Chess Forum
[ mod this thread ] << - < - > - >>
| From | Message |
| ccmcacollister 8/29/2004 00:04:28 [ report this post ] |
 Subject: All about GAMBITSMessage: Would you rather Offer, Accept, or Decline a Gambit ? What's the strongest Gambit? In e4 openings? In d4 Openings? As Black offering it? Which are not fully sound? Which Are sound; true Gambits but full compensation or more ? Or which do you like and dislike? And which would you like, or dislike to face? Any other Gambit thoughts ? Are all Gambits unsound, strategically ? |
| brobishkin 8/29/2004 02:05:01 [ report this post ] | Hmmm... Message: Lets start with the ever popular "Queens Gambit"... If I am on the black side, I very rarely take the Gambit (Queens Gambit Declined) due to my theory of "he who plays the first aggressive move in a closed game, usually loses" (2.c4 not included)... It's not an absolute formula, but has its valid points... Closed game are slower and full of development... Sooner or later an aggressive move is going to have to happen, but I find when it's premature in the development stages, that person (the one that made the aggressive move) has problems down the line... On the white side you will often find me playing it (Queens Gambit) against an aggressive player... Due to the facts stated... I have found success in the past tournaments with this strategy... Bro... |
| bucklehead 8/29/2004 08:11:47 [ report this post ] | Not many in my repertoire... Message: ..but as for the ones I face, I pretty much accept them all, at least in correspondence play. Here's a few thoughts: *Accept the King's Gambit. I used to mess around with declining this one, since until recently I was fairly scared by it. Then I realized that my fear was due to lack of preparedness. Hey, you want to go ahead and wreck your kingside, go ahead. I'll hold that pawn and hide over on the queenside. *Accept the Latvian Gambit. I always shudder a little bit when I do this, since the odds are good (as with all gambits) that my opponent is fluent in this gambit of his choice. But overall, I wouldn't say it frightens me. *Decline From's Gambit. OK, so there aren't a lot of Bird Opening players out there. But this gambit is one with real bite, so when it comes up I prefer to decline it via the Hayward Variation: 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.Nf3 dxe5 4.Nc3. *Accept the Cochrane Gambit. This is interesting--here you don't really have a choice about whether to accept or decline. I think it's better for black, but that hasn't stopped me from playing it as white from time to time... *Accept the Albin-Blackburne Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Bg4 4.dxe5 Nd7 5.exd6 Bxd6). I don't see this a lot (a few occasions in 'net chess where my opponent has stumbled onto it), but I have a healthy respect for what's possible. |
| brobishkin 8/29/2004 10:29:21 [ report this post ] | Hmm... Message: Bucklehead brought up another good Gambit... The "Kings Gambit" is always accepted when I am on the black side of the board... The unique flow of the Kings Gambit opens up the position and creates a fast and furious game... One inaccurate move and the game is over... Though the Kings Gambit is not quite as strong as the Queens Gambit, because black can capture and hold onto it, though there is a positional price to pay... In fact, it is not so common to see this approach in top level games, as black usually prefers to return the pawn for an equal position... So I rarely use the Gambit as white, and once again, it depends on the opponent at hand and his characteristics of play... But on the black side of things I always take this Gambit whenever offered... Bro... |
| bonsai 8/29/2004 11:14:08 [ report this post ] | Message: I'd say that the Liscyn Gambit 1.Nf3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.Ng5 is a case of accept and the immediately give the pawn back (3...Nc6) to get easy play instead of trying to hang on to the pawn by weathering a dangerous attack. The Benk� gambit is a rather tricky case and I feel it's probably one of the soundest anti-d4 gambits, but I have no idea whether it's best to decline it (4.f3, 4.Nf3, various ideas with cxb5 followed by b5-b6) or to accept it (e.g. those fianchetto lines with Rb1 seem to have been blunted a bit, after they were rather successful for a while). I suspect that there is no real doubt that the Queen's Gambit is completely sound, the only question is whether it promises white any advantage, black's best chance for an advantage is probably to decline it (the Slav or the Chigorin are notoriously complicated and offer both sides chances, while e.g. the QGA or some classical QGD lines are often somewhat dull). The Blackmar-Diemer-Gambit just ought to be accepted and in my opinion black has easy play after e.g. 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 Bf5. Maybe white won't be worse, but he's the one who has to worry. |
| badhorse 8/29/2004 18:09:05 [ report this post ] | Gambits? Message: I often use the Queen's Gambit. But for some reason the King's Gambit (when I am playing white) gives me the hebie-jebies. I get the impression I am leaving a gate open to my castled King's position. |
| ccmcacollister 8/29/2004 19:24:41 [ report this post ] | A new idea, to me ... Great ! Message: I never considered that concept brobishkin, of he who makes the first move of aggression, and it sounds intriguing! I think I must give that a look or try. Very interesting. The other thing I've noticed about closed or QP openings, seems to matter more Where you Put your pieces, than how quickly (such as in a KP or open position). perhaps since attack against you may come slower. And it may just be harder to relocate a misplaced piece in a QP/closed position !? ...... Which makes me wonder if QP opening wth gambits will be inbetween on speed vs placement importance. Something to consider that I never did till now. |
Post a reply to this message: |
