Gambit wrote on 01/19/10 at 07:46:37:


Then White can play the Hobbs-Zilbermints-Larsen Anti-Gambit with 1.f4 h6 2.b3!!, when 2...g5 3.Bb2 Rh7 (3...f6 4.e3 would be a nice present for White) 4.e3! gf4 5.Bd3 and White wins. Black can play 4...Bg7 but, being a die-hard gambiteer, I don't worry about such trifling details.

Sorry for the off-topic digression.

@Dragonslayer

Black can improve with 13...Be6 in your line, although I still prefer White after 14.Bf2! f5 15.Nd2 Kb8 16.0-0-0 fe4 17.Be4 Ba2 18.Rde1.

@Stefan Buecker

After 1.f4 e5 2.fe5 Nc6, does Hergert prefer 3.Nc3 or 3.Nf3? According to Vigus, 3.Nf3 g5 4.h3! d6 5.e4! is close to a refutation of this sideline.

Kaissiber 36 has an article of 21 pages on From's Gambit, written by Volker Hergert. He shows that 2...Nc6 ("Neo-From") is dubious, while 2...d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 remains a reliable weapon. 4.Nf3 g5 invites heavy complications after both 5.g3 and 5.c3. I contributed six pages on 4...Nf6, when 5.Nc3! (Bent Larsen's idea) is the hardest test. Of course Taylor's book and James Vigus' fine chapter in Dangerous Weapons: Flank Openings have been considered, as many other sources.

The second line is probably ok for Black.
The first is still unclear after 9.Qd3 Nc6 10.c3 Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 13.Be3 - no big news there, though Black may have one or two improvements after 13...Rxh2.
13...Bd7 14.Bf2 was debated in 2007 on this forum. Try searching the archives.
Black has scored reasonably well here in recent games. Se the German magazine - Kaissiber 36.