The first gambit a beginner should learn and at which rating • page 4/4 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

A gambit is per definition an opening theme.

It is categorized by a sacrifice that will lead to potential future advantages for the one playing it (most common: development or space advantage leading to attacking potential). Or it leads to complications and narrow and potentially unknown lines for the opponent.

This is why not all gambits are sound (e.g. the Stafford can be easily refuted with all natural moves by a 11xx player). Evan’s gambit, Scotch gambit, Queens gambit are Rock solid and there’s more that are harder to reach. Some are more dubious or coming from slightly unnatural lines but if you think about it any mid or end game sac is some kind of gambit tactic where you hope to accomplish something. It’s the essence of chess, unless you think that agreeing to a draw after 15 moves is exactly that.

Materialism is one of the deadly chess sins after all. Now I am not saying to just throw away material, but you shouldnt cling to material so tightly that it blinds you to opportunities that can arise in your games. Be it a pawn sac, an exchange sac or even a full piece to blow open the opponent's king position, an improving chess player needs to develop a responsible sense for these opportunities. Not only offensively, but also in order to sense when his own king might be in danger.

That said a beginner should probably just have fun with classic gambits, and not get too carried away with exchange or piece sacrifices unless the pay off is immediate.

@Rookitiki said in #30: > A gambit is per definition an opening theme. > > It is categorized by a sacrifice that will lead to potential future advantages for the one playing it (most common: development or space advantage leading to attacking potential). Or it leads to complications and narrow and potentially unknown lines for the opponent. > > This is why not all gambits are sound (e.g. the Stafford can be easily refuted with all natural moves by a 11xx player). Evan’s gambit, Scotch gambit, Queens gambit are Rock solid and there’s more that are harder to reach. Some are more dubious or coming from slightly unnatural lines but if you think about it any mid or end game sac is some kind of gambit tactic where you hope to accomplish something. It’s the essence of chess, unless you think that agreeing to a draw after 15 moves is exactly that. Materialism is one of the deadly chess sins after all. Now I am not saying to just throw away material, but you shouldnt cling to material so tightly that it blinds you to opportunities that can arise in your games. Be it a pawn sac, an exchange sac or even a full piece to blow open the opponent's king position, an improving chess player needs to develop a responsible sense for these opportunities. Not only offensively, but also in order to sense when his own king might be in danger. That said a beginner should probably just have fun with classic gambits, and not get too carried away with exchange or piece sacrifices unless the pay off is immediate.

Yoes1958

#32

KING'S GAMBIT. Most of my opponents in the 1300-1450 range don't know it well, and it's a fun to play. and you can create a crushing attack if not defended against well. Of course, it's been refuted so it's only good against lower rated players like me :)

ps. It's a courtesy to always accept the KG when offered :)

KING'S GAMBIT. Most of my opponents in the 1300-1450 range don't know it well, and it's a fun to play. and you can create a crushing attack if not defended against well. Of course, it's been refuted so it's only good against lower rated players like me :) ps. It's a courtesy to always accept the KG when offered :)

NatalijaFirenkova

#33

The one you enjoy the most at the level you feel like it

HypersupremeNitro

#34

botez gambit all the way

Melvintnh327

#35

I normally don't play gambits, because they normally give us less advantage instead.

Alientcp

#36

Scotch and/or wings gambit.