I have successfully used this gambit twice.
Both times I played it from memory, but I did originally learn it from a book.
1. e4 e5 2. Ng1f3 Nb8c6 3. Bf1c4 Nc6d4 4. Nf3xe5 Qd8g5 5. Ne5xf7 Qg5xg2 6. Rh1f1 Qg2xe4 7. Bc4e2 Nd4f3 0-1
My question is this......
Is it ethical to use this, since it isn't something I personally developed in my mind?
And if I shouldn't use it, how is using this any different than memorizing and using specific popular openings?
Play it out then let me know what you think.
regards, Marc
Originally posted by gambit3I suppose the only 'problem' is that when it's all over, you come away feeling like you didn't really play your own game. It's like you were making the moves for someone else.
What is the problem? Play it if you like and can.
When you play a memorized opening, you still get to a point where you're out of the book and have to use your own mind.
With this gambit, you go through the opening, mid and end game all in 7 moves, and you didn't really have to think about anything.
Originally posted by mwmillerYeah, but surely it's not fool-proof! You're not gonna get anyone twice...
I suppose the only 'problem' is that when it's all over, you come away feeling like you didn't really play your own game. It's like you were making the moves for someone else.
When you play a memorized opening, you still get to a point where you're out of the book and have to use your own mind.
With this gambit, you go through the opening, mid and end game all in 7 moves, and you didn't really have to think about anything.
Originally posted by mwmillerIt's no different except that in this case it is bad for your chess, as if White does not fall into the trap you have a difficult position.
And if I shouldn't use it, how is using this any different than memorizing and using specific popular openings?
One of the (minor) points of opening study is to catch opponents in traps like that, or to be aware of them and have an idea of how to respond. If people fall into it, it is their own fault.
I've had several wins (including one here) on the Black side of the Smith Morra in this very well-known line:
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cd 3.c3 dc 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nf3 Qc7 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Qe2 Ng4 9.h3?? Nd4 0-1
I think using memorized traps is always ethical if only to educate your opponent.
Recently, god, I fell into a basic basic trap in my pet opening -- the King's Gambit. Actually, I'm embarassed to even post this one...
But...
1. e4 e4
2. f4 Bc5
I don't think I've ever faced 2. ... Bc5 before. If I'd had half a brain, I would have just gone with a nice normal 3. Nf3 Nc3 then I suppose I could have turned it into a weird ruy-like-thing with 4. Bc5. But noooo..... I had to grab the "free" pawn and try and make the d4 push available. The theory was that I'd avoid losing my rook, instead bringing my king into the center and starting a really dangerous sharp fight. Soo...
3. fxe4?? Qh4+
Now here I obviously want to avoid the stupid damiano's defense thing of losing the rook. So, vaguely remembering an article I've read once where the following move is advocated by some crazy class A player as a shock tactic, using damiano's defense...
4. Ke2??????????? Qxe4#
MATE? WHAT?!!?? was my first thought.
Thank to my opponent for the lesson... (Heck, I may adopt 2. Bc5 myself against the KG)
Anyway, the point is -- a stupid trap = a lesson
Play anything you can if it's legal. I have no bad conscience when I win with a cheap shot. I hate to lose to one though. The one mentioned on first message with the black knight on d5, I've been caught with before on blitz. The simplest way is just exchange the knight and give black a double pawn. Eventually, you'll reach a level where cheap shots just don't work, and you actually have to think for yourself positionally. At that point you'll stop plopping that knight down on d5. But if you play morons like me, you can plop the knight there forever.