Help in Evans gambit

Hello, I'd like to have Evan's gabmit in my arsenal for whites. However, I seem to do bad with it. Is it not a good gambit? I think it's an OK gambit against club players (around 1100-1300 of FICS blitz).

Here is an example. Here I blundered big time, so it is not a good example. Anyway, I seem not to know how to use my development advantage. Please help! Later I'll post other Evans gambit games of mine, hopefully without obvious blunders.

Here is a 5/0 FICS game:

Here is another Evans gambit, again I'm playing white, and I lost. This time it is 15 min game 15/0 on FICS (so I had more time to think but still lost).

Here is where I finally win in 15/0 FICS game:

Well, if you're going to play a gambit it is especially important to know the critical line. You need to play d4 immediately after Ba4. Then castle if opponent takes, followed by Qb3 etc. Other wise you gave up a pawn to castle.

Originally posted by giantrobot
Well, if you're going to play a gambit it is especially important to know the critical line. You need to play d4 immediately after Ba4. Then castle if opponent takes, followed by Qb3 etc. Other wise you gave up a pawn to castle.

Hi Guych.

I feel Blitz games should not really be analysed, they should be enjoyed.

However you can see where quick snap judgement calls and 'obvious' moves
should have been played.

In the first one. Here, White to play.



Morphy or Chigorin would have played 16.d6 instantly followed by Nd5.

You don't analyse such moves you just play them, they are good.
Black is bottled up with a near naked King.

The fact it was missed, even in a blitz game, tells me you know the opening
moves of the Evans but not the games that Morphy, Chigorin and Speilmann
left behind.

And if someone posts them in a PGN moving thingy thing and you watch them
skip past. That is not knowing them. You have seen a trailer. Not the whole film.

In the second game it was completely unrecognisable as an Evans.
White sacced the b-pawn to defend.

Black even missed the Back Rank weakness. Here Black to play.



Black played 19...Qd6?

19...Nxa1 is good it wins and not hard to see in a 15 minutes game.

The 3rd game. Here.



White played 11.Rb1?? You are not an Evans Gambiteer.

I don't care if you won the game. I stopped here.
I would have congratulated you for saccing the Rook and losing.

11.exf6 must be correct.

Any chance to swap an undeveloped Rook for the f6 Knight covering a
castled postion MUST BE PLAYED.

You toss overboard any piece not doing anything just for the tempo and if
it happens to take a developed piece with it then so much the better.

Have you never seen a game with a double Rook sacrifice?

These things are not beyond you. You too can produce these mini masterpieces.
Tactical play can be taught, you need not be gifted.

But you must be willing to learn your craft.

Board out and a book of noted up classical and romantic games.

Study and learn how these guys exploited weakness's, turned a single tempo
into a raging torrent and used every tactical trick in the book.

Obviously you have not studied these great games.

And in a way I envy you because you are going to learn so much very quickly
and you will have great fun in doing so.

Thank you so much greenpawn! Now I know what a should be studying.
Could you recommend some sources?

Hi.

Don't you have a book on the Evans, it must have some classic examples
of Romanric play.

There is a Morphy book on ebay £7.99 by Reinfeld and Soltis.
Also Tartakowers 500 games is there

I know I picked a lot from 200 Miniatures by Du Mont.

Here: I did this for my boys in Bates Motel.

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=4

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=3

Here are all 200 games. No notes but the notes in the book itsellf are very light.
Usually just the background of the game. Which is good because if you saw
what you thought was a good move or a bust. You worked it out yourself.

Lift them and print them out. Play them over on a full set.

You will see small opening errors getting bashed and some marvelous
combinations and mating patterns. You will get ideas and inspiration.
It won't be long before you are putting these ideas into your own games.

These games were played by humans playing the same game we play today.

Here is Blackburne showing you the difference between a developed piece and
an undeveloped Rook.

Watch Black's 7th move saving the developed piece and letting the Rook go.

It is one of the games on the link I have given. play it out over the board and
let every move seep in. You will see the final wonderful ending was not an
accident combination that just appeared.

I think it is one of the most instructive miniatures ever played.
Every piece plays it's part.

I give it here just as a taster. But it must be played out over the board
to get the full flavour.

Amatuer - Blackburne 1900

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Guych.

11.exf6 must be correct.

Any chance to swap an undeveloped Rook for the f6 Knight covering a
castled postion MUST BE PLAYED.

You toss overboard any piece not doing anything just for the tempo and if
it happens to take a developed piece with it then so much the better.

Have you never seen a game with a double Rook sacrifice?

Thanks a lot!
I don't have abook on Evan's gambit; maybe it's funny to try playing the gambit without having read a book on it.
I will go over the games over a board. Thank you.

You can download a pgn file of that book here:

http://www.gambitchess.com/semi/dbbooks.htm

Scroll down to the section 'free DB books'

Hi Wulebgr

I have to be honest. If I had to list 500 instructive short games then
'Anderssen Immortal' and his 'Evergreen' would not be among them.

Nice finishes but very messy with loose ends and no flowing theme.
I've never liiked them. Too 'iffy'.

There are better instructive games, some are very simple but they
contain ideas and patterns that are all too often missed.

You have to see the ideas that the Modern Masters have in their locker.
They very rarely get a chance to use them so we never see them.
But they know them, they would never have got near a Master title without them.

You won't see Kramnik setting opening traps from the mid 1800's but he will
know the priciples behind them and these patterns and tricks are just
under the surface of all his games.

Actually Kramnik set Luke McShane an ancient trap in The London Classic.
McShane reacted wrongly and got scudded. 😏

Now I'm arguing with myself.

At the recent World Blitz Championship Kramnik replied to 1.e4 in all his games
with 1...d5. The lad can roll up his sleeves hack when he wants to.

Hi - there is a book by Jan Pinski - "Italian Game and Evans Gambit", Everyman, 2005.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
It's hard to disagree with greenpawn, but it is worth remembering that the critical position in the Evergreen Game came just as Anderssen developed his last piece by swinging the rook on a1 to d1. That's when Dufresne went for the apparent mate in one and lost, granting Anderssen immortality.


Black to move
[fen]1r2k1r1/pbppnp1p/1bn2P2/7q/Q7/B1PB1N2/P4PPP/3RR1K1 b - - 0 19[/fen]

Dufresne should have played?

Originally posted by ptobler
Hi - there is a book by Jan Pinski - "Italian Game and Evans Gambit", Everyman, 2005.