its not a gambit (gambit=giving up of material for compensation)
This is the ruy lopez, the most popular chess opening.
Its true white moves his piece 3 times in the opening, but blacks pawns on a6 and b5 may be attacked later by say a4, so theyre not all that helpful of moves to him.
Theres infinite things i could explain in these lines, but ill leae you to research them, just search 'Ruy Lopez' and you will find lots of material.
Explain This Famous Gambit.

That's not a gambit. That's the Ruy Lopez.
1. Bb5 attacks the knight defending the e4 pawn (among doing other things). It could cause problems early on if black plays incorrectly. Even if black doesn't white still has a good game.
2. Bc4 would be... the Italian game/Guiocco Piano(?)

u guys are saying this isnt a gambit,i thought the initial moves of any chess game are considered as gambit, so whats the new definition?

The first moves are an 'opening', some openings are gambits, if they offer material fo compensation, usually in the form of development of space.
Example, the kings gambit is a gambit. But it is also an opening. The Ruy lopez is an opening, but not a gambit.

thanks for your intellectual comments Fear_ItseIf

Chasing the Bishop looks a bit early, but it is a line played from time to time by serious players.
Usually, Black plays Nf6 and continues developing.

by the way i like bc4 rather than it.cz it targets the weak square,so why b5?
Huh?So what if it tragets f7?Black can defend very easily and has an easier game then The Ruy Lopez(often called the spanish torture)Considering Bc4 better just because it eyes f7 is too simple a definition.The Ruy Lopez is much more popular as it is more difficult for black to achieve equality than it is in The Bc4 lines.Bc4 is seen a lot of times in Amateur games cuz there are a lot many traps associated with it and you have to be careful.Not saying that Bc4 is bad or anything,it is just less poluar at master level.
by the way i like bc4 rather than it.cz it targets the weak square,so why b5?
Huh?So what if it tragets f7?Black can defend very easily and has an easier game then The Ruy Lopez(often called the spanish torture)Considering Bc4 better just because it eyes f7 is too simple a definition.The Ruy Lopez is much more popular as it is more difficult for black to achieve equality than it is in The Bc4 lines.Bc4 is seen a lot of times in Amateur games cuz there are a lot many traps associated with it and you have to be careful.Not saying that Bc4 is bad or anything,it is just less poluar at master level.
I don't see it as much different than asking why 1. d4 instead of 1. e4 (or vice versa.)

Bc4 and Bb5 are both good, but i know from several past experiences Bb5 is a lot harder to play against

by the way i like bc4 rather than it.cz it targets the weak square,so why b5?
Huh?So what if it tragets f7?Black can defend very easily and has an easier game then The Ruy Lopez(often called the spanish torture)Considering Bc4 better just because it eyes f7 is too simple a definition.The Ruy Lopez is much more popular as it is more difficult for black to achieve equality than it is in The Bc4 lines.Bc4 is seen a lot of times in Amateur games cuz there are a lot many traps associated with it and you have to be careful.Not saying that Bc4 is bad or anything,it is just less poluar at master level.
I don't see it as much different than asking why 1. d4 instead of 1. e4 (or vice versa.)
Not really,e4 and d4 are equally good while the Ruy Lopez is considered better than Bc4.
Bb5 is much better than Bc4, but you need to play well the closed positions as well.
This video explains the differences between the Ruy lopez and the Italian game.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hriSNXPkIA
@al_farabi - this is a gambit (the King´s Gambit):
White gives up the f pawn for the possibility of very quick development and an immediate attack (after castling K-side) along the open f-file.
As many have pointed out, the Ruy Lopez doesn´t offer up material, so it´s not a gambit. Despite moving the bishop several times, it has great attacking possibilities and is one of the most analysed openings there is, together with the Sicilian.

by the way i like bc4 rather than it.cz it targets the weak square,so why b5?
Huh?So what if it tragets f7?Black can defend very easily and has an easier game then The Ruy Lopez(often called the spanish torture)Considering Bc4 better just because it eyes f7 is too simple a definition.The Ruy Lopez is much more popular as it is more difficult for black to achieve equality than it is in The Bc4 lines.Bc4 is seen a lot of times in Amateur games cuz there are a lot many traps associated with it and you have to be careful.Not saying that Bc4 is bad or anything,it is just less poluar at master level.
I don't see it as much different than asking why 1. d4 instead of 1. e4 (or vice versa.)
Not really,e4 and d4 are equally good while the Ruy Lopez is considered better than Bc4.
"Despite moving the bishop several times, it has great attacking possibilities and is one of the most analysed openings there is, together with the Sicilian."
What is so bad about moving the bishop several times? Yes, there is the opening rule which states that you should not move a piece more times in the opening after you developed it. However, it is because you should develop the other pieces instead of moving a piece twice. When black plays a6 and later b5, you have to move the bishop 2 times again because it is attacked, but black does not develop anything with those moves, so still white has the better position. Moreover, the move a6 and b5 weakens temporarily the queen side. Of course, black will attack on the queen side, so those moves will be helpful later in the attack, but white has a chance to a4 after b5. And that is an interesting version.
Gaining a tempo on a piece (like the move a6 and b5 in the Ruy) is only matters, if it is important developing move. But they are not.

Chasing the Bishop looks a bit early, but it is a line played from time to time by serious players.
Usually, Black plays Nf6 and continues developing.
of course! Black plays Nf6 after Bb5, but i wanted to indicate the problem with a few moves,,thats why i went to the main problem early maybe a little bit early.

"Despite moving the bishop several times, it has great attacking possibilities and is one of the most analysed openings there is, together with the Sicilian."
What is so bad about moving the bishop several times? Yes, there is the opening rule which states that you should not move a piece more times in the opening after you developed it. However, it is because you should develop the other pieces instead of moving a piece twice. When black plays a6 and later b5, you have to move the bishop 2 times again because it is attacked, but black does not develop anything with those moves, so still white has the better position. Moreover, the move a6 and b5 weakens temporarily the queen side. Of course, black will attack on the queen side, so those moves will be helpful later in the attack, but white has a chance to a4 after b5. And that is an interesting version.
Gaining a tempo on a piece (like the move a6 and b5 in the Ruy) is only matters, if it is important developing move. But they are not.
True
i have seen this gambit in many master games,here it is...
my questions are....