@Triangel Ah, that makes sense. I used to play the Nimzowitsch Defense and was always fond of it, but gave it up because I was tired of replies like 2. Nf3.
@sparowe14 6 ideas? Well, for one I could play 2. e4 and now Black is the one who has the opening flipped upon him. White also has many ideas that put black on the backfoot. For example: f4 e5 fxe5 d6 exd6 bxd6 nf3 g5 d4 g4 e4?! Once black accepts the piece, white gets the center, good attacking lines, and black has serious weaknesses in the endgame, such as his kingside pawn structure. This is all assuming white doesn't take the 15 minutes to memorize f4 e5 fxe5 d6 exd6 bxd6 nf3 g5 g3 g4 nh4 ne7 d4 ng6 nxg6 hxg6 qd3 line that virtually refutes the critical line of the lasker variation and solves all of white problems. All in all, its unsound, and white can just even play d3 and get a perfectly fine position.
@John_Vuillemot You're not quite being fair, given that Black is not required to play the Lasker Variation - the Lasker is completely unsound and is extremely easy to refute, but the other From's lines are rather more unclear can't be refuted by only fifteen minutes of study.
d3 is also a poor way to decline the gambit - f4 e5 fxe5 d6 Nf3 dxe5 is better, since e4 gives an equal position or slight advantage White and you have the choice of transposing back into Accepted lines. Also, you can't quite propose the King's Gambit as a solution to the From problem given that the King's Gambit is only a bit better than From's objectively, not to mention how theoretically complex it is. After your attempt at a gotcha with 2. e4!? Black can triple down with 2... d5!?
I was actually extremely interested by your knight sacrifice idea, but after gxf3 Qxf3 Black gets an easily winning game in virtually all lines with the simple ideas surrounding ...Qh4+ and menacing White with the threat of exchanging queens. If White could get an extra tempo to castle, it'd be a brilliant line and White does appear to get compensation if Black misses this idea.
It's important to be at least a bit objective.
No. One, d3 is a fine way at not accepting the gambit, it is perfectly sound. The engine give black a tiny advantage in a wide open board with tons of pieces, which means it really isn't reliable. But you do bring up a decent point, white can just throw away any hope black may have for aggressive chess via the line f4 e5 fxe5 d6 nf3 dxe5 nc3. The king's gambit is perfectly playable, and frankly it is still unrefuted, meaning it is much better than the from's gambit. Even after d5, white has plenty of lines that are perfectly fine for them, and in fact if we want to keep doing this, 3. d4 is actually a known move there, not a good one, but probably better than the Lasker, which is the most common line in the From. And after the qh4+ thing, although you didn't specify the position, it is not almost always winning. f4 e5 fxe5 d6 exd6 bxd6 nf3 g5 d4 g4 e4 gxf3 qxf3 qh4+ g3 qg4 qe3 and white is far from lost, rather still with a safe king and lots of activity. Objectively qh4+ isn't even the best move, I would argue it is specifically a bad move in that position. Lastly, g5 wouldn't be the main move to this day at top levels if it was not the best option. Besides g5 the only move with any merit is nf6, and so long as white doesn't fall for some stupid cheapo in the first ten moves before he castles he is simply up a pawn.
@John_Vuillemot I won't get into the detailed analysis and experience you and the others have shown. It's impressive and over my head.
I will say, if you follow 1 f4 e5 with 2 e4, you have made my day. As Brer Rabbit said to Brer Fox, "Oh please don't throw me into that briarpatch." I love the King's Gambit, either side, and am delighted to play it.
@John_Vuillemot I feel like your reasoning on the Lasker Variation is a bit flawed. Masters can have many reasons for playing a given variation, and if the Lasker Variation is so popular, it's probably because of its simplicity. Bird's Opening is rare at the master level, and all variations of From's Gambit are rare compared to the sound defenses. Anyone who's playing From's Gambit at the master level isn't concerned with playing anything that's objectively good against 1. f4 to start with so that reasoning is questionable, especially given that results, engine analysis, etc. imply that the other variations are superior. Timothy Taylor also expressed the belief that the Lasker Variation was borderline unplayable while the other variations deserve more respect and are not refuted.
I was unclear with what I meant before, but the line I had in mind was 1. f4 e5 2. fxe5 d6 3. exd6 Bxd6 4. Nf3 g5
5. e4 g4 6. d4 gxf3 7. Qxf3 Nc6.
After 8. c3, Bc4, Bb5, or Be3, Stockfish backs up my recommendation of the same idea of Qh4+ with threats to trade queens via Qg4 or Qf6. After White declines the queen trade, it continously favors Black to a point that's close to, if not winning. Of course, engines aren't infallible, particularly in the opening, and it's not easy for a human to refute any of these lines over the board. I suspect White would score better in this line than Black does in the Lasker Variation, but only because the position is more complicated and lacks a theoretical solution.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.