Originally posted by Northern LadYeah perhaps you are right 😉
As someone who plays both sides of the KG, I agree that 3...g5 is the most critical continuation and is indeed what I normally play as black. However, to say "Black is already better" is, I think, a claim too far!
But I would rather be Black in that position.
Originally posted by AdoreaApparently a couple of pages of very incomplete analysis is now a book...
its a claim that Fischer was more then happy to make... 3... d6 the "most elegant waiting move" 4...g5 and your in the fischer defense... a defense which fischer wrote a book about after losing to spassky in a KGA game. Where his fiery statement "Of course white can make other moves, and lose differently."
fischer says g5 and later h6 makes black "much ...[text shortened]... t i think black is better, and with company like fischer, i feel pretty solid about it. 🙂
Fischer actually said that 3...g5 was not as accurate as 3...d6, which is probably an inaccurate statement itself!
Originally posted by KorchAs a KG player I would have to say that 2...Bc5 is not nearly as trying as the 3...g5 variation of the accepted, I think that white gets an equal (perhaps slightly better) game in the 2...Bc5 variation of the KG.
[b]2... Bc5 is most common way of refusing it but that builds imposing pawn center for white and he will be able to castle anyway ( pawns on c3 and then d4 with tempo. )
Its not so simple - black will be able to attack white center and white will have to play carefully for not getting into trouble.
Here is one good example:
[Event "Aubervilliers ...[text shortened]... 1 h6 20.a3 Bd6 21.Rf1 Re8 22.b4 a6 23.g3 Qe6 24.Rff3 Qe4
25.Kg1 a5 26.Qe1 0-1[/b]
Originally posted by Northern LadAgreed. Although, I still think that the Kieseritzky offers fine chances for white. I remember hearing that white was struggling in it, but having started playing the KG very often again, I couldn't find any lines that I found particularly scary looking from the white perspective.
As someone who plays both sides of the KG, I agree that 3...g5 is the most critical continuation and is indeed what I normally play as black. However, to say "Black is already better" is, I think, a claim too far!
Originally posted by najdorfslayerI don't think I would, I'm not quite sure actually...
Yeah perhaps you are right 😉
But I would rather be Black in that position.
Plus, playing the black side of a Muzio or Rosentreter is just scary, and playing the black side of a Kieseritzky doesn't look very comforting..it actually just looks confusing and difficult.
Of course, white could just play the Algaier and confuse the hell out of black immediately.
1 edit
Originally posted by cmsMasterI dont think that "equal (perhaps slightly better) game" is what KG player wants. Practice shows that KG players have problems to achieve more than draw against 2...Bc5. I still have no loses in RHP with this line.
As a KG player I would have to say that 2...Bc5 is not nearly as trying as the 3...g5 variation of the accepted, I think that white gets an equal (perhaps slightly better) game in the 2...Bc5 variation of the KG.
You've had some excellent players chime in, but as black I prefer
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf 3. Nf3 d5 4. exd Nf6
I usually just give the pawn back and castle to safety.
Game 3638342
1 edit
Originally posted by zebanoI agree that 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 d5 is good weapon against KG - this system is one of the reasons why I don`t use KG.
You've had some excellent players chime in, but as black I prefer
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf 3. Nf3 d5 4. exd Nf6
I usually just give the pawn back and castle to safety.
Game 3638342
Originally posted by cmsMasterAfter Bobby Fischer lost a 1960 game at Mar del Plata to Boris Spassky, in which Spassky played the Kieseritsky Gambit, Fischer left in tears and promptly went to work at devising a new defense to the King's Gambit. In a 1961 article in the American Chess Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 1, titled "A Bust to the King's Gambit", he put forth this idea and brashly claimed that it refuted the King's Gambit, which was clearly an overstatement. Fischer concluded the article with the famously arrogant line, "Of course white can always play differently in which case he merely loses differently."
Apparently a couple of pages of very incomplete analysis is now a book...
Fischer actually said that 3...g5 was not as accurate as 3...d6, which is probably an inaccurate statement itself!
i apologize, i meant to say an "article". above is the history behind this.
and below is fischer's explanation, so there can be no more confusion. Fischer used it, and it is widely popular in modern chess. Numbers in my database sits black at +7%. Not a very large difference, and is obviously arguable. However I think we can rather solidly state that d6 is the better move, as d6 opens the lines for the bishop, and doesn't really fall off for black in any continuation.
Fischer called 3... d6 "a high-class waiting move." The idea of it is to avoid the Kieseritzky Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5) and free the queen's bishop, as well as giving an extra space for the king to run to if necessary.
After 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 the most common response is 4.d4. If white now tries to force transpositions to Berlin or Classical defence positions then white can end up in difficult positions (eg. 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng5 f6 7.Nh3 gxh3 8.Qh5+ Kd7 9.Bxf4 Qe8 10.Qf3 Kd8 and black has a better position due to the reversed king and queen).
Another popular move is 4.Bc4 which is often met by 4... h6. Fischer dubbed this the "Berlin Defence Deferred". It stops the white knight on f3 from moving to the two dangerous squares e5 and g5.
A quite recent idea is 4.d4 g5 5.Nc3. White's plan is to leave the bishop on f1 for a while and to develop the queenside first: Be3, Qd2, 0-0-0. With g2-g3 White intends to play an improved version of the Hanstein Gambit (3...g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 and later g2-g3).
Originally posted by AdoreaYeah, I know about the Fischer Defense, but there are plenty of decent lines to meet it, and I think it definitely is less challenging than 3...g5. My personal favorite line against the Fischer is 4.Nc3.
After Bobby Fischer lost a 1960 game at Mar del Plata to Boris Spassky, in which Spassky played the Kieseritsky Gambit, Fischer left in tears and promptly went to work at devising a new defense to the King's Gambit. In a 1961 article in the American Chess Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 1, titled "A Bust to the King's Gambit", he put forth this idea and brashly claime ...[text shortened]... an improved version of the Hanstein Gambit (3...g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 and later g2-g3).
1 edit
Originally posted by KorchI looked that game, thanks for the link. Maybe I just have to get used to KG as black because in some lines (3...g5 included) the position that emerges is far different from any other opening I have ever played. Everything hanging, every tempo is precious, every mistake is severly punished. So 2... Bc5 is at least a little bit less sharp than gambit accepted...
[b]2... Bc5 is most common way of refusing it but that builds imposing pawn center for white and he will be able to castle anyway ( pawns on c3 and then d4 with tempo. )
Its not so simple - black will be able to attack white center and white will have to play carefully for not getting into trouble.
Here is one good example:
[Event "Aubervilliers 1 h6 20.a3 Bd6 21.Rf1 Re8 22.b4 a6 23.g3 Qe6 24.Rff3 Qe4
25.Kg1 a5 26.Qe1 0-1[/b]
Originally posted by tomtom232Actually, that seems pretty common.
Its easy..most KG players have little experience against lines a 1...e5 2...g5 3...Bg7...4...h6 5...d6 set up.
But it's hard to just say that they have little experience against a solid "setup" without providing actual lines.
1 edit
Originally posted by cmsMasterWell, I am going mostly off experience here...I use to have little experience against this and when I sprang it on some friends they also had little experience and then when I went looking for it I had trouble finding many games with it, either in the games explorer here or databases on other sites or in the megabase....the only personal lines I have are 5/0 or 3/0 games which will hardly show the merits of the line for either side. I will try to find something
Actually, that seems pretty common.
But it's hard to just say that they have little experience against a solid "setup" without providing actual lines.
the "line" that leads to this setup, or at least what I play as white, is 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nc3 g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.O-O h6 6.d3 d6 and later black can play Be6 to try to trade bishops which is why I tried to start playing 6.d4 but in blitz, for me, I always get into trouble when I play the pawn to d4 instead of d3.