He should have captured the pawn accepting the gambit, and then the Queen check would have been more threatening, because it would have gone fxg3. Your opponnent probably didnt know any of the lines for the gambit, so he didnt know how to exploit. I avoid it myself when i play white unless i want to get practice with defense. I generally lose with white to all but the most beginner of players.
How NOT to respond to the King's Gambit!
Sort:
Oldest
Jan 27, 2009
0
#3
Well, actually this guy can't make it to 1600s and not be familiar with the lines of the King's Gambit! And regarding the queen attack - it is clearly silly: 3. Nf3 terminates any concern from her after 2. ... e5xf4 . So no, it would not have been more threatening. Just silly, through and through. Everyone knows that you're only asking for trouble bringing your queen out early!
As for your loses when using the king's gambit : perhaps you are not familiar with any of the good lines for the gambit, nothing to do with its validity in play! I have several examples of good games against good players that have fallen prey to the king's gambit.
In fact, I've been exploring its usefulness in another thread "Is the King's gambit 'dead' ? " Maybe you can learn some of the main lines there from all the good responses it has had.
Jan 27, 2009
0
#4
It is easy to get to 2000 and not know the King's Gambit. Just don't answer 1.e4 with e5 and you'll never see the KG.
CarlMI wrote:
It is easy to get to 2000 and not know the King's Gambit. Just don't answer 1.e4 with e5 and you'll never see the KG.
When you answer 1.e4 with e5 it is possible that you play the kings gambit, e5 is the only move you can play to make the kings gambit possible.
the king's gambit is technically unsound, not that it loses but white is supposed to be at a slight disadvantage instead of the traditional slight advantage. The most important thing for black is to know and understand at least most of the theory. That's how you combat all dangerous openings. If you know very little about it, unless you're very strong you will have a very dangerous game and it's very likely you'll fall into a trap by just playing a natural move. Moves like these also lead to wild games in themselves, so even if you've been following the theory there is still some room for error.
Has nobody yet mentioned that 2...Qh4+ is a known defence to the King's Gambit? There was a book written about it, if I recall correctly, originally in German and translated into Dutch at least. Stefan Buecker, IIRC.
I think 4...Qxe5 is suspect. The first two queen moves may look strange, but it's a bit rich to condemn them when White has used his first four moves on clearing space around his king!
As far as I know, 4...d6 is normal, and if 5.exd6 then 5...Qxe4+ 6.Qe2 Qxe2 7.Bxe2 (or Nxe2) Bxd6, which is probably pretty equal, and not the sort of position a King's Gambit player wants.
just answer 1.e4 with 1.c6, you can avoid the kings gambit
c6 is a bit passive but solid defense that doesn't offer so many winning chances. it can be in your repertoire but you should probably at least have a backup. the king's gambit shouldn't be something to fear, it should be something to hope for.
Bringing the queen out may be a known opening but it's still ridiculous. Big Advantage White!
gbidari wrote:
Bringing the queen out may be a known opening but it's still ridiculous. Big Advantage White!
Convincing and concrete analysis!
Jan 27, 2009
0
#12
There is nothing wrong with the KG. It is a satisfactory opening with respectable results.
As with all openings you have to know it to play it. If Black does not have a line against 2. f4 then he should not play 1.... e5. I usually play 2... Bc4
I used to be a big proponent of the kings gambit, (OTB) though iv never tried it online - reason being online players have alot more time to check all the possible threats. Though when you are playing anyone OTB it is a beautiful tool to have.
Jan 27, 2009
0
#14
Eh. I don't play the KG and don't know any of the lines. My rating on this site is in the 1750s range....
If my opponent plays E4, I play C5. If they want to play F4; then I will probably play e6 followed by D5.
Jan 27, 2009
0
#15
If you don't play e4 e5 then you don't need to know anything about the KG, no matter how high your rating. I play the French defense (e4 e6) and have never had to learn the KG, although my rating is over 2000. I do want to learn the KG because it looks attacking and fun and would be a good complement to my recent repertoire addition of Bird's Opening (1.f4). I know of a 2200+ player who regularly uses the KG to good effect.
Don't write off these slightly different openings - it's all about learning how to play them well. There's more to life than the sicilian and ruy lopez!
I rank in the mid-1500s in long play.... and I don't know any openings... I just have a few openings that I play sometimes, but I don't know their names... I just play and try to have the foresight.... I also don't know what my opponents openings are called.... but Chess.com and your forum topics have inspired me to learn because to me it is a new interesting part of the game.... I have been playing for awhile and have some battles with 1600-1700 ranked opponents... most of those games I lose but I feel the more I lose against high ranked opponents the better I get..... do you guys feel that knowing the names of the openings improves your game?
Jan 27, 2009
0
#17
CarlMI wrote:
It is easy to get to 2000 and not know the King's Gambit. Just don't answer 1.e4 with e5 and you'll never see the KG.
With all due respect, that is just silly - how can anyone NEVER respond to e4 with e5 ??! There's no way you can get to 2000 (with at least 1000 games under your belt) and NEVER have met e4 with e5. How would you learn so many important lines and opening concepts that such scenarios ellicit?
In a word - Impossible.
Jan 27, 2009
0
#18
Elubas wrote:
the king's gambit is technically unsound, not that it loses but white is supposed to be at a slight disadvantage instead of the traditional slight advantage. The most important thing for black is to know and understand at least most of the theory. That's how you combat all dangerous openings. If you know very little about it, unless you're very strong you will have a very dangerous game and it's very likely you'll fall into a trap by just playing a natural move. Moves like these also lead to wild games in themselves, so even if you've been following the theory there is still some room for error.
I don't think that any move that brings out the queen so early, particularly not 2. ... Qh4?! can be called a 'natural move'.
Jan 27, 2009
0
#19
Scarblac wrote:
Has nobody yet mentioned that 2...Qh4+ is a known defence to the King's Gambit? There was a book written about it, if I recall correctly, originally in German and translated into Dutch at least. Stefan Buecker, IIRC.
I think 4...Qxe5 is suspect. The first two queen moves may look strange, but it's a bit rich to condemn them when White has used his first four moves on clearing space around his king!
As far as I know, 4...d6 is normal, and if 5.exd6 then 5...Qxe4+ 6.Qe2 Qxe2 7.Bxe2 (or Nxe2) Bxd6, which is probably pretty equal, and not the sort of position a King's Gambit player wants.
Yes, it is a known defence to the KG... just like the fools mate via 1. f3? e5 2. g4?? Qh4# is also 'known'... it doesn't make any of them any more playable!
As for white's 'first four moves' - black's foolish response to KG has allowed for white to safely open up room and claim space as he is safe from any kingside attacks for a while after 2. ... Qh4+ ?! is easily thwarted. Black is not only lacking in devleopment, but has an exposed queen as a liability!
Jan 27, 2009
0
#20
ayanks03 wrote:
I rank in the mid-1500s in long play.... and I don't know any openings... I just have a few openings that I play sometimes, but I don't know their names... I just play and try to have the foresight.... I also don't know what my opponents openings are called.... but Chess.com and your forum topics have inspired me to learn because to me it is a new interesting part of the game.... I have been playing for awhile and have some battles with 1600-1700 ranked opponents... most of those games I lose but I feel the more I lose against high ranked opponents the better I get..... do you guys feel that knowing the names of the openings improves your game?
You may not know the names but you have certainly faced the situation several times, and thus have concocted lines of defence through trial and error. As I mentioned earlier, impossible not to know of the KG or its lines and be of a respectable rating or better. Not knowing the technical terms is different from knowing the lines!
This sweet resignation by my oponent was rather fullfilling as he was a good 150 rating points higher than me! We had a fierce battle, but in the end my position held up and my threats abounded.
Very puzzling that at such a high rating, in a 'long' 15 min game, that such a highly rated player would bring out his queen so early!? Well he paid the price: