Assuming gambit players are slew enough to play correct
gambits with enough positional compensation in any case
wouldnt it more wiser for average players to deline gambits ?

For example after e4 e5 f4 Bc5!? the not so well known Bardeleben
(instead of the more wellknown d5, Falkbeer) there's not much
special anymore in this position for white; last game in
my CA7.1 database gave 0-1 in Fiedler-Zaragatski, Germany 2002.

Example 2 the (rare) Zilbermintz Benoni-countergambit declined:
after d4 c5!? b4!? the famous Zilbermintz Benoni gambit
black can just reply with b6 or e6 (instead of bxc4), after
which white cant come up with anything interesting anymore
Next time i'll try to decline one of Sloan's gambits..
best regards
ChAn
PS MCGrew why do you call the CK Rasa-Studier gambit
Milner-Barry gambit which although true that Milner
played in 1932 in London this CK RS gambit, itsnt that
confusing coz Milner-Barry usually is associated
with French (with Be3) ?

--
Posted via http://web2news.com the faster web2news on the web

In article ,
"chessanalyst" wrote:

Assuming gambit players are slew enough to play correct
gambits with enough positional compensation in any case
wouldnt it more wiser for average players to deline gambits ?

Well, there are gambits that should be declined.

On the other hand, if a white gets exactly a pawn's worth of
compensation in a given gambit, that doesn't make it wrong to accept the
gambit. It just means that the position is just as balanced before the
gambit as it was afterwards--merely balanced in a different way.

If it suits your style to defend patiently and then use your extra pawn
to win, then you should accept the gambit.

Bear in mind that declining a gambit right off the bat is often not a
reasonable option. It's often better to grab the offered material and
hold it just until it can be returned at an advantageous time.

(Perhaps the canonical example of this would be in 1.e4 e5 2.d4 ed
3.Nf3 Nc6 4.c3 dc 5.Bc4 cb 6.Bb2 d5! This line is almost certainly
better for black than declining the pawn straightaway).

In article ,
jk wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 01:50:15 -0700, Ron
wrote:
(Perhaps the canonical example of this would be in 1.e4 e5 2.d4 ed
3.Nf3 Nc6 4.c3 dc 5.Bc4 cb 6.Bb2 d5! This line is almost certainly
better for black than declining the pawn straightaway).

after 7 exd5 6..d 5 looks like a countergambit to me;
personally i prefer d6, but if you like countergambits,

You'll rarely see ed, because the pawn now blocks the bishop, giving
black time to finish his development (and he's still up a pawn.)

Bxd5 is most common, when black returns all the material for a slightly
favorable endgame (7.Bxd5 Nf6! 8.Bxf7+ [to retreat the bishop is
essentially to admit that he doesn't have enough for the pawn--black is
developing with tempo and wlll soon neutralize the pressure] Kxf7 Qxd8
Bb4+! results in an equal-material position where black's queenside
pawns are slightly better than white's kingside pawns because of the
location of the kings, although I suspect that the position is probably
a draw with correct play).

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Ron wrote:

In article ,
jk wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 01:50:15 -0700, Ron
wrote:
(Perhaps the canonical example of this would be in 1.e4 e5 2.d4 ed
3.Nf3 Nc6 4.c3 dc 5.Bc4 cb 6.Bb2 d5! This line is almost certainly
better for black than declining the pawn straightaway).

after 7 exd5 6..d 5 looks like a countergambit to me;
personally i prefer d6, but if you like countergambits,

You'll rarely see ed, because the pawn now blocks the bishop, giving
black time to finish his development (and he's still up a pawn.)

Bxd5 is most common, when black returns all the material for a slightly
favorable endgame (7.Bxd5 Nf6! 8.Bxf7+ [to retreat the bishop is
essentially to admit that he doesn't have enough for the pawn--black is
developing with tempo and wlll soon neutralize the pressure] Kxf7 Qxd8
Bb4+! results in an equal-material position where black's queenside
pawns are slightly better than white's kingside pawns because of the
location of the kings, although I suspect that the position is probably
a draw with correct play).

Instead 9...Bb4+?? with material equality, Black should play 9...Nxd8
and keep the extra piece. Maybe you're thinking of the line with the
moves 3.Nf3 Nc6 omitted?

Fred Galvin wrote:

Instead 9...Bb4+?? with material equality, Black should play 9...Nxd8
and keep the extra piece. Maybe you're thinking of the line with the
moves 3.Nf3 Nc6 omitted?

I second that. After 1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Bc4 cxb2
5. Bxb2 d5 (Nordic or Danish Gambit) 6. exd5 is unusual, because the
pawn obstructs the white bishop while doing nothing for itself.

It´s a different matter with 3. Nf3 Nc6 inserted (Goering gambit).
After 4. c3 dxc3 5. Bc4 cxb2 6. Bxb2 Black gets a playable game with
6...Bb4+ but 6...d5 would be a mistake because of 7. exd5. Black
now has to move the Nc6 again giving White a really big advantage
in development. For example: 7...Nb8 (not best) 8. 0-0 Nf6? 9. Re1+
Be7 10. Ba3. Whatever Black does, he has serious difficulties
developing his kingside and getting his king into safety.

Claus-Juergen