The QGA trap

There's a well known trap in Queen's Gambit Accepted. I will note it up for those who don't know it.



Okay, so probably everybody has already known this thing and I'm wasting your time. So I'll get to my question. I play this a lot in my blitz and bullet games and after taking whichever piece black lets me take, I lose way too often. My problem is that it's still a very unstable position. I need to get my queen back into action, take care of my king, which (who?) is very far from safe and be careful not to let Black's queenside pawns hurt me. I often fail to do all those things in quick games. I don't have any pgns of those ready at the moment, but you can see how chaotically I'm regrouping in the RHP game below. I actually won this one, but I felt pressure almost till the very end. Even another blunder by my opponent didn't put me at ease -- until I saw a forced checkmate.



Just look at my kingside minor pieces. They keep trying to find a good spot until they get exchanged for something. Are there any guidelines I could follow in these positions in order to win these games more comfortably? Instead of just hanging in there, trying not to blunder my material advantage away? I don't really know how to attack from this unless my opponent blunders again.

Hi Wandering K

Good Post. If you want to talk about TRAPS! then I’m your man.

It’s not like we are discussing a rare trap, the position after 6.Qf3.
(nor is it very modern - Greco gave the exact same order of moves in 1620!)


has been seen on here 1,708 times. White = 1276, Drawn = 204 Black = 228.
(and I have 50+ Black’s being caught with this in genuine OTB play)

I’ll use the word ‘trap’ but in the real classification of the term it’s not a trap.
White is not taking a risk playing for 6.Qf3. In a genuine trap there must be
a element of risk involved be it material (saccing something) or positional
(seriously lagging behind in development.) . That is why we warned not to play for traps.
(especially opening traps - middle game traps if you are losing are often worth a gamble.)

In the wee explanation you gave of the trap you missed the importance behind the move 3.e3.
This shy and timid looking move is the key to the whole trap as leaves the h1-a8
diagonal open to White Queen.
6,012 players on here have played 3.e4 instead e3 with a mixed bag of results.

In Bullet Chess and Blitz anything can happen.
Personally if I’m a piece up in blitz. (I never play bullet anymore, it’s the fastest
mouse wins - there is very little chess involved.) then I’m giving it back the first
chance I get to open up their King. (infact in every class of the game if I’m a
piece/pawn up then I’m nervous and always looking to give it back.)

Here after 7…Bd7


I’d say the best place for the Queen is 8.Qa6 so it’s still in the action amongst the
Queenside and f3 is free for the g1 Knight.

This is the most popular choice of the ‘experts’ in this trap. Notably AttilaTheHorn
who has had this position 11 times. (not a record - Marko Krale has had 6.Qf3
on here well over a 100 times!)

White’s losses have been due to switching off thinking the game is over.
Indeed it is, a lot of Black’s simply resign after 6.Qf3.

A couple of examples of how the play on here has gone.

frankhermens - RobinH RHP 2011



I like this example as no nonsense 'I'm keeping the piece' White win.
White tries to give up Queen leaving him two Rooks and a Bishop v a Queen.
Black declines the offer.

Rainmaker18 - SDPeterson RHP 2011

There are other people that disagree with greenpawn34 as to calling this a trap. Apparently he has a different definition for a chess trap than these people at the links below:

The next link gives the best continuation for 6...Nc6 variation:
http://www.chess.com/article/view/trap-in-queens-gambit-accepted

The next link gives the best continuation for 6...Bb7 variation:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/more-puzzles/queens-gambit-accepted-taraasch-trap

The 6...Bb7 variation is not really the best for black as this video says:
YouTube

It looks like a trap to me, but I am not going to go out on a limb and say greenpawn34 is wrong. He has a way of coming back at you that I do not like. I would rather be friends with him.

The Instructor

Hi RJ.

I like a good stramash in the Forum as well as the next man
but honestly there is no malice.

I come back at you (or anyone) with a point of view.
You can disagree and sometimes (very rarely) 😉 I do change my mind
and agree.

Setting traps is bad Chess, it's Hope Chess. But it is Chess.
If it works then good but it can get you into trouble.

I know the word 'trap' is used in all kinds of situations by all kinds of players
from Grandmaster to beginner but I think my clasification of it helps you
to understand the game a bit better.

A genuine trap is playing a move you know not to be the best move
hoping your opponent will blunder and fall into what ever trick it masks.
It is a bad move that has no other reason than to tempt your opponent
into a blunder.
There has to be a element of risk knowing that it will rebound if the opponent
spots the trap.

If you want to use the word 'Trap' then I offer two classes of trap.
A genuine trap and an incidental trap. (or better...an incidental trick.)

The first two links you gave were posted by a couple of punters from chess.com

You cannot going around posting yourself as 'The Instructor' if you are
going to link to punters from chess.com. Call yourself 'The Linker'.

In the first link you gave the opening statement is:

"Here is a trap for white in the Queen's Gambit accepted version
caused by a bad move by black."

The key bit is ".....caused by a bad move by black."

White did nothing wrong, his play was sound, Black played a bad move
and White punished him. If Black had sided-stepped the trap no harm done.
That trap is an Incidental Trap.

The second link spells Tarrasch 'Taarasch' and gives the same line of play.
It is not a trap

The two variations of the Tarrasch Trap that bear his name are in the
Ruy Lopez and are both incidental.

That means the blunder was made by Black, White did not harm his
position in anyway at all playing the moves he did. There just happened
to be a cute line of tactical play in White's favour because Black blundered.

The DVD gave the same line as above and called it a worth while trap.
Worth while to know yes. (The RHP stats prove that.) a trap no.

Let us see what The Oxford Companion to Chess has to say about a trap.

They state there is no precise definition of a trap adding that
many masters would not class an incidental trap as a trap.

They call a move that I call a genuine trap (a risky bad move that works) a swindle.

A swindle to me is when you are lost and you set a trap that your opponent
falls into and you spin the game around.
Swindles differ from a genuine trap because when swindling the damage
has already been done. You are trying to get back into the game.
A genuine trap is the damage that can give you a lost game.

Indeed when the The Oxford Companion comes around to defining 'Swindle'
it agress with me.

"A trap by means of which a player who has a lost position avoids defeat."
(The Companion appears to be arguing with itself.)

In the so called trap mentioned above White is not in a lost position
nor is he setting traps. His opponent is blundering.

By the same criteria we should be calling this a trap after: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6


Black has set White a trap. If 4.Nxe5 then 4...Nxe5.

The famous Elephant Trap is not a trap.



This is a genuine trap in the same setting.



And this is the most outrageous Opening Trap I have ever seen on RHP
(or anywhere else for that matter) It's brilliant.

It fits the bill perfectly.
From a safe and solid equal position a player takes a chance on wrecking
it all by setting a genuine trap.

Prefect - neldo RHP 2003 Game 330002

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi RJ.

I like a good stramash in the Forum as well as the next man
but honestly there is no malice.

I come back at you (or anyone) with a point of view.
You can disagree and sometimes (very rarely) 😉 I do change my mind
and agree.

Setting traps is bad Chess, it's Hope Chess. But it is Chess.
If it works then good but it can get you into tr has to move or be taken so...} 6. Ba4 Qa5+ {Goodbye Knight on e5.}[/pgn]

Your mention of swindle, reminds me of a book called "Chess Traps, Pitfalls, ans Swindles. Do you know how a Pitfall is different from a trap and a swindle? By the way, I am an Instructor dedicated to the Spirituality Forum. You are apparently the Chess Forum Instructor.

The Instructor

Hi RJ

Of course I have that book you mention.

I'd say a pitfall is actually a better name than a incidental trap.
There is a pitfall on the board that has not been dug by your opponent.
If you avoid it you do not gain an advantage because it is there.
However should you fall into it then your opponent will fill you in.
(I'll use pitfall when I get around to writing my book on Traps & Blunders.)

Although I've said setting traps is bad chess the ability to do so when
you are losing will save you many a lost game.
It is what (at the moment) sets us apart from computers.

If you want to set a few when not actually losing (100% guilty) then
it's up to you. (do it, they are human. None of them are as good as what they think they are.)

I post here to help others enjoy the game as much as I do and entertain myself.
There is no doubt that I have also picked things up and I enjoy reading
the posts of others as we swap ideas.
I love talking chess.

In that other forum 'The closed mind forum'. I see little of that going on.
Nobody appears to enjoy posting there and most seem hell bent on arguing.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Your mention of swindle, reminds me of a book called "Chess Traps, Pitfalls, ans Swindles. Do you know how a Pitfall is different from a trap and a swindle? By the way, I am an Instructor dedicated to the Spirituality Forum. You are apparently the Chess Forum Instructor.

The Instructor

There's a Trappist Monk joke in here somewhere.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi RJ

Of course I have that book you mention.

I'd say a pitfall is actually a better name than a incidental trap.
There is a pitfall on the board that has not been dug by your opponent.
If you avoid it you do not gain an advantage because it is there.
However should you fall into it then your opponent will fill you in.
(I'll use pitfall when I ...[text shortened]... that going on.
Nobody appears to enjoy posting there and most seem hell bent on arguing.

Okay. Your nickname for the Spirituality Forum is very fitting for now. However, I am trying to change that by attempting to open the spiritual eyes of the blind by providing them with the truth revealed in the holy scripture.

I believe there are a few who come there with the intent to ask questions, discuss, and learn about spiritual matters. However, as you noticed, there are many trollers, who are only interested in disrupting, challenging, and arguing in the forum. I am attempting to expose the false cultic beliefs in light of what is revealed in the Holy Bible.

I was once an Instructor in the US Army and therefore have been inspired to take on that title again for the purpose of instucting in the Spirituality Forum.

The Instructor

Good Luck with that.

If there was just one religion on this Earth there would be a lot less war.
If there was none there would be even less.

Anyway back on topic - Wander King the policy is if you are a piece up
very often the opponent has a pawn, sometimes two for it.
If these pawns look like they may cause hassle sac the piece back for them
and don't wait till it's too late. As soon as a pawn(s) appear on the 6th
rank then the door for Pawn Promotion Combinations is opened.

Think:
"I'm a piece up. Good. I now have two pieces to sac." and tear into the King.

This was my last game I just played on a GameKnot session.
(It's got nothing much to do with the thread - but it's good fun.)

**RJ Hinds begins to talk about spirituality in the chess forum**

Admiral Ackbar: "It's a trap!!!"

Correct.

It's an incidental trap...A Pitfall...and I fell for it. 🙁

I'm white. This is an example of how to activate all you pieces. I struggled with the same problem as you for a bit.

Originally posted by Tygert
I'm white. This is an example of how to activate all you pieces. I struggled with the same problem as you for a bit.[pgn][Event "Clan challenge"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2013.06.13"]
[EndDate "2013.06.29"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Tygert"]
[Black "Chris S"]
[WhiteRating "1540"]
[BlackRating "1193"]
[WhiteElo "1540"]
[BlackElo "1193"]
[ ...[text shortened]... b5 c3 21. bxc3 b3 22. Ra1a8 Ke8e7 23. Bc1a3 Rd7d6 24. Qc6c7 1-0[/pgn]

I believe Black made it easier for you by moving those side pawns instead of trying to develop more quickly.

The Instructor

Listen intently!


1. YouTube

2. YouTube

-m.