Just an idea, if you want to get past the "real test" of the KingsGambit (g5) why not try my nice little thought of 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.h4!? On another forum they said there could ensue better for black Cunninghams and other things but what do you all think?!

Well the first point that Should be made is that anyone who is interested in the Kieseritzy Gambit should download the 
articles in issues 45,51 and 52 of the free Internet magazine Correspondence Chess News. There is a tremendous mass of detailed analysis.

A year ago I made a New Years resolution to stop playing The
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit for a year and instead start playing
1. e4 in almost every game. (I only scored 60% with the BDG in the ICCF Champion's league and I was lucky to manage that.)

In my very first ICCF Master Class tournament starting last year I had two Kieseritzy Gambits as white and one as black.
Following are the scores of the two games as white. (The game as black is not yet finished.) I have not yet had time to annotate these games in detail. Both of my opponents were higher rated than me. 
   
[Event "ICCF/EM/M/247"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2003.10.20"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Flude, David"]
[Black "Bohak, Janko"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 
6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 O-O 10.Ne2 Qf6 
11.O-O Qxh4 12.Bxf4 Nxf4 13.Rxf4 f6 14.g3 Qg5 15.Nd3 Nd7 
16.Rf2 Nb6 17.Bb3 a5 18.a4 Qe3 19.Qc1 Re8 20.Ndf4 Qxc1+ 
21.Rxc1 Re3 22.Ng2 Rf3 23.Ne1 Re3 24.Ng2 Rf3 25.Ne1 Re3 
1/2-1/2

[Event "ICCF/EM/M/247"]
[Site "ICCF"]
[Date "2003.10.20"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Flude, David"]
[Black "Arne Klausen , Tor"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 
6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.Nc3 Qe7 10.Bb5+ c6 
11.dxc6 bxc6 12.Nd5 Qe6 13.Nc7+ Bxc7 14.Bc4 Qf5 15.Bxf7+ Kd8 
16.Bxh5 Qxh5 17.Bxf4 Ba6 18.g3 Re8 19.Qd2 Qf7 20.b3 Nd7 
21.O-O-O Nxe5 22.dxe5+ Kc8 23.Rhe1 Qe6 24.Qd4 h5 25.a4 Rb8 
26.Qxa7 Bb7 27.Qe3 Ra8 28.Qc3 Ra5 29.Rd4 Re7 30.Red1 Rd5 
31.Rxd5 cxd5 32.Re1 Kb8 33.Qb4 Re8 34.Kb2 Ka8 35.c3 Ba6 
36.a5 Rb8 37.Qd4 Bc4 38.b4 Rb5 39.Kc2 Bb8 40.Qd2 Rb7 
41.Kb2  1/2-1/2

The next game is an example of my opponent playing an idea in the Fischer Variation given in "101 Chess Opening Surprises" by Graham Burgess. 14. d5 is an improvement over
14.e5 given by Burgess which looks better for black. 


[Event "IECG-CUP, Preliminary, CP-2003-p-00050"]
[Site "IECG"]
[Date "2003.09.28"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Flude, David"]
[Black "Volker Pittlik , "]
[Result "1-0"]

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 
6.Ng1 Qf6 7.Nc3 c6 8.Nge2 Bh6 9.g3 fxg3 10.Nxg3 Bxc1 
11.Rxc1 Ne7 12.Qd2 h5 13.Bc4 Be6 14.d5 Qe5 15.Nge2 Bd7 
16.O-O b5 17.dxc6 bxc4 18.cxd7+ Nxd7 19.Rcd1 Rb8 20.b3 Rb6 
21.Qe3 cxb3 22.axb3 Rc6 23.Nd4 Rc5 24.Na4 Rc7 25.c4 a6 
26.Nf5 Nxf5 27.Rxf5 Qe6 28.Nc3 Ne5 29.Nd5 Rb7 30.Kh1 Ng6 
31.Qd4 Rh6 32.Rf6 Qe5  1-0

Well, to play 3.Kf2 I suppose I'll have to be BBB - bored beyond belief 

But fans of the Chocolate gambit 1.e4 f5 2.ef Kf7 should of course take note of this opportunity...   

CraigEvans's mention of 3.Nh3 intrigued me!

Dahlgrun seems to be the only one to mention it, naming it the Eisenberg Gambit (don't know if this is after a person or perhaps an iceberg).

But is 3.Nh3 really playable or is it just something one should only play in blitz? 

Actually my question about what's supposedly wrong with the Bishop's gambit was directed to Semprun, who started this line. - I'd somehow gotten the idea that the first message was the latest posting... 

One of my favorites is the modest 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d5 4.exd5 Nf6 5.Be2. So I think 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Be2 d5 is not the best defense against White's 3rd move.

I used to like playing 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef 3.Be2 the little Bishop line 

Regards