Game 4719628
Having decided that I'm not temperamentally suited to the English, I decided to try the King's Gambit. This is the first game in it I played as White.
Just before move six I decided (looking at database lines) that after 6.Ng1 Bh6 7.Nc3 c6 8.Nge2 Qf6 9.g3 fxg3 10.Nxg3 Bxc1 11.Rxc1 Be6 that White is not doing so well.
Since the opening is supposed to be about attacking, I decided to try a piece sacrifice to gain time and development in exchange for the material. I did find a single database game where a master-level player tried this knight sacrifice (6.Bxf4) against an opponent rated over 2000, so while it may be unsound (why else so rare?) there may be a little something to it. I certainly managed to seize the initiative, but I'm not at all sure that I would have obtained the mileage I did had my opponent been stronger.
I'm reasonably sure that instead of 13.e5? I should have played 13.Nxc7.
Aside from this, no doubt I missed a whole bunch of tactical possibilities: in addition to never having played a KG game as White before, and being depressed lately (and as a consequence concentrating poorly and being lackadaisical), my tactical skills need improvement.
Having said that, I'd be interested in three things:
(1) Assessments of the knight sacrifice (6.Bxf4)
(2) Assessments of 13.Nxc7 instead of the game move 13.e5
(3) Assessments of general tactical failures by White (concrete analysis please).
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsI think that this is the correct idea of what you wanted to do. It is the Muzio Gambit.
Game 4719628
Having decided that I'm not temperamentally suited to the English, I decided to try the King's Gambit. This is the first game in it I played as White.
Just before move six I decided (looking at database lines) that after 6.Ng1 Bh6 7.Nc3 c6 8.Nge2 Qf6 9.g3 fxg3 10.Nxg3 Bxc1 11.Rxc1 Be6 that White is not doing so well.
Since ve 13.e5
(3) Assessments of general tactical failures by White (concrete analysis please).
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1074916
You can check out other games on that site on that opening. Pay particular attention to the kibtzing and check out other games on other DB's.
Edit: Game 3226641 I don't know if this has a name but it sure was fun.
Originally posted by adam warlockThanks for the suggestion, but after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 Black seems to have equalized. Or does it get tricky after that?
I think that this is the correct idea of what you wanted to do. It is the Muzio Gambit.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1074916
You can check out other games on that site on that opening. Pay particular attention to the kibtzing and check out other games on other DB's.
Edit: Game 3226641 I don't know if this has a name but it sure was fun.
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsI think that it is indeed theory on how to equalise with black the safe way on that line. But most likely the muzio is unsound and declining the knight is just chickening out. Of course that accepting the knight is very dangerous too.
Thanks for the suggestion, but after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 Black seems to have equalized. Or does it get tricky after that?
But looking at your game in particular why not 14. Nf6+ ?
Edit: Or 14 Nb6 ? I see some chances of drawing the queen away from protecting the king... But I'm not sure cause I didn't really analysed things deeply.
13. Nxc7 (instead of e5) doesn't seem to do much after 13...Qxc7 as the queen now covers g7 after Bxe6 fxe6 what you might've had in mind.
However after 13. e5 c6 you got a bit reckless and the attack dried up as you ran out of material. Here you can keep up some pressure with maybe Nb6 (not c7, as the black queen again covers g7 from there) or just take a step back with 14. Ne3 d5 (forced, to block the bishop) 15. Nf5 Bf8 16. Be3 with unclear position:
In the middle of an assault, it's sometimes better to take a step sideways for a moment instead of throwing at it all you've got!
Originally posted by IkutursoWell, what about 13.Nxc7 Qxc7 14.Bxe6 fxe6 15.Bxd6 Qf7 16.Rhf1 Qg6 17.Qd3 -- and now White has control of both open files on each side of the Black king, the Black queen has been lured away from her defensive position and is effectively blocked from the 7th rank, and the White bishop on d6 can move along either of two diagonals as needed.
13. Nxc7 (instead of e5) doesn't seem to do much after 13...Qxc7 as the queen now covers g7 after Bxe6 fxe6 what you might've had in mind.
However after 13. e5 c6 you got a bit reckless and the attack dried up as you ran out of material. Here you can keep up some pressure with maybe Nb6 (not c7, as the black queen again covers g7 from there) or just take ...[text shortened]... etimes better to take a step sideways for a moment instead of throwing at it all you've got!
Originally posted by adam warlockRegarding 14.Nf6+ this is indeed what I had planned and why I had ended up playing 13.e5 instead of 13.Nxc7. The problem is that after 14.Nxf6+ Nxf6 15.exf6 Qxf6 Black now has the initiative: notice how his queen and bishop line up on b2, while at the same time Black's queen and knight doubly attack the singly defended White bishop on f4. I did not see this until after moving 13.e5 and decided that the resulting complications would be fatal to White's attack.
I think that it is indeed theory on how to equalise with black the safe way on that line. But most likely the muzio is unsound and declining the knight is just chickening out. Of course that accepting the knight is very dangerous too.
But looking at your game in particular why not 14. Nf6+ ?
Edit: Or 14 Nb6 ? I see some chances of drawing the quee ...[text shortened]... way from protecting the king... But I'm not sure cause I didn't really analysed things deeply.
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsI cannot believe that 6.Bxf4 is sound. A simple comparison with the Rosentreter Gambit makes the point: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.d4 g4 5.Bxf4 gxf3 6.Qxf3 d6. Now white can choose between 7.Bc4 and 7.Nc3 (I prefer the former). White is extremely unlikely to even consider 7.h4, which would transpose into your line. However, it's always nice to see new converts to the KG!
Game 4719628
Having decided that I'm not temperamentally suited to the English, I decided to try the King's Gambit. This is the first game in it I played as White.
Just before move six I decided (looking at database lines) that after 6.Ng1 Bh6 7.Nc3 c6 8.Nge2 Qf6 9.g3 fxg3 10.Nxg3 Bxc1 11.Rxc1 Be6 that White is not doing so well.
Since ...[text shortened]... ve 13.e5
(3) Assessments of general tactical failures by White (concrete analysis please).
Originally posted by Northern LadNice to know it has a name. Of course White wouldn't consider 7.h4 after the Rosentreter, but as I made clear from my initial post, I started out with a Paris attack, got cold feet, and decided to try something wild.
I cannot believe that 6.Bxf4 is sound. A simple comparison with the Rosentreter Gambit makes the point: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.d4 g4 5.Bxf4 gxf3 6.Qxf3 d6. Now white can choose between 7.Bc4 and 7.Nc3 (I prefer the former). White is extremely unlikely to even consider 7.h4, which would transpose into your line. However, it's always nice to see new converts to the KG!
As for the Rosentreter proper, Bill Robertie (in a thread on chessgames.com) says that after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.d4 Black needn't take any risk with 4...g4 but instead can play 4...Bg7 followed by ...h6 and be a full pawn up with a clear plus. Is it that simple?
I wouldn't call myself a convert to KG at this point, especially after what I've seen in some of the KG threads here. On the other hand, the fact that a player of Northern Lad's stature uses it (regularly?) makes me wonder if reflexively dismissing it is the right response. Experimentalist probably describes my attitude, though poisoned by skepticism at this point.
I suppose I am looking for a line to play as White that is attacking and soundly tactical. I must say that I enjoyed attacking the whole game as White and losing, more than I have playing more passive games and drawing, though of course that wouldn't last should it result in consistent declines in my rating.
I wondered about Blackmar-Diemar as well as Smith-Morra. I don't want a line for CC play in which Black can consolidate and win (or reliably force a draw) if he works it out or finds it in the databases or knows the theory, even if it works ok at my current level of opposition, because that's a dead-end.
I suppose that any opening by White can be drawn by Black in theory, so I guess what I am really looking for is something that: (a) gives White good attacking chances and an early initiative, with emphasis on tactical play in pursuing those goals; (b) leaves White with a solid, playable position that isn't a known theoretical loss or draw given Black opponents who are theoretically informed.
Any suggestions?
Hello
Thanks for sharing Game 3226641 :-) I have never fallen asleep playing the Kings Gambit. Note that the Black Queen never moves off of her square during the entire 35 move shoot out :-)
Mike Gibbons
Sugar Land, Texas
gibbonsm
gibbons.mike@comcast.net
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken
Originally posted by Mark Adkins1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.d4 Bg7 5.h4 h6 6.hxg5 (also 6.g3!?) hxg5 7.Rxh8 Bxh8 8.g3 leads to complex, unclear play.
Nice to know it has a name. Of course White wouldn't consider 7.h4 after the Rosentreter, but as I made clear from my initial post, I started out with a Paris attack, got cold feet, and decided to try something wild.
As for the Rosentreter proper, Bill Robertie (in a thread on chessgames.com) says that after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.d4 Black n ...[text shortened]... loss or draw given Black opponents who are theoretically informed.
Any suggestions?
