(UTC)
Latest Updates:
(Moderators: CraigEvans, Hadron, proustiskeen)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Englund Gambit (Read 63181 times)
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #53 - 11/17/07 at 08:39:44
Post Tools
Okay, Mr. Markovich, I'd love to see the game you are talking about. Do you have the game score?
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
LeeRoth
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 1520
Joined: 10/22/05
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #52 - 11/14/07 at 22:43:09
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 11/14/07 at 08:36:56:
I would hardly say "lost". After 1 d4 e5 2 de5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Qe7 4 Bf4 Qb4+ 5 Bd2 Qxb2 6 Nc3 Bb4! 7 Rb1 Qa3 the fun starts. Play might continue:

8 Rb3 Qa5 9 a3 Bxc3

10 Rxc3!?, Zilbermints - Mucerino is interesting and has been played by me with White at the Second Intercollegiate Championship, Pennsylvania, 1999. I won that game.

10 Bxc3 Qc5

The game is not over yet.



Of course, play might also continue 8.Nd5 when Black is in trouble.
Wink



  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #51 - 11/14/07 at 13:14:17
Post Tools
Meat wrote on 11/12/07 at 16:47:37:
Quote:
I tried the gambit in The City of Adelaide tournament last year against an unprepared opponent. It does seem to be the kind of game you can only get away with once.


Right, because your next opponent will probably play 6. Nc3, after which you are already lost.


I once saw Chuck Diebert of Blackmar-Diemer fame, Elo ~2300, play this gambit against some player ~1900, and be summarily crushed.  Diebert is an outstanding tactician, but it's pretty hard to combine when your opponent controls the center and has more pieces out. 

The only time I myself ever faced it, I played 6.Nc3 and won easily.   

What is it that attracts people to this sort of thing?  Really there are an amazing number of unsound gambits that are refuted quite simply by bringing out your pieces on good squares and not being too much tempted by material gain.

  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #50 - 11/14/07 at 08:36:56
Post Tools
I would hardly say "lost". After 1 d4 e5 2 de5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Qe7 4 Bf4 Qb4+ 5 Bd2 Qxb2 6 Nc3 Bb4! 7 Rb1 Qa3 the fun starts. Play might continue:

8 Rb3 Qa5 9 a3 Bxc3

10 Rxc3!?, Zilbermints - Mucerino is interesting and has been played by me with White at the Second Intercollegiate Championship, Pennsylvania, 1999. I won that game.

10 Bxc3 Qc5

The game is not over yet.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Meat
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 184
Joined: 06/27/06
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #49 - 11/12/07 at 16:47:37
Post Tools
Quote:
I tried the gambit in The City of Adelaide tournament last year against an unprepared opponent. It does seem to be the kind of game you can only get away with once.


Right, because your next opponent will probably play 6. Nc3, after which you are already lost.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #48 - 11/12/07 at 15:26:18
Post Tools
Sounds like the famous Englund trap, all over again! What was your opponent's rating?
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
walnoten
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 5
Joined: 02/18/06
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #47 - 11/11/07 at 00:51:04
Post Tools
I tried the gambit in The City of Adelaide tournament last year against an unprepared opponent. It does seem to be the kind of game you can only get away with once.
1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Bf4 Qe7 4 Nf3 Qb4+ 5 Bd2 Qxb2 6 Bc3 Bb4 7 Bxb4 Nxb4 8 c3 Nc2+ 9 Kd2 Nxa1+ 10 Kd3 b6 11 Nbd2 Ba6+ 12 c4 Qxa2 13 Nd4 c5 14 Nb5 Bxb5 15 cxb5 Qd5+ 16 Ke3 Qxe5+ 17 Kf3 Nf6 18 e3 Qh5+ 19 Kf4 Qxd1 20 Nf3 Qd6+ 21 Kg5 h6+ 22 Kh4 g5+ 23 Kh3 g4+ 24 Kh4 gxf3 25 gxf3 Qe5 26 f4 Qh5+ 27 Kg3 Qg4++ 0-1
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #46 - 09/16/07 at 23:10:39
Post Tools
Okay, let me send an email and see what develops. I might be busy with school, though...
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10777
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #45 - 09/16/07 at 20:38:47
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 09/16/07 at 03:25:20:
I appreciate the good news. Unfortunately, this tournament is by invitation only,
in South America. Each chess federation can send one (1) player. Since I'm not 2400-rated, it looks like I can't play there.


Well, I am not invited either and still I will participate. So I did two years ago. If you are really interested, send an email and see what happens. The Federation is backed by a solid sponsor. As it is the first FIDE-tournament in Suriname ever it might be in the interest of SCF to have an international field - the more nationalities the better. If you have a FIDE-rating, you will have a good chance.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #44 - 09/16/07 at 18:25:22
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 09/16/07 at 18:06:56:
The only gambit Lendermann plays that I know about is the Smith-Morra Gambit of the Sicilian Defense. He also thinks that he is hot stuff, which he is not. It's why some peoplke don't like him at the Marshall -- the snotty attitude.


Aww lev don't be too hard on him, that's just the exuberance of youth. Cheesy

Lenderman is definetly a gambiteer at heart, he plays the Centre Ruy another trappy cheapo opening. True he hasn't punted 1.e4 d5 2.g4 yet, but I don't think you should hold that against him.

I actually learned a thing or two from his Smith Morra lecture, although I disagreed with most of it, but no doubt his target audience was the less discerning play for 'fun' crowd. 

Toppy Smiley   
  
The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1397
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #43 - 09/16/07 at 18:06:56
Post Tools
The only gambit Lendermann plays that I know about is the Smith-Morra Gambit of the Sicilian Defense. He also thinks that he is hot stuff, which he is not. It's why some peoplke don't like him at the Marshall -- the snotty attitude.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2211
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #42 - 09/16/07 at 18:02:51
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 09/16/07 at 02:54:52:
Congratulations on beating the snotty little bastard, Alex Lendermann. With the Latvian Gambit, too -- now there is an accomplishment.  He always tries for cheapos.  The only way to beat him is to either play closed positions and trade down pieces or return material and beat off his attack.

FYI, people at the Marshall Chess Club call him "lucky bastard" because of these cheapos. That said, let me address the other concerns posted by you and Bibs.

First, a really good tournament costs a lot of money. Take the World Open in Pennsylvania, held in summer. The entry fee alone is $363, which prevents many from playing. Then there is the hotel and food expenses, plus travel.
So we are looking at around $1500 - $2000  at least.  Not an easy task for someone who lives on a fixed income.

Secondly, after 1 g4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 g5  Nd5 5 Nxe4 Nc6 6 d3 e5 7 Nf3
White should be OK.  Note however, that instead of 4...Nd5, many of my opponents play  4...Bg4? 5 Be2 Bxe2 6 Qxe2 and here White has the edge. Now, maybe 4...Bg4? is not good, but in my experience, I have seen it many, many times.

Thirdly, I shall have to check your so-called "refutations" another time, when I have a chess board and more free time handy. Outside this website, no one is going to know your "refutations" anyway, while many know my gambits and play them.

One more thing: WE SHALL MEET ON ICC SOON.


Lev I'm shocked, I would have thought you would have embraced a fellow Gambiteer such as the youngster Lenderman. 

What gives?

Toppy Smiley
  
The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #41 - 09/16/07 at 14:24:25
Post Tools
Quote from Gambit 
Quote:
Now let's take a look at your analyses of the Zilbermints Grob, aka Scandinavian
Defense, Zilbermints Gambit:   
 
1 e4 d5 2 g4 (or 1 g4 d5 2 e4) dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6     4 g5!  and now what is Black going to play? This can get very tactical, with White easily getting a big edge if Black is not careful.



Has the natural 2...e5! been suggested yet? Looks like a simple refutation to me, as I don't see what white should do... 

E.g: 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Qf3 QxQ 5.NxQ Bd6 with at least a structural advantage XPg4 - and nothing to worry about for black.

'Active' play seems to rebound on white:
3.Nc3 d4 4.Nb1 Nf6 -/+
3.d4 dxe4 or Nf6!?  -/+

So, how do you defend this for white??
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bonsai
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 622
Joined: 03/13/04
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #40 - 09/16/07 at 12:44:30
Post Tools
flaviddude wrote on 09/16/07 at 05:16:41:
I am surprised that so far no-one has mentioned the very detailed book by Stefan Bucker on this opening.

This deals with 

- the Hartlaub Gambit. 1. d4 e5 2. dxe d6

- The Soller gambit with 2.f6

- The England Gambit 2. dxe Nc6 3. Nf3 Qe7.

but not the previousl mentioned Ne7.

Actually, in the Kaissiber article by Bücker says that he did cover the move in his 1988 book (is that the one you mean?), but only in 4 lines and 5 footnotes (concluding that it is +/-). Then Bücker goes on to say that in addition to Gerstel (who played it as early as 1985), Zilbermints also re-invented that move in 1993. Bücker then goes on to say:"His (=Zilbermints) 21 page analyses were published in 1994 in BDG World across 3 issues and offered wild analyses in which the white king sometimes ran to d5 or g3 - quite entertaining, even if his variations contained a number of mistakes. I (=Bücker) have mercilessly weeded out these pretty, but irrelevant variations and have instead tried to concentrate on the critical and plausible responses by white."
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bonsai
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 622
Joined: 03/13/04
Gender: Male
Re: Englund Gambit
Reply #39 - 09/16/07 at 12:34:03
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 09/15/07 at 23:01:31:
Dude, I don't know if you are just being lazy, but doing research is part of chess. If I tell you that theory was published in such-and-such chess magazine, then get off your butt and try to locate it. That's what I do, that's what good chessplayers do. Lazy ones don't even bother, and you, unfortunately, belong to that category.

Looking in the Kaissiber I primarily find a lot of variations in the letters to the editor, the reply to which is "well, if white is happy to be better - instead of trying for a win -  then he can play like this." and on the Gerstel-Gambit "1.d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nge7" we find that after 4.Nc3 Lev's pet variation here is 3...h6 (Recommended by Zilbermints, because he for once had to admit that 4...Ng6 5.Bg5 is unpleasant), but here it is admitted that white has a slight advantage with 5.a3, while simply getting on with development and being better after 5.e4 is not even discussed. What is black doing here anyway? 1.d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nge7 4.Nc3 h6 5.e4 g5 6.Be3 Bg7 7.Qd2 g4 8.Nd4 Bxe5 is the best I can come up with for black and it looks quite pleasant for white. Black's development is not particularly good, his pawn structure somewhat dodgy, I wish I had positions like that "for free" more often.

The main Kaissiber article basically says that 1.d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Nge7 4.Bf4 Ng6 5.e3 Qe7 6.Nc3 is better for white, while 5...d6 is suggested as a potentially better "practical" try.

Erm, why exactly were we meant to look at a analyses that essentially say that black is just worse?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge