Gambits/Traps

I would like to know more about gambits and opening traps in general. Can you suggest a good resource (books, videos, courses, etc.) that teaches thems? Keep in mind that:

- I'm not interested in King's, Queen's, Benko, Evans, and in general gambits that are very well covered in main opening theory (so i don't need further research to know more about them)

- I'm not interested in gambits that gives me a bad position if my opponents doesn't blunder, unless it's one of those like the Stafford, which should be bad against perfect play, but i believe is very difficult to face. Also i believe some are just trash, like the Tennison, it almost never works.

What are you trying to achieve?

You don't want sound gambits like the Queen's Gambit because you say they are over analyzed.

You don't want unsound garbage, which is basically the King's Gambit and every Gambit you don't list.

Are you just dying to sacrifice material or something?

Maybe Halloween Gambit or Blackmar-Diemer-Gambit.

You're asking for a lot; just about every gambit falls into one of the two categories you described.

The semi-sound one like the Kings Gambit and Evans Gambit are well analyzed, because they were played a huge amount like 150 years ago and are still played occasionally at the top level.

Most of the other gambits do not give you a bad position under correct play. The gambits are usually played as white and black can get equality under correct play. These are terrible at the grandmaster level, but below 2000 or so or in a rapid game they can be effective.

No guys.

Good sources:

GJ chess (youtube channel for traps)

Miodrag Perunovic (youtube channel for gambits)

Jonathan Schranz (youtube channel for gambits)

Eric Rosen (youtube channel for traps)

Those are my main sources, have fun =)

Well, if "no guys", then what the bleep are you looking for?

There are very few sound gambits.  They are all heavily analyzed.  The other gambits are crap.  You don't want what is heavily covered (QG, KG, Evan's, Benko), and you don't want unsound (KG, Englund, Latvian, Elephant, Morra [Moron?], Wing, etc).

Well, you've got nothing left!  Lines that involve the sacrifice of a pawn re not automatically Gambits because the pawn is sacrificed way later based on opposing play, not a pawn given away early on.  For example, 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.d3 d6 6.f4 e6 7.Nf3 Nge7 8.O-O O-O 9.Be3 Nd4 sees White Sacrifice a pawn here with 10.e5! (This is why most play 9...b6 now instead of the old 9...Nd4).  But this is not a Gambit because it is one line where White can sacrifice a pawn.  There are numerous other lines that lead to no sacrifice of a pawn (9...b6, 6...Rb8, 6...e5, etc).

Ok, let's put it in this way. You have two parameters, one is the damage that you do to your position when you play an unsound gambit, one is the counterplay and the difficulty that the other players has to find the best moves. Those parameters must be well proportioned.

One of my favourite examples is the Stafford. If you play against a good player, the Stafford just ruin your position, but there are so many attacking ideas that the opponent will struggle to find all the best moves. Even if unsound, i like it.

Some are not completely sound and if your opponent is prepared you won't get an advantage, but when you play it you don't damage much your position either, you don't have full compensation for your sacrifice, but still an active position so it's always worth studying them because if you know the middlegame that will arise better than your opponent you are likely to get an advantage.

Some are just bad because you damage your position too much or because even an unprepared opponent is unlikely to get into trouble. Not all gambits are the same.

Also i didn't talk about gambits only but traps in general. I mean i still have to figure out how to play against Max Lange Attack, which is not a gambit, but just a sideline that always catches me unprepared, so i would like to know more about this kind of stuff. I guess Max Lange attack is heavily analized too but i didn't find much about it in the Italian Game analyses on youtube.

I might still find analyses of the Max Lange attack on youtube, chess.com or other sites but do i have to search something for every gambit or opening sideline that i know? And what about those that i don't even imagine they exist?

I would like if there were some resources that give their insight about which ones are the best and teach them.

i reported you for spam

King's gambit is not unsound.

Many unlisted gambits are not unsound. Examples: Staunton, Budapest, Evans, Vienna. Even albin, etc... while they are not the best moves in the position they have some compensation and are all quite playable and can impose practical problems, especially in shorter time formats... not to mention catching opponent off prep.

But I agree that the OP doesn't know what he wants... probably trolling too since he asks for traps and gambits and apparently reports someone when they post exactly what he asked here... Altough englund is kinda crappy...

I know exactly what i want, maybe i fail to express it properly in english language (or you fail to understand, i don't know). I didn't actually report him, the point is that if you read my message you should understand at least that a link that teaches a single line is not what i'm looking for, i can find a lot of them already. I'm looking for some teaching material organized in a way that learning is time-optimized.

The problem with your entire premise is you want analysis on garbage that might work against a lowly 1200 player, like the Stafford Gambit, that will never work against players of decent skill (1800+ OTB), and expect there to be books and articles on such trash.  Hate to break it to you, but publishers and authors, with extreme rare exception like a Latvian Gambit book published 21 years ago, are going to publish stuff on openings that are sound, or at minimum borderline sound like the Leningrad Dutch or King's Indian.

The only crap you will find on garbage like the Stafford or Hillbilly Attack or 1.e4 e5 2.Ke2 trash are 1600s that want to claim it is so great and showboat their win against some 1100 nobody and you-tube it for his 15 minutes of fame.

Give it up kid!

Blackmar-Diemer seems ok, but in approaching study of it, I just noticed black transposing into caro so often that I went 'forget it.' 

For black, I still like Albin counter-gambit. It doesn't just collapse if the opponent declines the early trap. 

wrong wrong wrong

A forum discussion without dumb replies