accepting gambits

[Geoff Chandler]

Not forgetting the Jerome Gambit when two pieces are sacced.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. Bxf7+ Kxf7 5. Nxe5+ Nxe5

Back to pawns, was there not a rule in the Danish Gambit. 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3... The first pawn you must take, the 2nd pawn you can take and the 3rd pawn you may take (or something like that.) I use to play 3...Qe7 because Tarrasch played it once. As I said I very rarely accepted a gambit pawn. Always 2...d5 in the King's Gambit. But theoretical piece sacs you rarely have a choice, you have to take them.

[John Clarke]

Back to pieces: there's the Vienna Variation in the Queen's Gambit, which if Black is feeling reckless can go:

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Bb4+ 5.Nc3 dxc4 6.e4 c5 7.e5 cxd4 8.Qa4+ Nc6 9.O-O-O Bd7 10.Ne4 Be7 11.exf6 gxf6 12.Bh4 Rc8 13.Kb1 Na5

- but White should come out on top, I believe, if he finds the right lines.

[Derek Sinclair]

Derek,

Have you investigated the Swiss Gambit?

This is a gambit involving no pieces or pawns given away.

There is also the arriving late at the board to annoy your opponent gambit.

how does the swiss one work then

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Derek,

Have you investigated the Swiss Gambit?

This is a gambit involving no pieces or pawns given away.

There is also the arriving late at the board to annoy your opponent gambit.

how does the swiss one work then

Mr Upham was attempting to be funny...

The Swiss Gambit is the term used to refer to losing (or drawing) in early (usually first) round of a tournament that is using Swiss pairing rules to determine a winner. The idea is that losing early means you may be able to romp through the field with a 100% score for the rest of the tournament, the main advantage being that you can arrive at the final round with momentum behind you, and win to overhaul the early leaders.

It can also yield some advantage in colour pairings. Though how effective it is, I don't know.

[IM Jack Rudd]

I once joint won a tournament with the rare Reversed Swiss Gambit: I won my opening game, and the rest of the top five seeds all drew or took half-point byes, and thus I got to 4/4 without meeting any of them. (My last round game was a draw against Charles Cobb, and his brother won his game to share first with me.)

[Ian Thompson]

It can also yield some advantage in colour pairings. Though how effective it is, I don't know.

It's going to backfire as soon as the group of leaders consists of an odd number of players and you, as the highest rated player in the score group half a point behind them, get the up float.

[John Clarke]

It also fails if there's too many in the section, so that you never get to play the guy who wins it half a point ahead of you. Cases in point: the Under-160s at Islington 1972, and LARA 1975, both won by players with clean scores in front of several on 5.5/6.

[Jonathan Rogers]

On theoretical piece sac lines - these are interesting, and, I would guess, considerably rarer then exchange sacs. Off the top of my head, I wonder whether they fall into two main groups - huge attacks sacrifices (or not so huge) as in so many 1 e4 e5 games, and connected pawns sacrifices. Of the latter, there are various Chigorin or QGA lines which involve capturing on c4, and later sacrificing a knight on a5 for a phalanx of queenside pawns, French Tarrasch lines where knight is sacrificed for passed d and e pawns (or are these not really theoretical lines as such?) Dragon lines involving Black captures on ... g4 (same query), and who can forget Bronstein's 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 ed5 Na5 6 d3 h6 7 Nf3 e4 8 dec Nc4 9 Qd4 Nb6 10 c4 ?!

Or, I don't know, maybe there are numerous varieties. There must be numerous English and Open Sicilian lines where White sacs a knight on d5 for a combination of attacking options, better co-ordination, intrusive pawns and wrecked opposition pawn structures. But again I don't know whether these are particular contested theoretical lines or just general themes arising from the opening,

[Jonathan Rogers]

Just remembered a very long line in the Open Lopez, where Black has connected pawns for the piece. I think it featured in a well known Timman v Smyslov game - no idea whether it is still a contested line.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Just remembered a very long line in the Open Lopez, where Black has connected pawns for the piece. I think it featured in a well known Timman v Smyslov game - no idea whether it is still a contested line.

Any chance of posting the moves of that line (and the game)?

[Joey Stewart]

There's a few gambits black can go for in the ruy lopez but i think the marshall is perhaps the standout - really tough to defend for white, in fact I don't think many top GMs even allow the position to happen anymore.

[Matt Mackenzie]

They generally don't allow it because it is now reckoned a likely draw with best play.

[Kevin Thurlow]

The Marshall is used in Correspondence chess as a drawing weapon (also Berlin and Sveshnikov, but they're not gambits.)

[Jonathan Rogers]

Just remembered a very long line in the Open Lopez, where Black has connected pawns for the piece. I think it featured in a well known Timman v Smyslov game - no idea whether it is still a contested line.

Any chance of posting the moves of that line (and the game)?

It's Timman v Smyslov, Bad Lauterberg 1979 (discussed in Kasparov's Great Predecessors, vol II, p.373).

Whether this is a gambit or an opening line is something of a question. The latter is perhaps more accurate, but credit to anyone who can articulate the distinction ..

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Both? Surely in a linkable database?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XxqS31npSRY

YouTube video will have to do for now!

Oops. Wrong game? That is Tilburg?

The clothing and hairstyles in the 1970s!

https://www.schachfreunde-hannover.de/v ... auterberg/