Question for 1..e5 players

When was the last time someone played the kings gambit against you?

1.e4 ..e5 2. f4

As white I normally play 1.Nf3, but would like to maybe experiment with playing the kings gambit. I am curious how frequently people meet this opening as black these days? It is very rare to see it in GM practise, but it strikes me that amateur players will not know the theory of this opening as it is so rarely played. As a club player, playing something that starts on move 2 which is largely unknown has it's appeal. 🙂

I see it maybe 10% of the time in e4...e5 games.
I don't play it as white but I love to play it as black.
I always accept the gambit 🤗
It's fun.

@patzering said
I see it maybe 10% of the time in e4...e5 games.
I don't play it as white but I love to play it as black.
I always accept the gambit 🤗
It's fun.

Ok interesting. Do you play otb club/tournament chess or just online? I've been looking at a few morphy games and can see that the dynamics of the opening require great tactical mastery to fully navigate the complications this opening presents. Seeing as i am primarily a tactician in nature, i don't see any reason to avoid this sort of tactical slug out right from the opening. 🙂

When I played in tournaments (20+)
I never saw it but maybe twice.
This was at the 1400 level where safety takes priority.
I'm sure you'll see more kings gambits near the 1800 level.

@patzering said
When I played in tournaments (20+)
I never saw it but maybe twice.
This was at the 1400 level where safety takes priority.
I'm sure you'll see more kings gambits near the 1800 level.

Yeh it would be great to see some stats. The way i see it, if black accepts the gambit, they had better know what they are doing in detail! If they decline the gambit, white just plays Nf3 and enjoys a little bit more central control. The f-pawn can either be exchanged to open the file, or advanced.. either way, white has options to change the character of the position, which is always nice.

@Marinkatomb

Playing OTB between 2000 and 2014 in league, tournament and county matches @ 140-150 ecf level I faced it in 5% of 1. e4 games. My feeling was that white spent more time on their refutations of the much more popular Sicilians and French that they liked a white line against the rarer e5 that starts at move 2 to minimise prep. In my experience that turned out to be the Bishop Opening or the Vienna rather than the KG.

As black against the KG I played the Becker defence 2...ef 3.Nf3 h6 which I'd studied in postal games played before work life balance allowed a return to OTB. Now I would play either the KG declined with 2....Bc5 or the Falkbeer with e4 which I've played online. I've always liked 2...Bc5 not just because it ignores White's "demonstration" and develops a piece, but because a maths teacher at school when I was about 10 fell into

which, if nothing else, demonstrates the value of some basic opening prep.

@ragwort said
@Marinkatomb

Playing OTB between 2000 and 2014 in league, tournament and county matches @ 140-150 ecf level I faced it in 5% of 1. e4 games. My feeling was that white spent more time on their refutations of the much more popular Sicilians and French that they liked a white line against the rarer e5 that starts at move 2 to minimise prep. In my experience that turned out to ...[text shortened]... e5 Qh4 4. g3 Qxe4 [/pgn]
which, if nothing else, demonstrates the value of some basic opening prep.

Ok interesting, thanks for that. I have to say, fxe5 is a dreadful move! Why not Nf3 🤔

I play 1..d6 as black and have a similar system for when white plays fxe5??

1.e4 ..d6 f4 ..e5 fxe5 ..Qh5 where black picks up material for fun.

The thing that interests me about the KG is lines like this..

1.e4 ..e5 f4 ..exf4 Bc4, inviting the check on h4. Amazingly, the engine actually prefers white here. The database stats for this line are actually 60% in favour of white, which seems so counterintuitive. It is my suspicion that most club players would greedily jump at the chance to play Qh4 check given the opportunity (myself included). This is why i'm considering adopting it, as this line starts at move 3, so there is automatically a narrow number of variations. Learn it well and it could be a real weapon.

Here's an example, Ivanchuk v Karjakin (So yeh, this is played by some top players, so i can't be so bad)

@Marinkatomb

GM John Shaw's massive Kings Gambit book published in 2013 claimed that 3.Bc4 was refuted (by Nc6 I think it was) so you may not get many Qh4's these days.

Yes fxe5 is terrible but White saw that the pawn was not protected, didn't look any further and thus was caught in a trap I had learned from a book.

@Ragwort
Yes i had a look at the engine evaluation and it does show black is better after Nc6. It is the kind of move you need to know is good though, I can't see any club player looking at that position for the first time and going 'Oh yeh, Nc6 is clearly the best'. The position just screams 'GIVE A CHECK!!!'

@marinkatomb said

Here's an example, Ivanchuk v Karjakin (So yeh, this is played by some top players, so i can't be so bad)

Why not
17. Bxf4

Sadly I just do not understand top flight games.

@wolfgang59

I can't see a tactical refutation of Ndxf4 or Bxf4 at move 17 so I think c3 is about making a useful consolidating move while waiting for Black to reveal how he wants to set his position up. By protecting d4 with pawn white frees the e2 knight to attack the f pawn as well and adds flexibility to his position and maybe makes the e5 push more stable. Certainly by the time he gets his knight to f6 a few moves later white is looking very good.

@Marinkatomb
The following game is an improvement on Karjakin's play at move 7.

It is very cool and interesting that, after White's 7th move, I only have 3 games in my database, and all from this century.

As a side note, I have Shaw's book (among several on the KG I own, although his is the size of an old American telephone book), but whenever I play in a thematic tournament here, we are out of the book by move 7 or so. There are depths yet to be plumbed.

@marinkatomb said
Ok interesting, thanks for that. I have to say, fxe5 is a dreadful move! Why not Nf3 🤔

I play 1..d6 as black and have a similar system for when white plays fxe5??

1.e4 ..d6 f4 ..e5 fxe5 ..Qh5 where black picks up material for fun.

The thing that interests me about the KG is lines like this..

1.e4 ..e5 f4 ..exf4 Bc4, inviting the check on h4. Amazingly, the ...[text shortened]... .Bf4 Rc8 38.Ng4 Bg7 39.Ne3 Bf8 40.Ra7+ Kc6 41.R1a6 Kb5 42.Nxd5 Rg8 43.c4+ Nxc4 44.Nc3+ 1-0

[/pgn]

I play this variation a lot and with success! fools black into thinking its a quick easy mate.

@Marinkatomb
I encounter it far more here , on the internet , than OTB in Scotland

@ragwort said
@Marinkatomb

GM John Shaw's massive Kings Gambit book published in 2013 claimed that 3.Bc4 was refuted (by Nc6 I think it was) so you may not get many Qh4's these days.

Yes fxe5 is terrible but White saw that the pawn was not protected, didn't look any further and thus was caught in a trap I had learned from a book.

Nigel Short thinks that White's biggest advantage is that Black has so many reasonable choices that he may confuse himself! I tend to play the Cunningham as black (3. … Be7) simply because the threat of a check on h4 is annoying for White.

BiggDoggProblem often creates KG tournaments in the Gambit Fantasy Club, and they fill up quick, so I think the KG is pretty popular.

My personal biggest successes a White come by taking the game to an ending, as White has two center pawns and good piece placement- and sometimes an uncastled king that looked risky in the opening becomes well-placed in the ending.

Sometimes the attacks are there, but I think KG players lose more due to single-mindedness rather than any flaw inherent in the opening.