Accept or Decline?

I just ran through my playchess games (blitz and standard) to see how I scored with the King's Gambit against the accepted variation and against the declined. All of my PC games with the accepted KG use the Bishop's gambit and my record with it is 6-4-1 (W-L-D). Pretty good, but not amazing or anything. However when my opponent declined the gambit I scored an outstanding 6-1-0 (W-L-D). This seems rather surprising to me as I haven't studied much declined opening theory. What do you guys think? Is declining the gambit just that much worse, or did my opponents just play worse?

I believe I read somewhere than declining the gambit is worse, but it is not that much worse to explain the big differences in your score. I would think it would be your opponents playing worse, or that your opponent(s) isn't comfortable in the type of position KGD leads to.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
I just ran through my playchess games (blitz and standard) to see how I scored with the King's Gambit against the accepted variation and against the declined. All of my PC games with the accepted KG use the Bishop's gambit and my record with it is 6-4-1 (W-L-D). Pretty good, but not amazing or anything. However when my opponent declined the gambit I sco ys think? Is declining the gambit just that much worse, or did my opponents just play worse?

Well first and most importantly how did you generate that statistic and what is its relevance?

1) how many of your KGA/KGD games were actaually won/lost BECAUSE of the opening? -- a blunder at move 50 is no indication that you are strong/weak at any particular opening - and to include the game in your sample well, quite frankly distort your results.

2) how does this compare to other Openings -- QGA/QGD is you record better/worse (and by how much) than KGA/KGD.

3) whats the Black/white ratio? -- how well do you play as Black? -do you even accept the gambit as black?


4) ratings, small sample size, and all other considerations.

if you have followed (2) and still found the KGA/KGD still scores significantly higher you must consider when that is the reason for this -- perhaps the QGA doesn't score so well for you because (on average) your openants are of a higher rating?



once you done these things you should have a meaningful statistic you can draw conclusions from it, which may infact help you work out what you need to improve

Originally posted by Shinidoki
Well first and most importantly how did you generate that statistic and what is its relevance?

1) how many of your KGA/KGD games were actaually won/lost BECAUSE of the opening? -- a blunder at move 50 is no indication that you are strong/weak at any particular opening - and to include the game in your sample well, quite frankly distort your results. ...[text shortened]... c you can draw conclusions from it, which may infact help you work out what you need to improve

Well, only a couple were won IN the opening, but I think most were won because of some influence from the opening. I don't use other openings as white, but compared to my black openings it seems I score much better with the KG. As black my record's pretty crap 🙂, but I play the Sicilian and so don't face the KG. However, I did play against the KG last night in an unrated game, I accepted it, and won the game.

KGD is supposed to be much worse for black than KGA so I would infer 2 things

1. blacks position is worse and their chances less; and
2. weaker players are more likely to decline the gambit whilst stronger players will be more likely to accept.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
KGD is supposed to be much worse for black than KGA so I would infer 2 things

1. blacks position is worse and their chances less; and
2. weaker players are more likely to decline the gambit whilst stronger players will be more likely to accept.

I disagree. Bc5 is a perfectly adaquate way to decline the gambit. I simply think that those who decline are unsure about the gambit and don't know the theory.

2...Bc5 is indeed my favorite variation of the KGD