Gambits against d4

A lot of people avoid this one, but it's playable if you ask me:

Thanks for the suggestion

A very sound and aggressive one: the Benko Gambit

Just remember you also have to account for Non-c4 lines (2.Nc3, 2.Bg5, 2.Nf3), the Anti-Benoni (3.Nf3), and the Benko Gambit Declined (4.Nf3) along with a very amateurish way of declining, 4.b3.  The first three should be your greater concern, but do be ready for 4.b3?! as well.

Also, Gambit and Initiative are not synonymous!

The Budapest Gambit, White can return the pawn and force Black into an extremely passive position.

The Grunfeld and Modern Benoni are very aggressive defenses.  Usually takes an error by White to actually get the initiative.

Chess is not a one way street and often Black must be willing to Defend.  There are more dynamic ways to defend, like the Nimzo Indian comparatively speaking to the QGD, but Black still must defend before he can think about attacking White.

The Englund Gambit is dubious at best.

Not being one to play the Benko as Black and not playing the White side for a number of years, I can easily see why players would play 4.Qc2, but why Nd2?  Does that not impede your entire development?  It feels even worse than the French Tarrasch.  At least in the Tarrasch, c3 is being left for the pawn and the Knight will go to f3.  Here, the c-pawn is already on c4, and the Knight I presume is there to guard the pawn, right?  So it is not free to move as long as the tension remains.

Just looks awfully clumsy and like it would impede the rest of White's development.

What is wrong with my thinking there?

Against 1.d4 specifically, the only gambit I know is the Englund(1...e5 which is just a terrible opening except if you're playing sub 1000s. 1...c5 is the Old Benoni and isn't really a gambit.

After 1.d4 d5 if white goes c4, you have the Albin which fits the description of what you're looking for.

My favorite: the Budapest! Actually playable.

Any feedback on my lines?

Edit: I didn't include the alekhine attack in here, because I have zero experience with it, but it's very dangerous (for black).

out of curiosity, which line for white forces black into a passive position? Is it the Alekhine attack?

It has been so long since I played either side of the Budapest that I do not know the lines by name.  What is the Alekhine?

It is in the 4.e4 line.  I believe this is the line I recall from a 1942 game.  Black is up a pawn, but his Q is all that is developed and his Bishop needs multiple moves to get in.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.e4 Nxe5 5.f4 Nec6 6.Be3 Bb4+ 7.Nd2 Qe7 8.Bd3 Na6 9.Ngf3 Nc5 10.Qc2 Bxd2+ 11.Bxd2 Nb4 12.Bxb4 Nxd3+ 13.Qxd3 Qxb4+ 14.Qd2 Qxc4 15.Rc1 Qxe4+ 16.Kf2 O-O 17.Rxc7 

Sorry about all the weird characters.  Found it and did copy and paste from a phone.

IM T. Taylor recommends Reti’s idea of 4...h5!? After e4. The idea is to keep the knight in the white space unless white forces some sort of concession, like h3 weakening the kingside. Taken from his Budapest book

I cannot speak for that book, but given that Taylor is 1 for 3 in writing books amongst the ones I have seen of his gives me doubt.

Plus, I gave up on garbage lines after getting crushed years ago as Black after 3...Ng4 4.Bf4 g5.  All these "barely playable" lines require just one slight error to lose.

This is why in the last 6 or 7 years I have played exclusively sound defenses as Black except occasionally at the club or in Blitz.  That means Kings Indian, Nimzo-Indian, QGD, Dutch, French, Taimanov Sicilian, Caro-Kann, Petroff, etc.  Not the Budapest or Owen's or St George, or any other barely playable defense.

I've checked with the engine, though. After Bf4 the line I gave works, although ...g5 is pretty dubious if white knows what he's doing (a timely h4!). To answer your earlier question, the Alekhine attack is 4.e4, although it was first played by Rudolf Spielmann (did I spell it right?)

No it's just freaking

reversed danish gambit guys

I'm just trolling please don't kill me