Quote:


No. I began to consider the KG seriously, when I became convinced, that White has chances too in the Modern Defences.

woofwoof: No, not forgotten. Even mentioned in this thread. It's just that playing 2...d5 3.exd5 exf4 is considered to be a better move order. It avoids the 3.Bc4 line.

The variation that most annoys me when I play the King's Gambit is the Modern variation.  You stated that you tried that and got reasonable positions out of the opening but basically that you were outplayed later.  Perhaps you could study your losses more thoroughly and this would provide a good defence for you.  Another advantage is that via the Falkbeer move order (1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5, not the only move but by far the most common, 3...exf4 4.Nf3 Nf6) you have a complete answer to the KG.  I guess you already know that since you have the Kaufman book.  I always enjoyed playing against the other variations more personally.  It's not that I considered some of the other variations inferior, just the resulting positions suited my style better.  (I wonder if a lot of KG players feel this way?)

Alias wrote on 07/04/06 at 14:03:56:


Alias was quite blunt here.  Maybe it's from his meat helmet?    However, he's right.  All too often, people blame the opening for their losses when it was really their tactics that let them down.

You should know that Fischer's 3...d6 is not considered a refutation of the KG at all.  It is merely one more line.  It's playable, but I wouldn't even go so far as to say it's as good as some of the other lines mentioned. 

Philosophically, a gambit should be taken unless you know for sure that it's good.  In which case it isn't really a gambit.  That's why the Queen's Gambit is often described as not being a true gambit.  What this means in this discussion is I firmly believe that any KGD, even the Falkbeer Counter Gambit, will be intrinsically worse than the best acceptance lines. (They may still be playable, just not as good as the best KGA lines.) As others have pointed out though, there are many paths to Rome in the KG for Black.

[quote author=Dinomike100 link=1151973610/0#4 date=1151990678]How about Fischer's bust to the KG.  Didn't that practically wipe out the KG from GM play?  I'm not saying black is winning, but he probably has equality.  Here is a website which has an online annotation of Fischer's ideas:

[url]http://www.academicchess.org/Games/chessviewer/Fisherbustkingsgambit.shtml[/url]

When I played this, I often found white had to really go out of his way to get a good attack going.
[/quote]

I'm afraid that the situation has evolved a bit since Fischer, although the original statement that 3. ...d6 gives Black the better game is probably intrinsicaly correct.
For a while 4. d4 g5 ; 5. h4 g4 ; 6. Ktg1 was the main battleground, but Black came up with several promising rejoinders. Now, as I learnt at my own expense from MNb, there's 5. Ktc3 to deal with. Perhaps if I overcome my laziness and aversion for tactical variations, I'll give another shot at refuting it, but the job should really go to you 1. ...e5 players out there...

TalJechin wrote on 07/04/06 at 07:01:06:



Sheesh.  So much for advice from the experts!   

How about Fischer's bust to the KG.  Didn't that practically wipe out the KG from GM play?  I'm not saying black is winning, but he probably has equality.  Here is a website which has an online annotation of Fischer's ideas:

http://www.academicchess.org/Games/chessviewer/Fisherbustkingsgambit.shtml

When I played this, I often found white had to really go out of his way to get a good attack going.

After 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 I've done pretty well with 3...g5, although things can can get complicated and messy and I've had a few tough games.  I less comfortable playing against 3. Bc4 (which is also less common in my games - so far) but I trust lines based on 3...Nf6.  In both cases, I've found Emms' Play the Open Games as Black provided a pretty good starting point for preparing to face the King's Gambit.

The Classical King's Gambit Declined lines after 2...Bc5 are certainly playable, but I've always felt that accepting the gambit gives Black much better winning chances.  Although I don't feel this way about all gambits, for the King's Gambit I'm pretty convinced that the pawn should be taken.

I agree with MNb that there is no easy solution (I guess that's part of the reason why the King's Gambit has such loyal - to put it mildly - supporters), but once you get youre defenses worked out you may even find you look forward to facing the King's Gambit.  If you are well prepared, I think that Black's winning chances against the King's Gambit are probably quite a bit higher than they are against more conservative white openings.

One of the Open Game lines I hate facing the most is 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3.  There is nothing threatening here at all for Black, just really difficult to generate winning chances - a real test of Black's patience (not my strong suit).