Comments on https://lichess.org/@/engot12/blog/unknown-chess-openings-that-suck/DENlKBkN
The Englund Gambit 1 d4 e5? is bad enough by itself, no need for 2...Qh4 to make it bad.
King's Gambit 1 e4 e5 2 f4? is bad as well per Fischer & Kramnik.
All openings with Gambit in their name are more or less unsound, except Queen's Gambit.
The Englund Gambit 1 d4 e5? is bad enough by itself, no need for 2...Qh4 to make it bad.
King's Gambit 1 e4 e5 2 f4? is bad as well per Fischer & Kramnik.
All openings with Gambit in their name are more or less unsound, except Queen's Gambit.
@tpr said in #2:
The Englund Gambit 1 d4 e5? is bad enough by itself, no need for 2...Qh4 to make it bad.
King's Gambit 1 e4 e5 2 f4? is bad as well per Fischer & Kramnik.
All openings with Gambit in their name are more or less unsound, except Queen's Gambit.
In the Englund Gambit are some traps with black that actually work, that's why I included this line as one of the worst
@tpr said in #2:
> The Englund Gambit 1 d4 e5? is bad enough by itself, no need for 2...Qh4 to make it bad.
> King's Gambit 1 e4 e5 2 f4? is bad as well per Fischer & Kramnik.
> All openings with Gambit in their name are more or less unsound, except Queen's Gambit.
In the Englund Gambit are some traps with black that actually work, that's why I included this line as one of the worst
#3
"In the Englund Gambit are some traps"
- Sure, as in most gambits, but if white plays well black loses by force.
#3
"In the Englund Gambit are some traps"
* Sure, as in most gambits, but if white plays well black loses by force.
