Defending Against a KGA

Ok, I play a lot of KGs, usually as White. In this game I played Black... and wouldn't you know it, White played a variation about which I know almost nothing.  Sacking the N on move 6 gave White tremendous attacking possibilities, especially in this 5/0 blitz game.  My entire plan, if it can be called that, was to hang on to material and avoid getting mated.  My defense proved better than his attack, but, being blitz, it's doubtful either was even close to optimal.  Anyway, here's the game. I thought the nature of the game was somewhat interesting.

Do not accept :-)

Never!

I am terrified of positions like the one you had on move 6. (hence why I don't play the Scheveningen, Classical King's Gambit accepted, or other piece-sacky happy openings!). However, I think the best defense to the King's Gambit is simply the Falkbeer Countergambit. The positions are EXTREMELY comfortable (for example, after 1. e4 e5 2. f4 d5 3. exd5 c6 4. Nc3 exf4 5. Nf3 Bd6 6. dxc6 Nxc6 7. d4 Ne7 8. Ne4 Bc7 9. Bc4 0-0 10. 0-0 Bg4 you need not worry about bloodthirsty white attacks, and in fact black is the one who suddenly finds himself with excellent chances against white's king!) But if you INSIST on playing 3. ...g5 (not that there's anything wrong with it) be prepared for insanity. 3. ...d6 is great because white has more limited chances for psychotic bloodthirsty play, since the knight isn't coming to e5 or g5! Frankly, 3. ...d6 scores so well that 3. Nf3 sort of feels busted. The positions aren't always comfortable, but they generally favor black. Good luck gunning down that annoying King's Gambit!

As a rule, I score too well against the Falkbeer to use it myself as Black.  The KG, however, is one of those cray-type opening where I have some idea what to do as White, but feel uncomfortable as Black.  So, who knows?

King's Gambit opening : 1.e4 e5 2. f4

batgirl wrote:

As a rule, I score too well against the Falkbeer to use it myself as Black.  The KG, however, is one of those cray-type opening where I have some idea what to do as White, but feel uncomfortable as Black.  So, who knows?

I too went through a King's Gambit phase (all players seem to go through these "seek-and-destroy" gambit phases, before they seek more quiet grounds in d4 land [my life story!!]:) ). But I always preferred the Bc4 variation (like I said, Nf3 feels super lacking against d6..). I still sometimes trot it out when I'm looking to blow my opponent's mind. It is very underrated and the look of shock and contempt I receive when playing it is usually only rivalled by the one I get when I play 1. c4 g5?!?!??!!?. Give the Falkbeer a try though (not the inferior 3. ...e4 version which isn't very good) as the unbalanced positions (usually black's activity and play against white's weakened king position vs. white's MASSIVE 4-2 queenside majority) make for fun and interesting play. Let me try to dig up a game from the black side of this opening featuring a dubious (but FUN) queen sacrifice by me. If I find it, I will post it here. Falkbeer for life!!

I've been playing chess since 1996.  My first opening love was the King's Gambit and it remains so today.  I must suffer from arrested adolescence.  People tell me the Bishop's Gambit is busted.  I don't know but I never play it anyway, though not because of having to give up castling - I just never liked it (my apologies to Thomas Johannson).  I don't play the KG to surprise people, but because I like the ensuing material vs initiative fight and I've lots of experience (to balance my lack of talent).

People use abbreviations or acronyms a lot... QGD (Queen's Gabit Declined) the BDG (Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, the C-K (Caro-Kann). It does get confusing.  The other day someone mentioned the DSB, and I didn't realize it stood for dark square Bishop.  So we all learn something daily.

No, the people specifically claim the Bishop's Gambit is busted.  See HERE.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1289139 If Ivanchuk has tossed out this madness, then it probably is not TOTALLY busted :) but he's known for adventures in nonsensical openings! And Fischer even played the Bishop's Gambit, so it must be good!

The claim is that recent analysis, i.e. within the last few years at least, have established this.  It had always been my understanding that the Bishop's Gambit sidestepped some of Black's most ruthless replies and had a better reputation than the Knight's Gambit (though in the early 19th century, the Bishop's Gambit was held in low regard), but I was disavowed of this belief.  As I said, since I never play it, it's all esoterical to me.

In their refutational lines, I think after 4. Nf3 (instead of d4) should have no problem gaining the advantage for white. On c6, black's knight is very poorly placed (how many 3. Nf3 lines feature black playing Nc6 at any point??) and so if g5, you simply transpose to the classical king's gambit where black has played an inaccuracy on move 4 (instead of g4, he played Nc6?!). Basically, Nc6 just looks horrible. Just go back into Knight Gambit lines and dominate... But I've done just about zero analysis on this so called "refutation", but my eyes tell me it couldn't POSSIBLY be good.

I don't know.  Being of a practical nature, I never wasted time trying to follow it all even though I had once written an article on the Bishop's Gambit pre-20th Century.

Fischer Defense - 3... d6.  Here is the article he published.  http://www.chesscafe.com/text/bust.pdf

Just an observation, but in your game your move 3...g5 was premature because the f pawn isnt being threatened yet.  And not playing a developing move on move 3 allowed the white knight to advance.

What other gambits do you play? Have you heard of the "swashbuckling" Williams gambit?!

3. ...g5 is fine as long as you're prepared for chaos. Schallop defense is HORRIBLE (loses by force I think) and Fischer defense is probably critical. But certainly not a forced win for black..... There is nothing wrong with g5 though, I repeat.

3...g5 is mainline (and not at all premature) in the Classical Variation and leads to some of the most explored positions. As someone who is most comfortable and familar with 19th century games (hence the Classical), I'm also more at home with this then-most-popular variation.  In the game above I ran into a variation I wasn't familiar with other than some game by Tarrasch and had no idea how to proceed.  Generally, I have a general idea of where I want to go.

As clunney said above, 3...g5 is fine if you are prepared to go to war and to play against white's chosen opening.  If you want to actually defend against the KGA, I think it is premature.  Just a thought.

6. Nxf7?! was certainly surprising :) And I try to avoid defending that sort of madness. But it's all a matter of taste. I prefer to be the one forcing my opponent to defend insane unsound sacrifices, not to be the one defending them!!