The Rice Gambit is a variation of the King's Gambit promoted by the New York financier Prof. Isaac Leopold Rice (1850-1915) around the time of the Cambridge Springs tournament. Reportedly, this gambit has been called "a grotesque monument to a rich man's vanity" (source unknown). The moves leading to the key position are: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5 Nf6 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.O-O.
1) A specially-named Gambit implies that it's an offshoot, like the Muzio Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Bc4 gxf3). That's from memory so it might not be exact. The Nf3 sac makes this a special gambit above and beyond the "King's Gambit" of the f-pawn. Unlike the Muzio, the "Rice Gambit" looks like a normal mainline King's Gambit.
2) I recall seeing "Modern Defense" and "Abbazia Defense" to describe ...d5 lines. Seems like there's some nomenclature overlap here. These positions can also arise from the Falkbeer.
Now the main comment:
3) The distinctive moves in this line are Black's, not White's (g5 and d5 primary). Other than f4, White's moves aren't unusual. So this looks more like a "Rice Defense" to the King's Gambit.
Originally posted by Green Paladin What about "Rice Counter Gambit" in the Falkbeer tradition?
Perhaps. "Gambit" generally means the willingness to go down in material. The Falkbeer is a true gambit as Black's down a pawn in the ...e4 lines. In the Rice line, Black's merely returning the extra pawn - not really the same thing. ** EDIT ** I suppose if White can forcibly win either the f4 or g4 pawn, then it is a counter-gambit. I haven't looked at this aspect. ** END EDIT **
I think I misremembered the Abbazia / Modern line - that one is ...d5 without ...g5-g4. The earlier point about black choosing the line (=Defense) still applies.
The Rice Gambit
18 Mar '08 16:14
Back to Top