what do to against 1.d4 e5?

i have prepared this line against 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 because it seems like a fun line but i still havent faced 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 only 1.d4 e5 so i guess i wasted my time? im having a hard time finding litterature on this

i found a video on youtube that helped me. it seems the name is englund gambit. here is a link if anyone want

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FO2cIlD9Rs

1. d4 e5 is the Englund,  1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 is the Budapest. The Budapest is stronger for Black, and sometimes played by GMs.

yes that was the problem. i found alot about the budapest and it was easy to find a line i liked. the englund on the other hand seems like a opening openingsbooks doesnt mention at all:O

Well, but your line against the Budapest is not forced, and even arriving to that position I don't think the White has anything concrete. Most probably a draw. The Black even seems a little more compact, no weak pawns. f5 should be played before castling.

There is no need to avoid this. White is much better after 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Nc3! (and not 6.Bc3??).

thanks for help:) and i agree completely that black have some choices but its not that many and im working hard with them and think i figured out most of it. by the way this line was
introduced for White recently by GM Mamedyarov which
is also an advocate for Budapest Gambit with
the black pieces so im 100% sure that this is good for white. and i dont see how this is drawish since all the pieces are still on the board.if you want to convince me of a draw in this mess of a position you have to give me some lines. i also think f5 is quite good for white after g4.white can castle long and attack and knight to g5 looks annoying for black

The refutation to the Qe7 line of the Englund (which is the main line, but not the only possibility) is 1. d4 e5 2. dxe5 Nc6 3. Nf3 Qe7 4. Qd5

This lets white keep the gambit pawn with a decent position. Someone who has studied the opening as black will know how to try and keep going after this, and white will have to play accurately.

So perhaps it's easier for white to play without preparation by just letting black have the gambit pawn back and developing normally. ie 4. Nc3, then e4, etc.

good point. but the englund is incredible popular in my club so i will take a look:)

you seem to know your englund gambitlover what would you choose as white against it?

And this is what I meant by black players knowing how to keep the pressure going, and white having to play accurately.

I don't know if there's necessarily compensation for the pawn for black, but I do think it's probably easier for white to just avoid this by giving the gambit pawn back and playing normal developing moves like Nc3 and e4. Material ends up even, and white ends up with the better center and development, with a quieter overall position. White should have a slight edge, but it's playable for both sides with little memorization, and the better player should win.

Unless you've taken the time to analyze all of this as White and prepared for it, and attempted to keep all that in your head until you actually see the line OTB, you're likely just going to play into some prepared analysis by Black.  In addition, it's the type of line that Black gets to practice all of the time, as they get their line on the board at move one.  I had similar experiences playing Alekhine's Defense as black, you end up being more familiar with the resulting positions and traps, and that can mean a lot.

I think my favorite way to decline it might be just 1. d4 e5 2. e4 and maybe put my own gambit on the board with 2...exd4 3. Bc4 :P

As we have an Englund expert on board, I'd like to throw a question : how would you cope with the seemingly solid :

1.d4 e5 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Qd5 f6 5.exf6 Nxf6 6.Qb3 d5 7.e3 Bd7 8.Be2 ?

great idea. i have even studied the centergame so i already know enough to play it. why didnt i consider this earlier

Thank you for your answer : I tried the Englund myself and ran into this line. I played 8...a5 instead of 8...0-0-0 and had some problems generating enough play after that, but I was lucky to tire my opponent enough to make him blunder

Estragon, this is one of the main lines of the gambit. White may be winning, but black has some surprising resources.

Ok so I just looked at this with Fritz 10. I know that computer evaluations aren't the be-all-end-all of chess, but they tend to do good in these tactical situations. First of all, it seems white can just sac the bishop on f4 in the mainline with 5.Nc3 Qxf4 6.Nd5! and the rook on a8 will fall. This isn't totally clear cut as the knight may be trapped there, but Fritz thinks white is completely winning, and since no one mentioned this line I thought I would. In the mainline with 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Rb1 Qa3 instead of 8.Rb3 which is still good, 8.Nd5! puts the c7 square in trouble again and questions black's whole set-up.

Of course white could also just play 4.e4 and give back the pawn, when the Queen on e7 looks stupid. I really don't see why anyone would want to play this as black. It breaks the basic principles of chess by moving the same piece multiple times in the opening, bringing the queen out early, neglecting king safety, etc. Black doesn't seem to have any real plans either, just a cheap bag of tricks that are unlikely to work on anyone above 1600 strength. Worst of all, white can get a clear advantage in more than one way. As far as gambits go, this is the worst of the worst.

@BigTy : I agree with your evaluation of 5.Nc3 Qxf4 6.Nd5!, but black can play 5...Qxb2

8.Nd5! is an interesting variation too

As for the objective value of the gambit, it's probably bad, but it has practical value. Like most dubious lines, you have to carefully choose whom you're playing it against. I've tried it twice so far OTB and scored 2/2 against people rated 1640 and 1890.

 Why dont you play in the Ga state championship next month and show off ? 

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that 5.Nc3 Qxb2 6.Bd2 transposes back to the mainline, although 6.Nd5 is another option, but probably isn't as good.

I may have been a bit harsh on this gambit, but I just don't see why anyone would want to play it. Indeed you do have to be careful who you play it against, but if I were to fall for the trap once I would definitely never fall into it again. I don't play 1.d4 as white so my experience in this line is practically non-existent, but if I opened with 1.d4 and black responded with 1...e5 I would feel very confident even with the very small amount of analysis that I have done.