King's Gambit good for beginner, borderline intermediate player?

I normally try to play the Italian Game after e4 e5, but I love the Romantic style of chess and I know the King's Gambit is at the pinnacle of Romantic openings for white. Up to what level would you say the King's Gambit is a serviceable opening to have in one's repertoire? I don't want to play it every game, but it seems like a nice opening to have in your back-pocket to uncork every once in a while to shake things up. 

I know that King's Gambit games get crazy and out of theory quickly, so what are your favorite books on the King's Gambit that more cover the ideas and concepts of the opening instead of just rote memorization of lines?

the King's Gambit is insanely risky, while it can be played as a secondary opening make no mistake: you are sacrificing a pawn and your king's safety so you need to get down and memorize a ton of lines, I promise it will pay off

Appreciate the input but like I said, at our level the black opponent won't know any theory and the game will probably get crazy, fast. Which I like, the crazy spontaneity and creativity you get. So I highly doubt memorizing lines is important, more important to understand the key concepts of the opening. Which is the kind of book I'm looking for, concepts and ideas with helpful games, not a million lines and variations that will fall to pieces instantly because my opponent won't follow them

It’s a fantastic opening if you know the theory, but at lower levels you will lose a lot. It has never been refuted, but it’s not played at the highest levels because it almost always ends in a draw these days (though before computers Spassky beat Fischer with it, and Judith Polgar made her way to the youngest GM in history, at the time, using it as her weapon of choice. These days it’s excellent at intermediate to IM levels because it leads to vicious attacks and very few know the theory.

the King's Gambit is not the Queen's Gambit, the Nimzo or the Queen's Indian: it is a Gambit for real kings and as such, forcing lines are extremely important but I might be wrong

I was playing king’s gambit when I was around 1600-1700, many years ago, you can even dig in my chess.com games and find it. It was maybe the first opening I learned its theory. Back then I heard that Hikaro wins against 2400 players and that was a perfect reason for me to go for it.

It’s not a good opening at all, black can consolidate easily, especially in your level, in higher levels is more difficult because white has much stronger capabilities of creating complex positions. However if you have a really good tactical understanding, I mean really good, then it can serve you some wins. Even now rarely I play king’s gambit against 2300-2400 opponents, sometimes I win sometimes I lose. However the level of complexity of my recent games is much higher than 5-6 years ago, which most likely in your level you don’t manage to make it.

I have to alarm you it is not just about calculation or tactical understanding , most likely black doesn’t fall in basic opening traps, at least at certain levels they won’t.
However, since the position is unfamiliar, you should be able to add complexities to the game. This is hard part, you have to have familiarity with many structures to be able to create such difficulties, otherwise it’s a big pain to see as a white right after a few opening moves, it’s you who should defend the position.

I thought it would be fun to play the King's Gambit, and ended up getting my butt kicked by players who I would have beaten otherwise. It's a terrible opening. Give me the Grob any day rather than that. If you want to play a swashbuckling opening, try the Goring or Evans Gambit. 

Getting your butt kicked because you don’t know the theory says little about the opening itself. As I said, it has never been refuted, not even by the strongest chess engines. They stopped using it in computer chess championships because it always ended in a draw. As I said, the world’s strongest players in the past used it often. Now it’s pointless at the highest levels since they are always draws. White gets no advantage. This, of course, means nothing to 99.9% of players.

You are highly wrong in that

 

Care to elaborate? Nothing I love more than internet strangers telling me I'm wrong, and then offering absolutely no follow up or explanation as to why I'm wrong. I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just going off my own presuppositions, knowing nothing about the opening. But I do know that rote memorization of lines is detrimental at my level, mostly because my opponent will almost certainly deviate early, and then what did I spend all that time memorizing for?

Also to everyone in general, I appreciate the thoughts on the King's Gambit. I would still love a book recommendation or two, again primarily ones that tackle the core concepts and ideas and goals of the KG

The reason why you are mistaken is that the KG is highly weakening. You open up your king to several attacks, and best moves aren’t necessarily intuitive or obvious. It’s like yolo-ing into an enemy line naked with a machine gun. If you don’t know what you are doing, you’re going to get shot to hell.

there aren't core concepts or ideas as it's not a positional opening, there are just typical sacrifices you have to know. There aren't that many books on the KG as not many writers risk recommending it but Nepomniachtchi has done a Chessable course on it with new ideas based on 2 f4 2 exf4 3 Nf3. Even if the course is very advanced I think Nepo should explain the ideas very well

I’ve played the 2.f4 line but you need nerves of steel to do it. You have to be prepped to the gills to do it and be ok with your king on f1 and the black queen on the h file. Scary.

I exclusively played the KG and McDonnell Attack up to 1200. Had lots of fun and quick games. Also pushed myself beyond my comfort zone and gained tactical skills.

Ironically, KG is heavy in theory and memory.

Ended up ditching the KG out of my repertoire for a few solid openings because I wanted to round out my game.

In my opinion, to the question "is X opening good for intermediate players?" the answer is yes. (Caveat: troll openings like the bongcloud don't count).

Just try it and see if it suits your taste and style.

Openings really don't matter at all below master level. You can play anything that does not brutally violate the opening principles (you know, fight for the center, develop your pieces and castle).

Hello.   Book wise...

new kg book 600 plus pages by

john Shaw 

older but excellent book I have 

had for years 

the kings gambit as white 

by Ron raingruber and Lou maser

with Larry Christensen helpings them

   Covered all lines and in the accepted 

variation.   Leans towards positional 

handling... as white can get a passer 

q side whereby on kingside even tho 

black has 4-2 majority he can not 

get passed pawn 

yeah knowing theory important at least 

up to maybe 10-13 moves as positions 

definitely can get “ crazy “

but imho more as important is to

really enjoy and thrive imbalance 

situations where feel more comfortable 

than opponents 

chris Hudson 

I like the bishop's gambit version. 1.e4... 2.f4... 3.Bc4. 

Simon Williams has a nice DVD that covers it well.

The KG is definitely playable at beginners or intermediate level… As long as the ‘beginner’ level is because of little time spend on studying and playing chess…not because of cognitive capacities.