Queen gambit defense trap

I always wondered why this gambit (accepted) tecnically isn't gambit (black can't save his c4 pawn) since black can save his pawn with his third move (b5): 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 b5 supporting black's c4 pawn.


I found the anwser in wikipedia:


An opening trap after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 goes 3.e3 b5? (Black tries to guard his pawn but should pursue development with, e.g., 3...e5!) 4.a4 c6? 5.axb5 cxb5?? 6.Qf3! winning a piece on Black's weakened queenside.


Nice !

a QGA-player will hardly do that kind of a mistake though...

Originally posted by ivan2908
I always wondered why this gambit (accepted) tecnically isn't gambit (black can't save his c4 pawn) since black can save his pawn with his third move (b5): 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 b5 supporting black's c4 pawn.


I found the anwser in wikipedia:


An opening trap after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 goes 3.e3 b5? (Black tries to guard his pawn but should pur ...[text shortened]... 5!) 4.a4 c6? 5.axb5 cxb5?? 6.Qf3! winning a piece on Black's weakened queenside.


Nice !

I am not worried but I didn't know what to play against that kind of defence. I suspected that it has to have some drawback (I mean for the black)

heh, in slav, black, when taking on c4 after some preparing moves first, might be really annoying holding the pawn...maybe you were talking about these llines too..

yeah, if you want to try to hold the pawn, you should try the Slav. However, even if White lets you hold on to it, he will have sufficient compensation.

No, I am interested in gambit only from white's point of view ! As black I play Nimzo-Indian