FreeRepublic wrote on 09/22/25 at 16:35:23:

A sample video is included. Challenge:  Can you keep up with Jobava?

The ChessBase Opening Encyclopaedia has a 2021 article by Alexey Kuzmin on the line with 4...Na5 5.Bb3 Nxb3 6.axb3. Apparently this was first published in ChessBase Magazine #200. Kuzmin covers four Black replies: 6...Bc5, 6...Be7, 6...Bb4, and 6...d5. Kuzmin analyzes this last move using Firouzja-Carlsen from the Chess24 BanterBlitz Cup 15.04.2020. Although his article advocates for the White side, Kuzmin concedes that with 6...d5, "Black obtains full equality." However, he points out that Carlsen missed chances to equalize on moves 10 and 17 and eventually lost the game. Putting White's chances in a favorable light, Kuzmin notes that even the World Champion had problems finding a reliable way to equalize over the board. Speaking more broadly, Kuzmin says the Vienna offers practical chances since it's "quite a rare opening" and Black players are not likely to be familiar with "the subtleties of the 5.Bb3 variation." 

MNb wrote on 09/23/25 at 06:26:22:


FreeRepublic wrote on 09/23/25 at 13:22:16:


Thank. Unfortunately it doesn't work.4...Na5 5.Bb3 Nxb3 6.axb3 d5.

MNb wrote on 09/23/25 at 06:26:22:

From the table of contents it looks to be in chapter 6.

The text (available at website) states:

"When facing 4…Na5, a move designed to trade off the dangerous light-squared bishop, the recommendation is 5.Bb3 followed by a quick f4.

Diagram

The point is to accept the temporary loss of the bishop pair in exchange for fast pawn storms and open-file play—an approach that turns a defensive attempt by Black into a dynamic battle."

The King's Gambit Declined appears to figure prominently (but not exclusively) in a recent modern-chess database:
Vienna Game for White - Top-Level Repertoire, August 9, 2025 by GM Baadur Jobava GM Pier Luigi Basso

I cannot find The Fascinating King's Gambit, by Thomas Johansson, mentioned in this thread at a reasonable price.

The Vienna game, Bishop's Opening, and King's gambit can transpose to common positions known as the King's gambit declined. The lines are very interesting. In every case, white and black can choose to diverge. Taken all together, it is a maze of possible variations.

Anyone intersted should follow the link:
https://www.modern-chess.com/vienna-game-for-white-top-level-repertoire-700/?the...
read the description and scroll down to their sample chapter.

Agree with most of Micawber's lines, and I also prefer line c). A few additions:

1) The line (b2z) 8...Nd4 9.Qg3 0-0 10.fxe5 dxe5 11.Kd1 (This move was given by Estrin and Glazkov 1982) 11...b5! does indeed look good for Black. But it is not a new move. To my knowledge it was first played in J.Enevoldsen-R.Hartoch, IBM B, Amsterdam 1966. White replied 12.Bb3 Nxb3 (so 12...b4 is new  ) 13.axb3 b4 14.Bh6 Ne8 (14...Nh5 as in the next game looks preferable) 15.Ne2 and won in 58 moves.
It is also in the books: On page 143 Neil McDonald gives the game McDonald-Mikhalevski, London 1992, which saw 11...b5! 12.Bh6 (with no alternatives here) 12...Nh5 13.Qxe5 bxc4 14.Qxc5 drawn in 18 moves.

2) (line b2x) The reason the books don't mention Chigorin-Burill,New York 1889  is that Tartakover recommended 12.Kd1 (iso 12.Ke2) Neil McDOnald did some good analysis of this line reversing the official evaluation of +/-. All books (e.g. Korchnoi/Zak, Estrin/Glazkov) give 12...Nxa1 13.Nd5 Be7 14.Nxe7+ Qxe7 15.Rf1 Kh8 16.Qh4 and the threat Rxf6 decides in favour of White. There are two problems here:
a) This is one of those positions that look a lot less scary with a computer assisting the defence: After 16...b5 Black will counterattack with 17.Rxf6 Qc5 which should at least draw. If the bishop moves then d3 is soft and a rook comes to d8. If Black captures on b5 then Qb4xb2 comes into consideration.
b) 15...Nxe4! 16.dxe4 Qd6 McDonald attributes this line to ECO with a +/- verdict. This must be the 1981 edition, since the 1975 edition is identical to Korchnoi's book. McDonald proceeds to show that 16...Qd7+ is unclear. 

3) 11...Qd6 is also playable (line b2x).

4) If White tries 10.Bb3 then Johansson gives 10...Nh5, while 10...exf4 11.Bxf4 Nh5 of Otte-Schoorl, Dieren 2007 also looks effective. Black soon had a winning position.

5) I don't have Davies' book but after 9...exf4 10.Qxg7 Rf8 11.Kd1 Qe7 I wonder what he recommends to give White better chances. 12.Rf1 Rg8 13.Qh6 Rxg2 14.Bxf4 Black has:
a) Larry Evans recommended 14...Ne6 and Black is slightly better.
b) 14...Rg6 15.Qh4 Ne6 is worse since after 16.Bxe6 Qxe6 17.Bg5 Ng8 does not hit the queen at h6. White is better here.
c) 14...Nxc2 15.Bg5 should not be met by 15...Rxg5. Instead Bangiev gives a cool queen sacrifice beginning with 15...Nxa1.
White can try to avoid this with 14.Qxf4 or 12.Bxf4. I find it hard to believe that White should be better after 12.Bxf4 Rg8 13.Qh6 Rxg2 14.Bg5 Ng8!

Davies gives:
7.h3, Bxf3 8.Qxf3, Nd4 9.Qg3!, 0-0! (Tartakower)
and comments that he considers 9....Nxc2+ as too risky for black.
He gives no clear reason for avoiding 8.....exf4

Marin more also gives
7.h3, Bxf3 8.Qxf3, Nd4 9.Qg3! but only considers 9....Nxc2+ (bad for black) and Qe7. 
His point is that if black plays 8...Nd4 9.Qg3,Nh5 is not good for black
after 10.Qg4

if black inserts the capture on f4
7.h3,Bxf3 8.Qxf3, exf 9.Bxf,Nd4! 10.Qg3,Nh5 then
11.Qg4 black can capture with Nxf4.

Johansson  examines this position as well:

NMB comments that Johanson thinks 8...exf doenst equalize,
but this is only partly true (if black gives this variation an independent turn).  Johanson adds that 8...exf 
9.Bxf4,Nd4 should lead to a transpostion of the 8.....Nd4 lines.
Johansson also gives Davies variation with 9...0-0, although I couldnt establish what his final verdict on this line is, as he gives a rather untracable transposition. 
Finally there is a lot of analyses after Marin's continuation, suggesting this line is still unclear, but maybe still playable for white.

All considered, I think I should go with Davies suggestion. 
If you're more materialistic or reckless and plan to capture with Nxc2+
Marin's continuation is probably more accurate.

By the way 8...Nd4 9.Qg3 was also played by Bobby Fischer 
(in a simul in 1964). 

When I get some free time I promise to update the KG eBook and add the Forum analysis file to it, as with the 2 Knights.
In the meantime I am stuck in Cappelle and have no access to the relevant books, can someone quickly explain why Marin and Davies think their line is the most accurate?