Go back
King's gambit - Fischer defense

King's gambit - Fischer defense

Only Chess

Vote Up
Vote Down

Oh, I see my mistake now. My instinct for getting scared about King and Queen on the same file as a Rook isn't strong enough. I thought the Pawns would be more solid defense than they were. I've been told to develop that instinct before too.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Oh, I see my mistake now. My instinct for getting scared about King and Queen on the same file as a Rook isn't strong enough. I thought the Pawns would be more solid defense than they were. I've been told to develop that instinct before too.
yea, a well-timed king move could have stymied that whole attack.

Vote Up
Vote Down

and now I get lazy and collapse. gee, if that isn't the story of my chess life.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Not quite a collapse...you just lost the exchange.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Not quite a collapse...you just lost the exchange.
and my extra pawn. thanks to missing an obvious one-move threat. disgusting.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Hmm. Maybe 27 g4 would have done it. I thought you were screwed already at that point. What about 27...Qh4+ 28 Kg2 Rxg4+?

5 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Hmm. Maybe 27 g4 would have done it. I thought you were screwed already at that point. What about [b]27...Qh4+ 28 Kg2 Rxg4+?[/b]
you're right. hell. I can't find a saving move that doesn't lose the h pawn to Bg4 eventually ANYWHERE. I'm going all the way back, it's just indefensible. The absolute best I can do is at the end of my little attack, creating a diversionary queen invasion on the qside light squares. 23. Qc6 I guess would have been best. Sometimes I hate chess. I really understand mateulose, when I carry out an incredibly sharp attack, succeed in my goal, then lose.

Maybe 23. Kf2 instead of h2. But then how is the g pawn saved? I can't find any way to do it, because then there's no way to protect the g pawn with the rook on f, and there's no way to grab a tempo to move that rook to put the knight on f3.

I'm giving this to der bringer, see what it does with it.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by paultopia

I'm giving this to der bringer, see what it does with it.
Well, first of all, it insists on 20. Bxg5, which is I guess the same but a bit more direct. But it gives white a 1.05 pawn advantage after black's 22nd move. It then gives 23. Rf2 Bd7 24. Qd5 Be6 25. Qc6 Rac8 26. c3?! Kd8?! 27. Nd4 -- and I don't understand THAT at ALL. It wants to prepare Nd4, but why not go directly to Nf4? And why does it want black to wast time with Kd8 when it could be plunking a rook on the g file to prepare Bh3? Anyone??

I hate all these non forcing moves. Hate 'em.


Oooh. The b pawn. aaah. Nonetheless, I guess I'm right that the idea was Qc6.

Vote Up
Vote Down

As someone who has played both sides of the KG I feel sure that 3...g5 tests white more than 3...d6 (Fischer's move). After 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 h6 white doesn't have to play 5.d4. For example 5.h4!? with the idea d4, Nc3 and Qd3 is one idea. Also the line 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 gives white good chances of a positional plus.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

20. Bxg5 seems like a good move.

So your program gave White an advantage after Black's 22nd move?

Yeah, 23. Qc6 would have been unpleasant. I'd probably have gone 23...Rac8.

With the line you say your computer gave, I am not sure which R goes to f1. I assume it's the a Rook.

I think the computer decided the fight over Black's c Pawn is more forcing than Black's attack against White's King. Nd4 leads to Nb5 maybe? Is that what you meant when you said b Pawn?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Could someone show me an example where the fischer defense wins the game? I found the 3 d6 move on exeter Gallagher J - Jackson S but after finding the entire list of moves as shown below white won this game. I have found 3 games where Fischer played against the king's gambit, and lost as black. Maybe I'm not understanding the thread properly, I'm still quite new to the opening theories.
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 g5 5. h4 g4
6. Ng1 Bh6 7. Nc3 c6 8. Nge2 Qf6 9. g3 f3 10. Nf4 Qe7
11. Bd3 Bg7 12. Be3 h5 13. Qd2 Nd7 14. O-O-O Nf8 15. Rhe1 Bd7
16. e5 dxe5 17. dxe5 Ne6 18. Ne4 Bxe5 19. Nxe6 Bxe6 20. Bc5 Qc7
21. Nd6+ Bxd6 22. Rxe6+ Be7 23. Bd6 Qxd6 24. Rxd6 Bxd6 25. Ba6 O-O-O
26. Qc3 Ne7 27. Rxd6 bxa6 28. Rf6 Rhf8 29. Qc5 Rd7 30. Qxh5 Rfd8
31. Qxg4 Kb7 32. Qxf3 Nd5 33. Rxf7 Nb6 34. b3 a5 35. h5 a4
36. Kb2 axb3 37. axb3 a5 38. h6 a4 39. h7 axb3 40. cxb3 Ka7 41. Rxd7+ Black resigns

Nyxie
the Valkyrja

Vote Up
Vote Down

After Fischer wrote that article, nobody ever played the King's Gambit against him again. The games he lost were before he analyzed this version of the opening.

However I cannot find any examples where Black wins with this opening. Either Fischer was wrong or for some reason his variation is really unpopular?

Vote Up
Vote Down

This thread has inspired me as I'm trying to learn more about chess opening theory right now to improve my game. I went looking through my own games for king's gambit refutations. I'm playing Gumbie in one right now and was hoping for insight. Well I found one, against guess who, yep Gumbie, the man himself.

Game 668428

I wish I knew enough about chess to explain why I did this move or that, but being honest I'll admit I was just reacting to the board and trying to play the best move. I have read this whole thread 3 times now, and a lot of it just does'nt make sense to me. I think the point that I did understand is that only bobby fischer understands bobby fischer's refutation of the king's gambit.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nyxie
This thread has inspired me as I'm trying to learn more about chess opening theory right now to improve my game. I went looking through my own games for king's gambit refutations. I'm playing Gumbie in one right now and was hoping for insight. Well I found one, against guess who, yep Gumbie, the man himself.

Game 668428

I wish I knew enough abo ...[text shortened]... rstand is that only bobby fischer understands bobby fischer's refutation of the king's gambit.
What would you have done after the more straightforward exd5?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
After Fischer wrote that article, nobody ever played the King's Gambit against him again. The games he lost were before he analyzed this version of the opening.

However I cannot find any examples where Black wins with this openi ...[text shortened]... er was wrong or for some reason his variation is really unpopular?
Hector-Leko, Copenhagen 1995

1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 f5!? (a novelty at the time this was played, I think it is considered Black's strongest move here but am not up on the current theory of this line) 7.Nc3 (7.ef? Qe7+) 7...Nf6 8.Bf4 (8.Qe2? Bh6 9.ef+ Kf7! wins for Black according to Shevchenko-Raetsky, 1992) 8...fe 9.Qd2 d5 10.Be5?! (10.Nb5 Na6 11.Nc3 c6 12.Ba6 ba 13.Nge2 is unclear according to Leko) 10...c6 11.Nge2 Be6 12.Nf4 Bf7 13.Nd1 Nbd7 14.Ne3 Nxe5 15.de Qc7! 16.Qc3 O-O-O 17.O-O-O Nh5 18.Ne2 Bh6 19.Kb1 Be3 20.Qe3 Kb8 21.Qg5 Rhg8 22.Qf5 Bg6 23.Qg5 Rde8 24.Qg4 Qe5 25.Qg5 Qg5 26.hg Re5 27.g4 Ng7 28.Nf4 Ne6 0-1