Panteldakis countergambit against the King´s gambit

I've started seriously studying the little-known Panteldakis Countergambit, which I find to be a very interesting practical option at least for blitz games.

That said, in more serious games, I believe Black should probably go for more critical lines.  

This variation seems to have a provocative, annoying effect on King's Gambit players, and there's a good chance they’re not well prepared for it.

I consider it an easy option to study with Black, unlike other more critical lines like, for example, the Falkbeer Countergambit.

There are two main lines for Black in the Panteldakis: 3...Qe7, which seems to be the strongest and most ambitious option  though also a bit more complex 

and the simpler choice of giving a check on h4, then retreating the queen to e7 after White plays g3.

In that second line, queens are usually traded and Black tends to equalize quickly.

That said, White does have an annoying sideline with Be2 to block the check hardly anyone plays it, but it’s not the end of the world either.

Although I'm 800 Elo below the OP so he's scarcely in need of approval from a woodpusher of my kidney, I've been a lifelong KG player and am the sort of obsessive chap to have bought all the books. For whatever it's worth, I agree with his analysis having thought awhile and gone hunting through the literature. Can't fault it. The 3..., Qh4+ then 6. Be2 and so on line is given in Shaw as his recommendation for White.

I suspect that many a KG player seeing this gambit for the first time will bale out with 3. Nc3. I know that I for one would have. I suspect that's an okay if unambitious move too.

I don't believe in arguments from authority

even if someone has a higher Elo than you, you're perfectly capable of refuting me.

That line you mentioned with 3 Nc3 is very interesting, and you're right

it would be a very logical way to face this variation if you’ve never studied it before.

In fact, it scores quite well for White in the database, which doesn’t surprise me, because Black usually isn’t expecting it.

It’s played in only about 5–6% of games, so chances are high that Black won’t be prepared to face it.

So ...f5 is a psychological move, but Nc3 seems like a pretty strong psychological reply maintaining central pawn tension and forcing Black to prove they know how to continue from there.

Indeed, that line with Be2 gives White an advantage, and that’s why I’ve already mentioned that in slow, more serious games classical time controls where mistakes are less frequent I wouldn’t recommend this Panteldakis line for Black.

Precisely because there are, or at least I believe there are, about ten serious ways to successfully counter the King’s Gambit.

I don't much believe in arguments from authority either, guv. But our comparative grades might give the casual reader who happens upon this thread some idea as to who has the superior chess brain in this conversation. And it's you.

For years, I flouted "authority" and played the Hanstein with a rare and eccentric move

until I found the refuting concept for Black. I am no stranger to ploughing my own furrow. But I also know better than to enter what Terry Pratchett once described [with bowdlerisation for the sensibilities of this site] as a "barefoot [posterior] kicking contest with a porcupine". ;-)