My gambit is based on King's Gambit: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxf7? Kxf7. It is -2.1 so i don't think it is so bad. But as the Black's Kingside is weak, sometimes you can outplay them. Example: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. d4 Nxe4 8. Bxf4 d5 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Kg8 11. Nd2 Nxd2 12. Qxd2 Be6 13. Rae1 Nxd4 14. Bg5 Qd7 15. Bf6 Bg7 16. Re5 Rf8 17. Bxg7 Rxf1+ 18. Bxf1 Qxg7 19. Rg5. The queen now is pinned and white has the advantage!
My gambit is based on King's Gambit: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxf7? Kxf7. It is -2.1 so i don't think it is so bad. But as the Black's Kingside is weak, sometimes you can outplay them. Example: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. d4 Nxe4 8. Bxf4 d5 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Kg8 11. Nd2 Nxd2 12. Qxd2 Be6 13. Rae1 Nxd4 14. Bg5 Qd7 15. Bf6 Bg7 16. Re5 Rf8 17. Bxg7 Rxf1+ 18. Bxf1 Qxg7 19. Rg5. The queen now is pinned and white has the advantage!
-2.1 is losing.
Actually, the best move after nf6 is 6.Nxg4 . After Nxe4 White plays 7.d3! Ng3. In this position, White will sacrifice the ROOK by 8.Bxf4!!. After taking the rook, time for 9.Qe2+! Qe7! 10. Nf6+! Kd8 11.Bxc7+!! Kxc7 12. Nd5+! Kd8!. Then you take a queen and it is equal.
Actually, the best move after nf6 is 6.Nxg4 . After Nxe4 White plays 7.d3! Ng3. In this position, White will sacrifice the ROOK by 8.Bxf4!!. After taking the rook, time for 9.Qe2+! Qe7! 10. Nf6+! Kd8 11.Bxc7+!! Kxc7 12. Nd5+! Kd8!. Then you take a queen and it is equal.
Get OUTTT!! -2,1 is pathethical lOSIngf PoSIIITIOOOONNLOLLLLLLLLLLLL WHTA IS THIS guy Yappoing Abbouuuuutt
Get OUTTT!! -2,1 is pathethical lOSIngf PoSIIITIOOOONNLOLLLLLLLLLLLL WHTA IS THIS guy Yappoing Abbouuuuutt
Of course as a new gambit it is a losing pos. But Black's Kingside is quite weak. If they make a mistake, Black can punish them easily.
Of course as a new gambit it is a losing pos. But Black's Kingside is quite weak. If they make a mistake, Black can punish them easily.
Here is an example to make -2.1 to -0.6: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. d4 Nxe4 8. Bxf4 d5 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Bf5 11. Be5 Nxe5 12. Rxf5+ Kg7 13. Bxe4 dxe4 14. Rxe5.
Here is an example to make -2.1 to -0.6: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 Nf6 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. d4 Nxe4 8. Bxf4 d5 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Bf5 11. Be5 Nxe5 12. Rxf5+ Kg7 13. Bxe4 dxe4 14. Rxe5.
@tpr said ^
-2.1 is losing.
yep! almost every new gambits show the losing positions.
@tpr said [^](/forum/redirect/post/OS9Zeqxl)
> -2.1 is losing.
yep! almost every new gambits show the losing positions.
#7
Basically every new "gambit" is an unsound gambit.
#7
Basically every new "gambit" is an unsound gambit.
Pretty much everyone who has invented a new gambit seems to think that the word gambit means something like: "A cheap trap that might catch unaware opponents of guard"
Pretty much everyone who has invented a new gambit seems to think that the word gambit means something like: "A cheap trap that might catch unaware opponents of guard"
@CG314 said ^
Pretty much everyone who has invented a new gambit seems to think that the word gambit means something like: "A cheap trap that might catch unaware opponents of guard"
Well, yes opponent can be smarter than we think. However they easily make the mistake in this gambit.
@CG314 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/jWsA06xT)
> Pretty much everyone who has invented a new gambit seems to think that the word gambit means something like: "A cheap trap that might catch unaware opponents of guard"
Well, yes opponent can be smarter than we think. However they easily make the mistake in this gambit.