Advice on Gambits

don't think so much about your playing style and if you should or shouldn't take up using a gambit. i'm a person who likes matieral over position any time. but i like practicing gambits because it helps you understand that you can win games without being ahead in matieral.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
If I had known your reply would be so short I might not have spent so much time typing it. Anyhow, glad you think so.

had I known your reply to my reply would be so short I would have spent more time typing it 😉

i wrote more above if you didn't notice. 😲🙄

is 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 c6 3.exd6 Nxd6 a known gambit and if so what is its name? has anyone ever tryd it?

Some people just throw pawns away because they get in the way of the pieces and your opponent waste time picking up the little suckers. Then later they make up a name for it, like the Jansen-Bouganville Gambit (played frequently by Nimzowitch as a teenager). Then chess authors write enormous books about it. Usually, in the preface it goes something like this, "Although not entirely sound, the Jansen-Bouganville Gambit is sure to catch your opponent off-guard and due to the profound knowledge you will gain by studying this book, will surely succumb."

gambits are the same as opening theory to me. lots of openings are said to be sound. its like this some openings have a bigger chance of winning. like caro kann has a more likleyhood of black drawing than winning and in the sicilian its more chances of winning than drawing. as for some regular openings they have the good and the bad the boring and the attacking. when chess is driving me nutz on my regular play i play some gambits for the hell of it just to have a little fun. u know?

Originally posted by cmsMaster

That was my first ever BG game, and so there are a couple ehs in it, but overall not a horrible example. And if I'm not good enough for you...

Well, maybe a good example for opening but 22. Bxc4 there was a terrible blunder. Whatsoever, a victory is a victory, no matter the way you gain it. Anyway, I had only heard of this Benko gambit, but you stirred up some interesent about it in me. Looks like I'll have to check it out.

For Smith-Morra (I play it rarely) I prefer this line 4. Bc4 cxb 5. Bxb2 instead of 4. Nxc3. Does it still count as S-MG? White reaches the same position as after Danish gambit, only black has lost his c-pawn instead of e-pawn.

Another nice gambit is The Falkbeer Countergambit (I hope that's the correct name) against KG - 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5. I have no idea how good it counts, but I prefer playing it against KG instead of accepting KG.

You are all Wrong the only real gambit is the danish gambit.
e2-e4 e2-e5 d2-d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2.

Originally posted by jonzzzz
You are all Wrong the only real gambit is the danish gambit.
e2-e4 e2-e5 d2-d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2.

Shut up.

Originally posted by kbaumen
Well, maybe a good example for opening but 22. Bxc4 there was a terrible blunder. Whatsoever, a victory is a victory, no matter the way you gain it. Anyway, I had only heard of this Benko gambit, but you stirred up some interesent about it in me. Looks like I'll have to check it out.

For Smith-Morra (I play it rarely) I prefer this line 4. Bc4 cxb 5. Bxb2 ...[text shortened]... I have no idea how good it counts, but I prefer playing it against KG instead of accepting KG.

Benko's great, and the Falkbeer is very interesting. Not sure what you call your variation of the Smith-Morra to be honest...

Benko gambit sucks I could win as White any day.

Originally posted by jonzzzz
Benko gambit sucks I could win as White any day.

You seem to have trouble winning in general. And the Benko is an awesome opening.