has been many times before.

That sounds interesting!
Can you tell us at which level you play, and how strong your opponents were?

Also me personally, I'm very interested in a good line against 3. ... ba3:, if there existed something I might take up the wing gambit myself in serious games (in internet blitz games it is a lot of fun)!

@trw, if you have problems with the mainline 1. e4 c5 2. b4 cxb4 3. a3 d5 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. Nf3 e5 then you simply have to get the Kaissiber article! Extensive discussion of 6.Bb2 and 6.c4 and a lot of fun.

MNb wrote on 01/05/07 at 20:23:18:

I do not play this because of: 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 a) 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 e6

How about something like: 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Nf3 e6 6.Be2 Nf6 7.o-o Nc6 8.Re1 Be7 9.axb4 Bxb4 10.Na3 o-o 11.Nc4 Qd8 12.Bb2 b6 13.Bd3 Be7 14.Ng5 h6 15.Qf3 Bd7 16.Ne4 Nb4 17.Nxb6 Nxd3 18.Qxd3 Qxb6 19.Nxf6+ Bxf6 20.Bxf6 gxf6 21.Qxd7 =

In my book I covered 3...e5!?, and I still think that it's a promising and fairly easy move to play.

TonyRo your book is excellent any thoughts on an up-date?

TonyRo wrote on 05/22/18 at 13:55:31:

In my book I covered 3...e5!?, and I still think that it's a promising and fairly easy move to play.

A recent game of mine went 1. e4 c5 2. b4 cxb4 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. a3 e5 which is a similar idea. The continuation was 5. axb4 Bxb4 6. Na3 Nf6 7.  Bd3 0-0 8. 0-0 d5 9. exd5 Qxd5 after which I think Black is better. The game didn't last much longer. White hit the Queen with 10. Bc4 Qc5 11. d3 but after 11. .. Bg4 went wrong with 12. h3 Bh5 13. g4 Nxg4 14. hxg4 Bxg4 15. Nb5 e4 16. Be3 Qh5 0-1

An interesting idea is 5. Bc4 which leaves a dilemma for Black. Natural is 5. .. Nf6, but then 6. Ng5. So which Two Knights defence should work? An engine would allow the "Fried Liver" so 6. .. Nxd5 7. Nxf7 Kxf7 8. Qf3+ Ke6. Backing out with 5. .. Be7 allows White a tempo gain on the actual game.