Well, I proposed a couple of improvements on the old Grob line (8...Ba5 9.Rb5 Bxd2+ 10.Qxd2 Kd8 11.e4 a6 for instance, while in the 11...h6 line, Grob's 13...Qf8 can certainly be improved upon).  I don't trust 11...h6 though, for while Black may be fine after 12.h4 b6 13.Bc4 Na5, I think the immediate 12.Bc4 leaves Black in trouble.

However, I don't agree with the "unclear" assessment that was widely applied to the line until recently (which I suspect caused the long-held view that 8.Rb3 was stronger than 8.Nd5).  The onus is on Black to make the line playable, not on White to prove an advantage.

There is no limit to what a human can achieve so long as no energy is spent on worrying who gets the credit.

 Re-inventing or reintroducing the Zilbermints Gambit would be a more accurate way to put it. Keep in mind that Stadelman's analyses was apparently forgotten by the chess world. I say this because, after searching quite a bit, I cannot locate any games with 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6  3 Nf3 Nge7 earlier than 1983. 

All told, there exist only six games prior to 1993, with the 3...Nge7 line. No player before me played this line regularly and consistently.
What I did was develop the theory of this opening and re-introduce it into tournament play.

The same article I cited states that Stadelman called 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 d6 the "Stad Gambit". He was apparently unaware that Henry Charlick, an Australian correspondence chess player, introduced 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 d6 in 1894.

In Germany, 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 d6 is known as the Hartlaub Gambit. It is named after the German player, Carl Hartlaub,  who played the opening in 1899 and 1921.

As was stated earlier here, some openings have more than one name.

I'm happy to call it the Zilbermints Gambit mainly because there are reputable sources that call it as such- Tim Harding, Stefan Bucker etc.

But I agree with HTH's central point.  Surely, to invent an opening is to be the first to play it.  If someone else comes up with the same idea and introduces it to a wider audience- even if totally independently of the original inventor- that's not inventing it.  It's establishing/popularising it, and arguably re-inventing it.

I would like to take the time to respond to these critics who say I did not invent 3...Nge7 in the Englund Gambit. The facts are as follows.

It was March 1993. At that time, I was analysing both 1 d4 e5 2 de5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nge7 and 1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Nxf3 e6 6 Bg5 Be7 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 9 Kh1

This was way before the Internet started. I had no idea who Stadelman was, nor of any games with the 3...Nge7 line. That came much later. In fact, Stefan Buecker of Germany sent me a photocopy
of an article published in Canadian Chess magazine in August 1965.
That article was in itself quite interesting. Apparently, the editor at the time found old clippings of yet another chess article in a copy of Aron Nimzovich's "My System", first published in 1936.

The old clippings dealt with the Englund Gambit. One of these mentioned Samuel Leigh Stadelman's analyses (judging by the way it was written). Unfortunately, no date was given.  The Canadian editor deemed the clippings curious enough to re-publish them.

Now, Stefan Buecker sent me the photocopy of the Canadian article in 1996. Prior to that, I had no inkling of who Stadelman was. Later research yielded some data and even a rare photograph of him.

Stadelman analysed many lines, but only two were ever published.
I believe that the newspaper which published the original articles was the Philadelphia Inquirer, where Walter P. Shipley was the chess editor. Both Shipley and Stadelman belonged to the old Franklin (since 1955 Franklin-Mercantile) Chess Club. 

Stadelman's analyses ran as follows:

1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nge7 

I. 4 Bg5 h6 5 Bh4 g5 6 Bg3 Nf5!

II. 4 Bf4 Ng6 5 g3 d6 6 Bb5 Bd7 7 ed6 Nxf4 8 ef4 Bxd6

The original article states that he gave other lines, all leading to an easy equality for Black.

What needs to be understood is that I cannot find any of Stadelman's games with the 3...Nge7 line. All extant games (1900-1910) do not begin with 1 d4 e5 2 de5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nge7 but rather with 1 e4 e5 or some other opening. So, in the absence of games, I can only assume it was analyses by Stadelman.

As for the year when the original article was published, well, I really have no idea. Nimzovich's "My System" was published in 1936, so that might be a clue. Though the original article might have been published prior to 1936 and inserted into the book later...

The Englund Gambit tournament took place between December 1932 and January 1933 in Stockholm, Sweden. It started out 1 d4 e5 2 de5 3 Nf3 Qe7 4 Qd5 and was directed by Karl Anton Englund. You see, Englund did not invent 3...Qe7; rather, he directed the first Englund Gambit thematic tournament. 

I wonder if Stadelman saw games from the tournament and proposed 3...Nge7 as an alternative to 3...Qe7 ? Or was it independent analyses that had nothing to do with Englund's tournament? Will we ever know?

S. L. Stadelman was the Franklin Chess Club champion in 1907 and 1908. His ancestry was Swiss-German and German. Not sure of his death date, but he was born in 1881. Stadelman lies buried in a church cemetery in Ardmore, Pennsylvania.

If anyone has more information about SLS, it would be appreciated.   

Gambit wrote on 10/03/08 at 14:29:40:



Both.

Lev:  Are you interested in having a star named after you?  Much more prestigious than a chess opening!  Imagine...a whole world with your own eponymic idealogy awaits for you here:  http://www.starnamer.net/


One day people may even colonize your world!