MUBAs Opponent wrote on 02/10/08 at 02:38:53:


Speaking of b-pawn gambits, 1.Nc3 e5 2.d4 ed4 3.Qd4 b5 (3...Ke7 4.Qe5 mate is also plausible) 4.Qe4 wins the rook on a8

X wrote on 02/10/08 at 00:10:06:


There have been quite a few chapters/articles in books about the move g4. Three examples are one of the chapters in Eingorn's Creative Opening Preparation, a section of Watson's strategy books (can't remember exactly), and even a brief survey on the move g4 by Genna Sosonko in the Yearbook.

I was mainly referring to gambits as Black - there are very few successful g-pawn sacrifices in this case. However, I would agree that as White g4 is usually more useful than b4 (excluding flank openings).

DoubledPawns wrote on 02/09/08 at 03:56:45:


Or the Evans, of course!

Ideas. But no good ideas, alas. As such not worthy contributions. 

Am not on ICC, only play blitz on playchess. Rarely. I dont take too seriously mind you, but I am 'hajime' on that, so any time is fine. Happy to play anyone. 

Regarding playing style, I am perhaps quite flexible. 
I play very rarely, so when I do am inevitably rusty, but the game Papatryfonos- Bibby from Calvia 2004 (look on any dbase) illustrates effective gambit play, which appears to fascinate you.  Unprepared naturally as out of theory at move 2-3, but applied ideas from Catalan.

OTB, I doubt we would find ourselves in the same tournament for geography and rating reasons. But, with respect, playing you holds little interest as you, and there is no easy way to say this,  appear rather weak.

Gambit wrote on 02/08/08 at 03:16:43:

Gambit,
there is not much to analyse, 
4. fg h6 5. Qh5 +-
4. .. Bg7 is too slow, black has no compensation for the pawn after 5. Nf3 or Bc4.
Nevertheless, a pawn deficit and a strategic lost position do not mean much in a blitz game.
This opening can be effective to humiliate your opponent, saying "You're such a lousy player! I can play
this utter crap opening and still win!". But for that, you need to win first, which will not be easy.

Everything and anything from Lev thus far could simply be called 'Utter bo*****s'.

The 'ideas' are about as constructive as a football player looking for ever new and creative ways to put the ball in his own net.

Can moderators operate on the level of 'quality control' please?

Of all this stupid bunch, the Reverse Wing Gambit sounds best.

mefisto6 wrote on 02/07/08 at 12:38:49:


Don't be ridiculous!  I never name my openings "Best....." 

In any event, I would prefer more analyses and less joking in this thread.

I found a way to revive the line with a modification of the gambit:  4.fxg5 f6!!  (King's Gambit of the Mouse Slip Variation)

Why not just play 1.e4 g5 and get it over with already?  This thread is so whack.   

Does the gambit work with an extra tempo? (1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.d3 f5 4.g4, although imo to play it with White is even less sane)

X wrote on 02/07/08 at 07:56:07:


Fair enough, we've had a good laugh already .

I don't think 1.e4 e5 2.f4 g5 is sound; what about just 3.fe5?. Black cannot win the pawn back with ...Nc6, ...Qe7 and/or ...Bg7 because of simply d4, but otherwise isn't White just a pawn up for nothing?

[/quote]
What about 1.e4 e5 2.f4 g5 ?
[/quote]

Yes, this looks like a fascinating counter-gambit ! In my opinion, there are 2 factors stopping it from becoming fashionable at the GM level:

a) 3.d4!? is a fascinating counter-counter gambit which, according to my analyses, is a forced draw...

b) The more important reason, however, is 3.Qh5!!, obtaining a decisive psychological advantage. There are two threats: Bc4, Qf7 mate, and the ever so subtle fg5 winning a pawn. Black can play 3...ef4, but after 4.Nf3 the threats of Ng5, Bc4 as well as d4 seem unstoppable. You know, this gambit reminds me of 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 g5 ...

Bibs wrote on 02/03/08 at 05:49:16:

What about 1.e4 e5 2.f4 g5 ?

DoubledPawns wrote on 02/06/08 at 09:48:44:


Nice try. I think 4...d5 is premature here. This isn't the Hobbs-Zilbermints  Gambit in the Bird Opening, where you can get away with this sort of thing. That line runs 1 f4 h6 2 Nf3 g5 3 fg5 hxg5 4 Nxg5 d5!
and after ...Qd6, Black is got real compensation for the pawn.

Here, after 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 f4 g5 4 fg5 d5? 5 Nxd5 Black has problems.

This new gambit reminds me of a story a friend of mine told me:
In a blitz tournament he had black against an IM and after 1.Nf3 he played 1...g5. The IM looked at him with a smile on his face and took the pawn saying: "Well, I just take this one". A few moves later the IM won easily.

What the story tells us: You may find a lot of exciting ways to sac pawns in the opening - strong players will just take them and win. Better open the bin ...

PS: And who the ... is "Zilbermints" - Ive never heard, read ... 

Why don't we randomly hold a poll on this?

Nonsense. fg5.
You are a pawn down. Nuff said.
Next randomly generated g pawn push pls...
Is he being sponsored per g-post for charity? 
Perhaps an email from a dyslexic girlfriend leads dear Lev in his search  for the all-important g-post.

I disagree. Mouse Slip Variation is a very stupid name. How about the Sicilian Defense, Grand Prix Attack, Hobbs Gambit?

1 e4 c5 (Sicilian Defense) 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 f4 (Grand Prix) g5 (Hobbs Gambit)

The real Hobbs Gambit is 1 f4 g5, while the Hobbs-Zilbermints Gambit is 1 f4 h6 2 Nf3 g5! 

Now, back to your question. After 1 e4 c5  2 Nc3 Nf6 3 f4 g5 4 fxg5 h6!
what do you suggest?

5.g3 looks too slow. Either 5.Nf3 or 5.Bc4 look stronger, developing actively to try and exploit Black's kingside weaknesses. 

For example: 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 h6 7.d3! and White is much better. (Weaker is 7.g6?! fg6 8.Nh4?! Ne5, but 8.0-0 looks slightly better for White anyway). Compare with the Grand Prix Attack.

After 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4, the idea of 3...g5 seems to be to take control of the central square e5 and to accelerate Black's kingside development. 

The critical test is accepting the sacrifice with 4.fg5 (4.f5?! Bg7 is fine for Black in view of White's weak dark-squares; a timely ...e6 will follow; 4.Nh3 is White's best bet if he wants to refuse the gambit - after 4...gf4 5.Nf4 is unclear but probably better for White in view of Black's weakened kingside, e.g. Bc4, 0-0, Qh5). 4...h6 (4...Bg7 5.Nf3 is too slow) 5.Qh5! and Black is already in trouble, since g6 is an obvious threat, and 5...d6 6.Bc4 (6.g6!? Be6 7.Nf3) 6...e6 7.Nf3 is not really what Black is after.

My conclusion is that 3...g5 might work in blitz, but that's about it.

P.S I checked the ChessLive database, and found the two games mentioned. The first one is an obvious typo on move 3, while in the other White played 5.gh6?! instead of 5.Qh5.