PANFR wrote on 05/02/14 at 16:29:09:


Is it that stupid? There's an immediate threat of Qxe4 which needs to be defended against. You block in the B f8 but if you intend g5 to hold the f4 pawn, that gives the Bishop a square on g7. You end up with a grip of the dark squares, similar to some of the more mainstream ideas against the Kings Gambit.

By some standards including engine assessments 2. f4 is just a dubious move, so replies to it should be looking for a Black advantage, but equality will do if it creates an original position.

After ten minutes thought, engines evaluate 3...Qe7 as equal, which means that such a stupid move should be avoided, since it's not tactically justified.
My database has 18 games with it, and white is scoring rather well (+17 =0 -1). None of these games is worth much, I think.

RdC wrote on 05/01/14 at 00:16:02:

The Ruy Lopez doesn't cut down Black's dangerous responses either, like 3...a5. Just saying. - I won't defend the Bishop's Gambit (3.Nf3 is better), but if Timothy Taylor is listening, the idea 3...Qe7 should be in his book.

RdC wrote on 04/29/14 at 17:56:32:

Wow, you managed to find a possibility not considered in The Evolution of Chess Openings! By the way: This 1906 work has sorted the alternatives by their date of introduction. So the six pages covering the Bishop's Gambit begin with the oldest option, 3...f5 (Lopez 1561), ... idea No. 10 is 3...d5 from a game Bilguer vs Bledow (published in Chess Players' Chronicle 1841), the eleventh option is 3...b5 (1841) and the "newest" is 3...Nc6 (1874).

This is a remarkable gap of 140 years between 1874 and "XIII. - thirteenth. - 3...Qe7, recommended by RdC 2014 in chesspub.com". - There are eight games with 3...Qe7 in the database (White won 7, lost 1). So there remains some work to be done to justify the idea.

RdC wrote on 04/29/14 at 09:28:51:


Yes, 4...Qh4+ is possible; but actually 4...Rxg8 5 Qh5+ g6 6 Qxh7 Rg7 is very good for Black anyway. This dates back to Mayet-Hanstein, Berlin 1866.

Jonathan Tait wrote on 04/26/14 at 09:42:11:


I didn't even know that 3. .. f5 was possible, but a superficial engine check seem to confirm that it's OK. I suppose if you are writing an advocacy book about the King's Bishop Gambit, all possible continuations have to be considered, even if in practice there's around one recorded OTB game a year.

Presumably a tactical point is that the obvious continuation 4. Bxg8 Rxg8 5. Qh5+ winning back a pawn can be thwarted by Black flicking in 4. .. Qh4 + himself.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 04/27/14 at 09:56:28:


...although it's not really a thread about the opening at all.

Hadron wrote on 04/26/14 at 23:25:14:

I don't trust the alternatives. Losing one game quickly, reaching the Breyer Gambit (3.Qf3) via a transposition of moves, was enough.