your thoughts on Kings Gambit

Hey as you guys know I am new to openings I am reading about the english opening but I have also learned some basics of the kings gambit through videos on youtube and here. I have used the kings gambit and have had some succsess with it when playing computer opponets. Can you guys help explain it better to me and say if you think its a good opening for me to explore.  

If you study the theory and learn the best first 5-6 moves you will often win. People usually respond the same way over and over again and can use it to your advantage. I's suggest playing it against the computer first  in order to learn the best moves.

If you play 1.e4 you wont always get 1. ... e5 as a response. You must also be prepared to attack against the sicilian (1. ... c5), where learning the first 5-6 moves is a must. It is a good opening to explore but the fact that you have massive amounts of theory on 1. e4 e5 and 1.e4 c5 is definitely a downside. It does lead to tactical play though. 

if you don´t want to learn massive amounts of sicilian theory maybe this is an idea : 

I agree. As my rating increased and I started playing against stronger players  my knoweldge of the King Gambit chess theory became less and less useful. Most of my  oponents would play the Sicilian or Scandiavanian or simply decline the gambit. I suppose that is the case with most openings....

To the OP-

Drop the English opening and stick to 1. e4. Come up with playable replies to 1.. e5 1.. c5 1.. d5 1.. e6 etc. Understand that the King's Gambit is just one small part of all the different openings you will be playing. Mostly keep playing games and learn from what happens and add to your Repertoire as you go.

The English Opening is fine, but it is not an ideal opening for a club level player. It has a lot of transpositional posibilities (d4 openings, Maroczy Bind etc..) that would a Master can take advantage of but would not be ideal for someone less experienced in the openings.

The advantage of playing 1. e4 is you learn the open games, you learn a lot of classical chess and you develop your tactics.

Whatever you choose stick to it though and get some depth in it before bailing on it for the next flavor of the month opening.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the English Opening.

I used it quite successfully when I used to play Scholastic Chess in high school. It worked fine for me at the time (I was a 1400-1450 player). I had positive scores in the tournaments I played. It was great playing something other than 1. e4 because so many people at that level just play it exclusively and defend against it all the time.

People hardly transpose at all in those stages. Most people just responded with a Reversed Sicilian (1. c4 e5), surprise surprise. It allowed me to play my favorite set-up, 1. c4 2. Nc3 3. g3 4. Bg2. Most people just weren't prepared for a hypermodern battle on the flanks. The games tend to go much longer. I never really had any minatures or quick victories. But it was a blast to play.

I still dabble in the English every now and then when I need a change of pace or want to throw something slightly different at an opponent. One of my friends also uses the English and 1. d4 well as a seasoned tournament veteran.

At the GM level, Jaan Ehlvest uses it all the time in the past couple of US Championships.

I just stopped playing it as my main opening because as I evolved as a player, I found other openings that I like better right now.

But there is absolutely no reason at all to drop this opening if you like it. It just gets better and better as you become a better player.

To truly play 1. e4 well, you have to learn a dozen different tabiyas for a dozen different openings.

At the beginner level, there is some merit to playing 1. e4. But you will probably play 1. e4 e5 like 75-80% of the time, with some French, Scandinavian, and Sicilian thrown in the mix for good measure.

It is very nice to have a surprise weapon to throw at people, who can probably count the games they defended against 1. d4 on one hand. The number would be even less against 1. c4.

Join a thematic King's Gambit tournament if you want a taster.

Glad I was able to help americanfigher. The moral of the story is to pretty much play whatever you enjoy the most. Really, it's all good at the beginner and intermediate level. Even something as benign as the Four Knights Opening or the Giuoco Pianissimo can be ultra-deadly in the hands of a Master.

I dropped the King's gambit just because I don't like how much black wins with it. Instead I've been doing a lot more italian games.

 I agree there is nothing wrong with the English- but if someone is at a starting point of learning I wouldn't recc. it. I think it's better to learn the open games get pummeled, go back- get better at tactics, study the old classics and get strong.

But it's better to stick to the English and learn it well than to jump back and forth between many different systems.

The first opening I learned to play was the English.

Sorry, but that second diagram is completely mistaken... after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.e5 Nh5, to play 5.g4?? would be terrible! The knight on h5 is not trapped at all, since the pawn on f4 takes en passant to g6. 5...fxg6.

And this, by the way, is one of the good defenses against the King's Gambit. You can see that it was used by Karpov a few times.

Also, you seem to be playing always 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Nc3 - why not to play the attacking and better 4.Bc4!