Armand Blackmar vs Alexander Labry (1876)

Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players ·

Kibitzing

Armand Blackmar vs Alexander Labry
Unknown (1876)
Dutch Defense: Staunton Gambit. Accepted (A82) · 1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	15 more games of A Blackmar
sac: 7.Nxh7	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can change the color of the light and dark squares by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page. Or, you can change it with the "SETTINGS" link in the lower right.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE. [CLICK HERE]

Nov-27-06		Autoreparaturwerkbau: 7.Nxh7! Aaaah, a beauty...! Well, black didn't even try to develop pieces anyway.

Jan-03-07		Silverstrike: <Autoreparaturwerkbau> Well, in all fairness, before 7.Nxh7, black's moves look quite reasonable on the surface.

Feb-11-08		FSR: It figures. A guy like Blackmar isn't going to let the fact that Black played 1...f5 instead of 1...d5 stop him from sacrificing a pawn with 2.e4 and 3.f3. Presumably after 1.d4 Nf6 Blackmar would have played 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4, the Huebsch Gambit.

Feb-21-08		FSR: <FSR: It figures. A guy like Blackmar isn't going to let the fact that Black played 1...f5 instead of 1...d5 stop him from sacrificing a pawn with 2.e4 and 3.f3.> Silly me. Modern Chess Openings, Fifth Edition 1932, refers to 1.d4 f5 2.e4 as "the Blackmar Attack" on pages 159 and 185. The same book, on page 153, observes that "the Blackmar Gambit" (i.e. 1.d4 d5 2.e4) "has not the same force as the similar attack in the Dutch Defense." MCO-4 (1925), p. 120, had referred to 1.d4 f5 2.e4 as simply "the Gambit continuation." In MCO-6 (1939), p. 215, and MCO-7, p. 258, it becomes the Staunton Gambit, "[a]lso known as the Blackmar Attack." In MCO-8 (1952), pp. 22 and 29, and all later editions, Staunton gets all the glory and poor Blackmar is forgotten.

Feb-21-08		FSR: <Silverstrike: <Autoreparaturwerkbau> Well, in all fairness, before 7.Nxh7, black's moves look quite reasonable on the surface.> Yes, 3.f3 is pretty dangerous if Black takes the pawn. 3...e5, as in Elo (yes, THAT Elo)-Powers, Milwaukee 1948, is considered safer. See, e.g., Harding, The Leningrad Dutch, pp. 128-29; A. Martin, The Contemporary Anti-Dutch, p. 64. Christiansen and Silman say that 3...e5 equalizes, but that 3...d5 4.Nc3 Nf6 is a better try for advantage. Dutch Defense, pp. 195, 202.

Jun-07-09		WhiteRook48: 13...Kf8??? was the fatal mistake

Feb-16-20		sea7kenp: There are 6 Games in this Database with 3 ... exf3. Opening Explorer gives 5 Wins for White, and only one Draw. Doesn't sound too good for Black! (3 ... e5 or 3 ... d5 look better).

Feb-16-20		perfidious: From a practical point of view, snatching the pawn gives White everything he wants; I would plump for 3....d5 and aim to transpose back to the main line after 4.Nc3 Nf6, or perhaps try 3....e5 as mentioned.

Jul-26-20		CalvinT: Mate in 4 with 12. Qh5+ ..not that it matters a whole lot, black is lost.

Feb-11-23		Messiah: <fred>, you heard what our resident 2300+ said, play this system accordingly from now.

Mar-12-23		fredthebear: Always, unless it's a bullet game (and rarely shoot that anymore). If 3...e5 4.dxe5. White should be OK since Black isn't developed either.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.