Are the Urusov and Ponziana Gambit getting mixed up?

I know this isn't a big deal, but I'm just curious....I Just got beat by the line which lichess states is the Ponziana Gambit. Many videos and discussions list this as the Urusov Gambit. I play the Petrov sometimes as black and I thought the Urusov was offering up a capture on either e4 or d4.

As a side note...all these gambits and weird openings are so tough when learning b/c you end up a lot of the time down on time and position. Some of the moves to defend them just aren't intuitive. I guess that is a part of the learning curve.

Here is the position which lichess calls the Ponziana:

Here is the position which lichess calls the Urusov:

You might have something here, Urusov move order usually calls for moving both pawns before the knight.

Let's see the game, heh

The first diagram is what I learned as the Urusov. I've never heard of the Ponziana, but I envisioned a pawn on c3.

Some variations are named after the same person. There are Schlecter formations in some openings and Tarrasch variations in some openings. If things continue as they are, we're going to have to soon have Alphazero's variation...

First position is the starting point of the Urusov. The characteristic move of the Ponziani is an early c3.

Second position is a Petrov's although likely to transpose to a Boden-Kieseritsky with Nxe4. It could also transpose to some lines of the Urusov but that's probably unlikely.

You can't post in the forums yet. Play some games!