ghenghisclown wrote on 03/17/12 at 20:37:55:


As an aside, Kaufman recommends players pick up the Moscow Variation of the Queen's Gambit in his repertoire book. It doesn't necessarily follow that a line is good or easy just because several people recommend it.

Personally, if you want easy, I like Karpov's answer, to accept the gambit then strive for c6 and d5.

I just felt it is the easiest to learn. You get that opening so rarely, it just doesn't make much sense to me to learn a super sharp line that you will have forgotten if you need it. Also: good development and piece play always is nice

derdudea wrote on 03/09/12 at 21:43:40:


Yep, always play something you believe in, not something your opponent believes in.

It's not foolish at all to attack an opponent who plays only a single opening. What is foolish is to come into such a game only half-prepared. The advantage of a narrow repertoire is that it's usually bullet-proof and you're gonna know the ideas behind the opening better than your opponent.

The disadvantage is that it can be attacked by an opponent who has found a SPECIFIC line.

From everything I've read, you never found that specific line to test your opponent.

It's a pretty brave choice letting the opponent go in for a Muzio Gambit- as Black I have traditionally preferred to enter the Hanstein with ...Nc6 and ...Bg7, and establishing a f4-g5-h6 pawn chain.  (That line is far less sedate than its reputation if my games in it are anything to go by- most of them have got pretty wild by around move 15).  But if you fancy your chances against the Muzio then by all means go ahead!

The game is over and I admit, I should have been punished for playing an opening I have no experience with. It was a bad idea to hope for so much opening advantage, that my lack of familiarity with King´s gambit positions and my bad tactical play in open positions would not decide the game.

I decided to play mainlines, because my opponent always played Nf3/Bc4 and later 0-0 and d4, which I guessed would lead to the Muzio, which I prepared.

N.N. (1750) - derdudea (1930)
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 g4 5.0–0 gxf3 6.Qxf3 Qf6 7.d3 b5 8.Bb3 End of preparation - or to be precise, what I remembered over the board. After the next few moves, which where acceptable:
8.Bb3 Nc6 9.e5 Lc5+ 10.Kh1 Df5 11.Lxf4 Sge7 I got a pretty good position, but not good enough to win right away. So chess had to be played and the game continued with a each player throwing away the win about three or four times. Finally, I won, but it was like playing russian roulette.

Goodbye to the King´s Gambit and this section!

Just to clarify the original post: you face a guy that exchanges on the french, where you somehow expect he is going for a draw. On 1...e5 however you expect him to play the King's Gambit? That sounds a bit strange to me, to be honest. If he's more after a draw, wouldn't he play something like the Italian, Four Knights etc.?

Alright, give that he plays the King's Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 f5 would be me offbeat recommendation (already given by Alias below). This is an aggressive line, almost unknown, and even not refuted at all  The best reply may be 4.d3... and that hardly scares black I guess.

STEFANOS wrote on 02/28/12 at 07:00:02:


I would think that this is also one of the responses that the White player is well prepared against, and the positions are also what would suit that player. For psychological reasons, I would probably go with something else, but of course this is a matter of taste and preferences, as you say.

The Falkbeer proper (1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 e4) works well unless White finds 4.d3!, whereupon Black struggles to generate much of an attack and White stands better.  Other lines such as 4.Nc3 and 4.Bb5+ give Black dangerous play, so it's up to you whether you consider 4.d3! a risk worth taking.  3...c6 amounts to an inferior version of the Modern Defence (which arises after 3...exf4)- but the Modern is a solid route to a dynamic equality which doesn't sound like it's what the original poster is after.

One double-edged idea that I have occasionally used is the Cunningham with 3...Be7 intending 4.Bc4 Bh4+, when after 5.Kf1 White will generally regain the lost pawn and have a strong centre but has long-term problems with the king. 

I often use 3...Nc6 as it often tricks opponents into playing a line they would not normally use against 3...g5, although one snag is that White can play 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ne5, transposing to a line of the Kieseritzky (3...g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nc6 6.d4) when 5...Nf6 and 5...d6 are more reliable than 5...Nc6.  That said I think Black is still alright after 6...Nf6 intending 7.Bxf4 Nxe4.  I would be more strongly inclined to make 3...Nc6 my recommendation against the Bishop Gambit (3.Bc4) as it isn't well-documented in books and yet is probably more critical than the ...d5 approaches that 3.Bc4 players are used to.  Most of the time (from experience of playing at the 1800-2000 level) it results in a Hanstein Gambit after 4.Nf3 g5.

A related idea is 3...d6 which prevents the Kieseritzky approach altogether.  White players who like the Kieseritzky might not be happy playing the line 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 (and not 6.Ng5 f6! which is even stronger than 6...h6), but White does have a couple of alternatives to this line.

Alternatively as per Flig's suggestions you could try 3...h5 or even just 3...g5, as Black has quite a wide choice against the Kieseritzky, 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6, or 5...d6 (which suffers from a drawish reputation at GM level but should still give plenty of play at 1500-2000 Elo level) or the less critical 5...Nc6 above.  5...Nf6 is probably most effective here as many club players will have studied out-of-date theory recommending 6.d4, which allows Black some advantage after 6...d6 7.Nd3 Nxe4, meeting Qe2 with ...Qe7.  (As Stefan Bucker has pointed out in a couple of recent articles, 6.Bc4! d5 7.exd5 is the way to go for White in that variation).

How about the Falkbeer - gambit back!

1. e4 e5: 2. f4 d5

I´m a rare guest in the 1.e4 e5 section, but I´m looking for a variation against the King´s gambit for special use against opponents, who are trusty adherents of this opening without being extraordinary well prepared.

Both players are usually in the 1500 - 2000 ELo range and will likely make lots of mistakes, so I´m searching for a risky variation putting White under pressure early and urging him to solve problems, giving Black chances to get a winning position right of the opening.

Which is the most testing choice, even if it is suspect with best play by White?
Usually, my next opponent will play 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3
and no, I don´t want to play my own repertoire because he plays the exchange french and I want an unbalanced game.