|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-29-06 | | AgentRgent: <DeepBlade: It is transposable so why not?> Perhaps becuase it belongs here: King's Gambit Accepted (C33) |
|
| Jun-29-06 | | DeepBlade: [White "DeepBlade"]
[Black "NN"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Event "InstantChess"]
1.e4 e5 2.f4 3.Nf3 c5
exf4 4.Bc4 Nc6 5.O-O Nf6 6.d3
h6 7.Bxf4 d6 8.Nc3 a6 9.Qd2
Bg4 10.Rae1 g5 11.Bg3 h5
12.h3 Bd7 13.Nxg5 Nh7 14.Bxf7+
Ke7 15.Nd5# 1-0
Now happy? |
|
| Jun-29-06 | | AgentRgent: <DeepBlade: [White "DeepBlade"]
[Black "NN"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Event "InstantChess"]
1.e4 e5 2.f4 3.Nf3 c5
Now happy?> I bet white is.. getting to move twice in a row. ;-)Anyway no need to get testy, just trying to help you post your stuff where it belongs. And here's a tip to improve: stop playing 4 year olds. ;-) |
|
| Jun-29-06 | | DeepBlade: If you see something wrong -> Blow the whistle... Your ''help'' is more a burden than a blessing |
|
| Jun-30-06 | | DeepBlade: [White "DeepBlade"]
[Black "NN"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Event "InstantChess"]
1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3
Bc5 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bc4 a6 6.d3
b5 7.Bb3 b4 8.Ne2 d5 9.exd5
e4 10.dxc6 exf3 11.gxf3 Bh3
12.d4 Bb6 13.Be3 O-O 14.Qd3
Re8 15.O-O-O Qd6 16.f5 Qxc6
17.Rhg1 Qxf3 18.Rxg7+ Kxg7
19.Bh6+ Kxh6 20.Qxf3 Bxf5
21.Qxf5 Re6 22.Bxe6 fxe6
23.Qxf6+ Kh5 24.Nf4+ Kg4 25.Rg1+
Kf3 26.Nd3+ Ke2 27.Qf2# 1-0 |
|
| Jun-30-06 | | AgentRgent: <DeepBlade: If you see something wrong -) Blow the whistle...> Actually it says "See something which violates our rules? Blow the whistle" Posting your games under the wrong ECO doesn't violate the rules, it's just sloppy. <Your ''help'' is more a burden than a blessing> I'm sorry that the concept of placing comments in the proper forum is such a "burden" for you. But honestly, it would have taken less effort to move the game to the proper ECO, than your failed attempt to rearrange the game did. I even gave you a link for crying out loud. I tried to be polite, but you insisted on taking offense. No skin off my nose, you're the one who comes off as a dolt. |
|
| Jul-01-06 | | DeepBlade: <AgentRgent> Ok I will post my games in the right forum from now on. I thought the c5 push was a good concept to gain control of the d4 square, so I would like to have some ideas how to decline it with c5. I said it was transposable, but you still didnt comment on the game. If someone posted the same thing in a wrong forum, id be glad to review it, and I would say ''please be more careful in the future when posting your games'' or something like that. You neither took the effort to review or to comment. All you can do is complain about it being in the wrong forum. Anyway I dont want to continue this anymore, I will pay more attention when posting my games, and you should try a different, more friendly approach. |
|
Jul-01-06
 | | keypusher: <deepblade> After 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3, 3....c5 is a terrible move, wasting time and weakening the c4-f7 diagonal. You don't need any advice how to meet it; you just need to convince your opponents to keep playing it! |
|
| Jul-01-06 | | DeepBlade: <keypusher> I didnt know it was such a weak move, because the Black player tends to get a knight on d4. With a Bg4 pin it looks pretty dangereuxx. Talking about wasting time...
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d6 3.Nf3
exf4 4.Bc4 Bg4 5.d3 Bxf3
6.Qxf3 Nc6 7.O-O Nd4 <Qxf4 Ne2+> 8.Qf2 f3 9.c3 Ne2+ 10.Kh1 fxg2+
11.Qxg2 Nxc1 12.Rxc1 Be7 13.Qxg7
d5 14.Bxd5 Kd7 15.Qg4+ Kd6
16.Qf4+ Kc5 17.d4+ Kb6 18.Na3
Bxa3 19.bxa3 a6 20.Rab1+ Ka7
21.Rxb7# 1-0 |
|
| Jul-01-06 | | DeepBlade: Games like this makes me question the power of c5. The game is tactical to the bone, the c5 was also a continuation to keep the position alive. It was against a strong 1600 rated player, so I think the game isnt rubbish. I cant stress enough, the dark and long diagonal needs to be controlled, together with Nd5 to challenge white. And a decent kingside defence would be enough. I find 0-0-0 for black a good concept, but white still can get his run for its money. [White "DeepBlade"]
[Black "NN"]
[BlackElo "1604"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Event "InstantChess"]
1.e4 e5 2.f4 d6 3.Nf3
Bg4 4.Nc3 exf4 5.Bc4 Bxf3
6.Qxf3 g5 7.O-O Nc6 8.d3 Nd4
9.Qf2 Bg7 10.Be3 c5 11.Nd5
Nxc2 12.Bb5+ Kf8 13.Qxc2 fxe3
14.Nxe3 Nf6 15.Nf5 Qb6 16.Bc4
Rd8 17.Qc3 d5 18.exd5 Qc7
19.d6 Qd7 20.Rae1 Rg8 21.Re7
Qc6 22.Rxf7+ 1-0 |
|
| Feb-01-07 | | SICPchess: Can anyone offer me the lines for KGD
1. e4 e5 2. f4 Nc6...
I have encountered it several times in league play, but each of my opponents took a different direction after Nc6, can anyone help with blacks "book" move order? |
|
| Feb-01-07 | | dehanne: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nf3 exd5 4.d4 d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Nc3 Bb4 7.Bxf4 is theory. Now a possible continuation is 7...Qa4?! 8.Kf2! Bxc3 9.bxc3 Qxc3?! 10.d5! (white threatens Be5, winning), and white is better. |
|
| May-25-08 | | Wassily: Question on the Falkbeer:
1. e4 e5 2. f4 d5 3. exd5 e4 4. d3 Qxd5 5. Qe2 Nf6 6. Nc3 Bb4 7. Bd2 Bxc3+ 8. Bxc3 Bf5 ?! 9. Bxf6 fxg6 10. g4 Bd7 11. dxe4 Qa5+ 12. c3 Nc6 Ordinary move is 8. ... Bg4 9. dxe4, so Black must have played inaccurately here. Despite being up a pawn and having the superior structure, White cannot castle long without doing something about the a-pawn (perhaps sacrificing it) and his kingside remains undeveloped. Moreover, after O-O-O/Re8 Black is ahead in development and is not without threats. I drew this game, after 13. h3 O-O-O 14. Nf3
Rhe8 15. Nd2 f5 16. gxf5 Bxf5 17. Nc4 Qa6 18. Bg2 Re7 19. Kf2 b5 20. Nd2 Red7
21. Rhd1 Be6 22. a4 Qb6+ 23. Kg3 bxa4 24. f5 Bb3 25. Nxb3 Rxd1 26. Rxd1 Rxd1
27. Qxd1 Qxb3
What do you think of White's play in the opening? The main line of the Falkbeer, as I have said, is inferior to the position after 10. g4. Where did White go wrong in the middlegame? First, White's inability to catch up in development resulted in a poor king position and cramped development. Second, White's large center became a liability quickly. In particular, the black rook opposed against the white K+Q on the e-file proved very annoying. Perhaps White should have played to trade off queens . . . would it have been worth giving back the pawn? Seemingly, White could have worked from here to obtain an advantageous endgame position. Any endgame thoughts?
All help is appreciated. |
|
| Jun-25-08 | | The Chess Player: Does anyone know when Pinski's book on the KG will finally come out? |
|
| Jun-25-08 | | Zygalski: The Pinski book is now to be authored by John Shaw and should be out by around September. |
|
| Jun-27-08 | | The Chess Player: Sh.t... That long? And it's gonna be authored differently now as well? Well i just hope it's still gonna be a good book. |
|
| Aug-30-08 | | suenteus po 147: Here's a thematic tournament dedicated to this opening (or at least, a variation of this opening): Game Collection: Vienna 1904 |
|
| Jan-25-09 | | blacksburg: i don't like you anymore, king's gambit declined. i'm taking the pawn from now on. |
|
| Aug-18-09 | | MaxxLange: A fun blitz line is : 1 e4 e5 2 f4 Bc5 3 Nf3 d6 4 b4!? the Evans Gambit - KGD hybrid! |
|
| Aug-18-09 | | MaxxLange: It's no good, of course.
After 4...Bxb4 5 Bc4, White prepares to castle short, with c3 and d4 coming, even if a second pawn must be sacrificed 5 c3 is the other main line, I guess |
|
| May-03-11 | | kia0708: King's Gambit is good only as a surprise weapon.
From the Guardian: "The German GM Jan Gustafsson, in his recent DVD Black Repertoire Against 1 e4, Volume 2' (ChessBase 2011) typifies the modern professional's view of the opening:
"Black should punish White for giving up a pawn on the second move and it's very hard for me to believe that White can get away with the King's Gambit". I take issue with this. True, for professionals the gambit has been relegated to a surprise weapon, but for anyone below it remains a legitimate choice: at club level don't expect your opening to be refuted, but do expect a complex struggle where anything can happen." So what do ya think about it ? |
|
| May-03-11 | | haydn20: I remember an article by Fischer, "The King's Gambit is Busted"! Also, at the recent Tata Steel, a GM broke out the KG and a commentator noted that the only problem for Black in the KG is knowing which refutation to choose! He was being wry--he meant that there are so many deep lines that Black could still get into trouble if he weren't sufficiently booked. All this says to me that it's OK to play it vs anybody under 2000+. |
|
Feb-14-14
 | | LIFE Master AJ: See A J Goldsby for a link to one of the most complicated KG's I have ever played ... |
|
| Nov-19-18 | | LassaDoudou: I played against someone who played 2... g5 against me. Anyone knows more about this line? It's called the Zilbermints double countergambit. |
|
| Nov-05-19 | | Judah: This ECO code should be labeled simply King's Gambit, not <King's Gambit Declined>. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
