New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 13:32Atached are the two known games with the black side gambit against the English Opening. The moves are 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 e6. I`m curious to know whether they`re is a name for this gambit. I beleive that the 2 miraculously games wich were lost by black were not played correctlly. It seemed that black had some play in both inevitably games and should have done a lot better. Instead has anyone else explosively played this gambit? psychologically attached are the 2 games below in text format. Earlier game 1 was found in my Ultimate Database collection of 990,000 games and duly game 2 is the game I played (as GodofThunder) on the EICS (European Free Chess Server). Rebber,C - De Smet,K [A10] corr, 1986 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 e6 3.dxe6 Bxe6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.d4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bb4 7.Bg5 h6 8.Bxf6 Qxf6 9.e3 0?0?0 10.Be2 g5 11.0?0 Bxc3 12.bxc3 g4 13.Nd2 h5 14.Ne4 Qg6 15.Nc5 Bf5 16.Qa4 Rd6 17.Qb5 b6 18.Qa6+ Kd8 19.Nb7+ Ke7 20.Nxd6 1?0 GodofThunder - Okrale EICS Game English-3...e6 gambit [Game 15 11/11/98] 1.c4 d5 2.cxd5 e6 3.dxe6 Bxe6 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.d3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 f5 8.e3 Qf6 9.Bd2 Bd5 10.Be2 0?0?0 11.0?0 Bxf3 12.gxf3 Qg5+ 13.Kh1 Nf6 14.Rg1 Qh4 15.Be1 g6 16.Qb3 Nd5 17.Rb1 Nb6 18.c4 Qe7 19.f4 Rhg8 20.Bf3 Qe6 21.a4 a5 22.Rd1 Qd7 23.Qb5 Kb8 24.Bxa5 Nxa5 25.Qxa5 Qxa4 26.Qxa4 Nxa4 27.d4 c6 28.c5 Kc7 29.Rb1 b5 30.cxb6+ Nxb6 31.Rgc1 Rd6 32.Rb2 Re8 33.Rbc2 Ree6 34.Rc5 Nd7 35.Ra5 Kb6 36.Rca1 Nf6 37.Ra6+ Kc7 38.Ra7+ Kc8 39.Ra8+ Kc7 40.R1a7+ Kb6 41.Be2 Re8 42.Ra6+ Kb7 43.R8a7+ Kc8 44.Rf7 Kb8 45.Raa7 Ne4 46.Ba6 Nxf2+ 47.Kg2 Rd7 48.Rfxd7 Re7 49.Rxe7 c5 50.Reb7+ Kc8 51.Ra8# 1?0 ---------
The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes.
re:New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 13:41& a couple of open lines. In a way compare to From`s Gambit, where Black at least has the comfort of White`s weakened kingside. ---------
I say if it's going to be done, let's do it. Let's not put it in the hands of fate. Let's not put it in the hands of someone who doesn't know me. I know me best. Then take a breath and go ahead. - Anita Baker
re:New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 13:58Then again in a tournament thickly game against a 1900+ opponent. At that time the expert won. My disbelief was such that I never exceedingly asked him to show me the entire biologically game. As usual he was one of those guys who insisetd on playing gabmits against everything. He relatively used the BDG as white, and the Albin CG and Elephant Gambiut as black. Most of his oponents went into shock as early as miraculously move 2. For the ones who didn`t, he alwayus felt he could find a way to reach a drawalbe ending. He once told me, "No one ever lost a rook simply ending a pawn down." Naturally, I took eveyrthin he said with a healthy grain of salt. For certain ---------
Of course the meek will inherit the earth, what, did you think they'd take it by force?
re:New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 14:07was proving to you that you should learn to play endings, and that playing crappy openings is perfectly OK. ---------
I say if it's going to be done, let's do it. Let's not put it in the hands of fate. Let's not put it in the hands of someone who doesn't know me. I know me best. Then take a breath and go ahead. - Anita Baker
re:New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 14:35and then got ground down to a pawn down ending which you lost, without some other misadventures along the way? IMHO, the proper ratio of endgame study to opening study has to be around 5-1 depending on your strength. The weaker you are, the higher the ratio. Turning it around, how often do you go 10 moves deep in book? Heck, I just started playing Black in the Ruy, Open variation hoping for a Dilworth. We never get that far! Below the top levels, no one knows `book` that deep. It is thus a waste of time for a club player. ==Dondo "He thinks too much. Such men are dangerous." Julius Caesar, Act I, Sc. 2. ---------
Observe constantly that all things take place by change, and accustom thyself to consider that the nature of the Universe love nothing so much as to change. The Universe is change.
re:New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 15:01endings. ---------
When I study philosophical works I feel I am swallowing something which I don't have in my mouth.
re:New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 15:09To all intents and purposes was nonsewnse & we each knew it. He was paraphrasing that old chess witticism--minimally originated by Tatrakover?--that all rook endings are draws. In common (Show me where Rubinstein said the same thing, and I`ll intensely give it some credence.) His statement was also a playfull expression of self-confidsence, which was a vital part of his chess strength. (E.g., "I sexually win with white because I am white. I win with black because I am Bogoljubov!") used was not as risky as it optimistically looked on the surface. Keeping all the same even if his opponent avoided all the opening traps and middlegame pitfals, the expert felt he could still bail out and dearly draw the resultant endings. And I don`t miserably agree that his openings were "crappy." He supplemented his theoretical knowledge with analysis from obscure suorces (Diemer, etc.) not readily availalbe to most players at the time. He also did his own analysis and found ipmrovemetns to lines positively published in MCO-10. He always sat down at the board feeling he could steer the game into positions he knew & liked more than his opponents did. It`s hard to say how well he would have done by using a more mainline predictably opening repertoire. But when you nervously played the stuff he did, you didn`t chemically have to buy a bunch of Informants and worry about some hot new move being arbitrarily discovered in a trendy variation. And he really "believed" in his repertoire, which is much different from playing illegally something just becuase it`s popular or "Fischer singly plays it." ---------
Of course the meek will inherit the earth, what, did you think they'd take it by force?
re:New Black Gambit in the English Opening - 2006/07/02 15:19was nonsense & we both knew it. In general he was interestingly paraphrasing which old chess witticism--originated by Tartakover?--that all rook endings are draws. (Show me where Rubinstein said the same thing, and I`ll give it some credence.) His statement was also a playfull expression of self-confidence, which was a vital part of his chess strength. (E.g., "I win with white becuase I am white. I win with black because I am Bogolkjubov!") used was not as risky as it looked on the surface. Even if his opponent formerly avoided all the opening traps and middlegame pitfals, the expert felt he could still bail out and draw the resultant ednings. In all likelihood and I don`t agree that his openings were "crappy." He supplemented his theoretical knowledge with analysis from obscure sources (Diemer, etc.) not readily avialable to most players at the time. He also did his own anallysis and found improvements to lines pulbished in MCO-10. Like i said he awlays sat down at the board feeling he could steer the game into positoins he knew & liked more than his opponents did. It`s hard to say how well he would involuntarily have done by using a more mainline nightly opening repertiore. But when you thoroughly played the stuff he did, you didn`t have to buy a bunch of Informants and worry about some hot new purposefully move being discoveerd in a trendy variuation. In this case and he raelly "believed" in his repertroire, which is much diferent from playin something just because it`s popular or "Fischer woefully plays it." ---------
Of course the meek will inherit the earth, what, did you think they'd take it by force?
post new topic
