MNb wrote on 02/17/16 at 17:00:18:


That is exactly what I have awaited. A skilled but not very much skilled oponentship with no special theoretical background to the very item (which is not easy to get...). And at best you know your mainlines and that you have to hunt King and Queen...

MNb wrote on 02/17/16 at 17:00:18:


I fully agree - and add that in the Ryder it is not only about taking risks but also about taking opportunities...

MNb wrote on 02/17/16 at 17:00:18:


That is what I think. Of course the Ryder is no ultimate solution but much more an ultimate task...
Improving analysing skills - yes, just as they are forced to (with vibrant pieces if just the opponent slipps a bit).
That insecurity of the opponents is just a matter of fact. We don't deal theoretically with the positions but just practically with time limit. Mistakes are allowed and wellcome...   

MNb wrote on 02/17/16 at 17:00:18:


Here we are. The problem of every "normal" opening approach for upcomers is: It is too much you have to deal with. Especially in the 1.e4-sector...


MNb wrote on 02/17/16 at 17:00:18:


This is the inclination I too have. We should not forget that chess is a game of mistakes. And making the first "mistakes", giving away two pawns for not enough play, may be a good investment, as the opponent later is invited to mix in his own share of mistakes...
And they will, not all, but statistically for sure and in rising rate the lower the level is...


CarriedbyGg wrote on 02/17/16 at 21:30:10:


Objection.
Just scoring well is in first instance a very good excuse for playing risky stuff. Simply: Why not?
Ah, as the oponents grow stronger. So you should do. And develop your skills.
How do we learn chess? In my last lecture, on tuesday, we talked about openings and just as naturally as it may be one of the pupils suggested to play for what in Germany is called the "Schaefermatt" -  1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.Qh5...

You may call it rubbish, I as a teacher would call it a micro plan. In a teaching or learning sense this pupil acts goal orientated - not sound yet, but goal orientated.

My simple question is how I can get pupils advance to play for goals. Even if this goals are on a higher level not sustainable. The Ryder is, quite sure, not sound. But for sure it is lively with White having the initiative - or fun as MNb gave it on his experience. Not enough but nearly... If Black plays the best moves, the Gambiteer may fail. May. But how often this case will arise?

I think they have to learn even those failures to reach the next level... Never forget: Those items may return in ugly situations were you have to choose between just bad or very risky.
So I think pupils should learn this early on...

CarriedbyGg wrote on 02/17/16 at 21:30:10:


Yeah. 1.e4 e5 2.f4. Burns. But how often do you get 1...e5?! And how do you sac against 1...c6 or 1...Nf6?

To keep things straight and simple, to reduce the workload in a sense that the pupils get an active position is a point on it's own...
Besides:playing the King's gambit quite often forces you to even sacrifice a whole piece (e.g. on f7) - may be logic and clearcut but also not easy...

CarriedbyGg wrote on 02/17/16 at 21:30:10:


Objection. Check Morphy. His play was clearly not allways exactly to death, but vibrant. But wrong in theoretical sense. But in combination with the opponents mistakes it was enough to construct masterpieces...

Young pupils should get in touch with such a genius input even if their level may be much lower. All in all they want to rise.
My experience is, that the input of pupils on lower ranks and higher ones dramatically rises, when the position turns to be concrete...

So of course they should learn, that an invested risk may matter positively...

CarriedbyGg wrote on 02/17/16 at 21:30:10:


Before we learn about pawn structure we definitely should learn about piece power for sure...

Strength of my opponents: ELO 1500 - 1800.
I never felt that any opponent was well prepared - they usually had just some vague idea of what to do.
I think you could recommend this to some pupils who need a quick patch and like taking risks. Be honest though - I never fooled myself by thinking it was the ultimate solution. It's dubious at best. Plus make sure they are prepared for Black's two best defenses. It's kind of fun (for players with a certain attitude) to find ideas, even if dubious, in lines that are supposed to be bad. That will improve analyzing skills. In practical games that will often work like a charm, because the defender gets insecure and still will have to find solutions behind the board.
In the meantime the pupil can work on a more serious repertoire. In about the same way I recommended a good friend of mine to play the Leningrad Bird (Polar Bear), when his regular repertoire was in a crisis. He already had years of experience with the Dragon,  the Closed Sicilian and the KID. To his amazement he scored 4,5 / 6, exactly because his opponents didn't really understand the resulting positions. There is some truth in "beneath ELO 2400 (or whatever) anything goes", as long as you understand the positions better than your opponents. The Ryder Gambit worked for me like that.

1. Yes.
2 - 5. Can't remember, I didn't keep track.
6. Never.
7. Fun. Still I quit after two years. Fun like this never lasts.

Background: my main source was Sawyer's Keybook I. I checked his lines with Fritz 1. I didn't have access to databases yet (now it's 20 years ago).

ChevyBanginStyle wrote on 04/18/10 at 10:33:51:


Old old old thread here, I admit, but...were you seriously suggesting that following a 1900-rated player's opening play into a clearly lost game on move 2 is in any way a good idea? 

Sure, but after 11...Nbd7 Black is still a pawn up, ready to take the centre with 12...e5 while White cannot even develop normally with 12.Bd3 because of 12...Ne5 or even 12...b6. At the other hand 12.Be3 Rxa4 13.Nxa4 allows Black to catch up with development as Na3 is misplaced.
In short: Black is better.

FM Eric Schiller wrote on 10/05/10 at 02:32:40:


Okay, that sounds good! Can you give us the first seven moves prior to the line cited above?

I don't play the Ryder because I am less familiar with 5 Qxf3 than 5 Nxf3. That said, I do venture it sometimes on the Internet Chess Club.

Give me these titled players to play on the Internet Chess Club, BDG Accepted, and I will beat them for breakfast.

SWJediknight wrote on 04/23/10 at 22:06:48:


Precisely the point. It is easier for Black to go wrong.

After 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 the Zilbermints Gambit in the Euwe Defense to the BDG arises. It has many similarities with the Ryder Gambit (two pawn sacrifice, for example), but is much more dangerous. For in the Zilbermints Gambit, all of White's pieces are developed and ready to attack. Moreover, Blacks does not have the 5...Qxd4 6 Be3 Qg4! line that is available in the Ryder Gambit.

Now, some have said that I should tell them the critical lines to my gambit. Seriously, folks. You don't expect me to give you all the answers, huh? Nor do you expect the professor to give you answers on the mid-term exam.

LOL!