English Chess Forum

Not counting the queens gambit ( which is head and shoulders above the rest, and not a true gambit if white wants his pawn back) which gambit openings would you say are the most troublesome to deal with?

My top 5 would be these.

1. Benko gambit - seems to get such consistently good positions for black that it is rare to see white winning.

2.Marshall gambit (ruy Lopez) - not seen for a while but nevertheless a powerful space gaining gambit which almost always works out well for bleak

3.morra gambit - this one is extremely user friendly and requires little more then natural development of pieces for a very dominant position.

4. Blackmar diemer gambit - another very easy to play gambit, typically ending with white crashing down the f file around move 30.

5.wing gambit - these can be used against a few black systems but all tend to share a similar level of central dominance and leaves white in a very comfortable position.

Anyone else have opinions on what should make the list?

Joey Stewart wrote:
Anyone else have opinions on what should make the list?

There are a couple that look like beginner's blunders that are quite playable.

In the Saemisch
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-O 6. Be3 c5 (allowing dxc5, Qxd8 and Bxc5)

and Svidler's line in the Gruenfeld
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 Bg7 which allows Bxf6 followed by cxd5 or Nxd5

Also there's the Icelandic and its Caro counterpart

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. c4 e6 or 3. .. c6

If they don't know any theoretical methods, the Kings Gambit can be dangerous to face for players below 150.

So many to choose from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_gambits

If objective then definitely not 3,4 and 5 - and not by some distance At least choose stuff where White keeps his normal sort of edge rather than black trying for one. Things like the anti Moscow, Nardojf poisoned pawn, Marshall gambit vs the triangle etc.

The Marshall also has a rather stronger claim to top spot than the Benko - tons of exceedingly high level games and no real progress for white.

Roger de Coverly wrote: If they don't know any theoretical methods, the Kings Gambit can be dangerous to face for players below 150.

As in Federov - Adams, for instance.

I’d definitely agree with Benko as number 1 - black gets a totally equal and (if white isn’t accurate) better game, for a mere pawn, which to be honest I never really miss and often win a central pawn for later. I started playing it a year ago and have yet to loose with it in about 15 games.

Sicilian wing gambit is also a good one - it’s easy for black to panic and end up with cramped pieces and no centre. I wouldn’t play the French counterpart though as the declined variations (the most common in my experience) are pretty boring to play for white.

I did have some success with the king’s bishops gambit in the minors when I was an e4 player. I suspect that it would be tantamount to suicide against stronger players though.

Not sure the name of this one (we’ll call it the Petrov gambit) but I used to catch loads of people out as black with 1.e4, e5 2.Nf3, Nf6 3.Nxe5, Nc6 4.Nxc6, dxc6 5.d3, Bc5 6.Bg5, Nxe4 7.Bxd8, Bxf2+ etc - of course 6.Be2 stops all the fun, and black has to try some hand to mouth existence with a 0-0-0 plan, but there is little compensation then. I gave up playing the line when several opponents in a row insta-found the move and I had a pretty bleak defence to look forward to.

There is this gambit:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Nc3

Staunton says this move was "introduced" in some games between Horwitz and himself in 1851.

Play may continue:

4...Nxc3 5.dxc3 f6.

Play now seems to me difficult for both sides. Who is better?

John Townsend wrote:There is this gambit:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Nc3

Staunton says this move was "introduced" in some games between Horwitz and himself in 1851.

Play may continue:

4...Nxc3 5.dxc3 f6.

Play now seems to me difficult for both sides. Who is better?

Ah, the Boden-Kieseritzky Gambit. My experience with the line suggests that Black is better, provided his next few moves are accurate. The main line runs 6.O-O d6 7.Nh4 g6 8.f4 Qe7 9.f5 Qg7.

(Black's also perfectly OK if he declines the gambit with 4...Nc6.)

Joey Stewart wrote: 2.Marshall gambit (ruy Lopez) - not seen for a while

Among the top guys, the line with 12.d3 and 16.Be3 is currently fashionable and not looking like much fun for Black. Of course, these things change and we lower forms of life only find out some time later.

King gambit

NickFaulks wrote:we lower forms of life

Surprisingly astute

I'd add:

The Shabalov-Shirov gambit
The Marshall gambit (from the Semi-Slav)
The Elephant gambit

as being very playable in the William Lombardy sense.

Jack Rudd said:

Ah, the Boden-Kieseritzky Gambit. My experience with the line suggests that Black is better, provided his next few moves are accurate. The main line runs 6.O-O d6 7.Nh4 g6 8.f4 Qe7 9.f5 Qg7.

An interesting line seems to be 6.Nh4 (i.e. without castling).

I'd like to put a good word in for the Budapest Gambit. It can be very effective at blitz!

You might expect me to endorse the Elephant Gambit but I expect the Latvian Gambit is better.

I am pretty sure the King's Gambit is effective against players well above 150 as well! But White will need to know it too - it often occurs to me that players are attracted to gambits because it avoids "boring theory" but often one needs to learn lots of "exciting theory" to get anywhere with a gambit; so they are really not time savers.

From Joey's list above, I have an idea that computers are most likely to try the Wing gambit. They would never try the Benko Gambit - play it against an engine and they will likely do what no human does, and crush you on the queenside!