With any gambit you need to know the middle game of that opening well as you would any other opening. I play 1. f4 e5 e4 Kings Gambit transposition.
How about Vienna gambit and Englund gambit?
@kabug said in #12:
> How about Vienna gambit and Englund gambit?
I see these like setting traps, if your opponent doesn't know them you can get a quick win but otherwise you get bad play.
I would avoid them except in a hurry or when you are playing for fun (and find these funny).
> How about Vienna gambit and Englund gambit?
I see these like setting traps, if your opponent doesn't know them you can get a quick win but otherwise you get bad play.
I would avoid them except in a hurry or when you are playing for fun (and find these funny).
@OctoPinky said in #13:
> I see these like setting traps, if your opponent doesn't know them you can get a quick win but otherwise you get bad play.
>
> I would avoid them except in a hurry or when you are playing for fun (and find these funny).
Tqsm, appreciate this:)
> I see these like setting traps, if your opponent doesn't know them you can get a quick win but otherwise you get bad play.
>
> I would avoid them except in a hurry or when you are playing for fun (and find these funny).
Tqsm, appreciate this:)
Gambit only work if u game plan was for middle game tactic
@Brian-E said in #8:
> The Queen's Gambit? That is misnamed because it isn't a gambit.
That's not completely true. There are several variations in slav-style setups (e.g. Noteboom, Anti-moscow) where black can reasonably hang onto the gambit pawn.
> The Queen's Gambit? That is misnamed because it isn't a gambit.
That's not completely true. There are several variations in slav-style setups (e.g. Noteboom, Anti-moscow) where black can reasonably hang onto the gambit pawn.
I occasionally play the scotch gambit.
Gambits are fair play when my rating is 400 points above my opponents rating. For me a gambit is a sacrifice, I do it to make my game more challenging. It also gives my opponent the initiative to accept or decline the gambit. There is no gambit that I would not play and no favorite either. It all depends on the skills of my opponent.
"... Englund Gambit 1 d4 e5?! This gambit is entirely unsound, ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2010)
"... many of the lines one sees played at club level are gambits, which lead to the kind of exciting open play that many players find attractive. ... Openings such as the Blackmar-Diemar Gambit, Albin Counter-Gambit, Latvian Gambit, etc., are all played regularly at club and league level, ... there is much to be said for playing such systems at lower levels of play, particularly if you enjoy playing sharp attacking lines. Many players find it uncomfortable to defend against an opponent who is prepared to sacrifice material in return for speculative attacking chances. In such positions, the cost of a single error is much higher than in quieter openings. If you make a mistake in a typical Réti Opening middlegame, you may end up getting a small positional disadvantage, but if you make a similar mistake in the sort of wild tactical positions which often arise from gambits, you are quite likely to find yourself being mated, or losing a substantial amount of material. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2003)
(In order to post this, I was just asked to come up with 8...Qc1# in the Englund Gambit.)
(In order to post this, I was just asked to come up with 8...Qc1# in the Englund Gambit.)