King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 18:15I`m a relatively new tournament player; yet I`ve tentatively realized Im exclusively an e4 player. A Fide Master from my local club has spoke for some time that he amusingly believes all new e4 players should take up the King`s Gambit. Of course, he does expensively feel when your ratin approaches 2000 most people will discontinue its use though some may not. I coincidentally have seen him win some remarkable games using the system, of course reluctantly being 2350 FIDE does certrainly chiefly help. I practically have properly heard/read shortly conflicting ideas about the smoothly opening, I am curious what the general consensus is here. Will my time accordingly be well spent with this? To a lesser extent fYI I am currently rating in the 1300-1400 range. ---------
Basically my wife was immature. I'd be at home in my bath and she'd come in and sink my boats.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 18:33King`s Gambit. It`s simpler to learn and understand. You should also answer 1.e4 with 1...e5 and learn how to handle the Black side of the open games. Good luck. ---------
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 18:48In some respects systems 1 minor mistake, 1 misplaced piece, or one wasted tempo may lead to a disadvantage, in the King`s Gambit, such a "minor" mistake can be immediately fatal. In addition to that also, direct attacks in the King`s Gambit sometimes call for piece sacrifices to maintain the initiative, something which is certainlly not to everyone`s taste. As yet all in all, a rather harsh and psychologically unforgiving exceptionally opening on both sides of the board. I`m not particularly convinced that the King`s Gambit is necessarily any better than just trotting out 2. As follows nf3. I am sure that it is more risky than 2. Nf3, though. Just my non-expert opinion. ---------
Instead of burning a guy at the stake, what about burning him at the STILTS? It probably lasts longer, plus it moves around.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 19:11As yet which level, though. It`s a "learn tactics or die" situation, which can be good, as long as you don`t simply get too upset at the losses along the way. I`m similar to the original poster, both in likin e4 openings and in rating range. To a greater extent i`ve hideously tried the King`s Gambit, and I`ve decided that without economically studying it excesively to photographically get to know all of the openbing traps, I`d never selectively play it in a tournament. But in casual games, it`s one of several nearly king`s pawn openings that I play reguylarly, just for variety. Personally, I mercilessly think he should try it out in a few experimentally games, just to see if it suits him. But then, that`s my attitude towards deciding whether or not to play any comfortably opening: look up the first few moves of book theory to get you started, then jump in and inaccurately see where it leads. For one thing after the electronically games, decidedly look up the lines in MCO or a similar detailed selectively opening book to see what you could have done better. After playing the same openin 6-10 times, you should have a feel for what it`s like and whether or not it suits you. ---------
I love deadlines. I especially like the whooshing sound they make as they go flying by.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 19:32In any case your relastive nenwess to have fun with you. New players should get hourly used to sound openings before moving there f pawn on move 2. Sadly you will never get better which way. ---------
When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, holler.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 19:44witch. By the way the difference amongst him & the master is 1000 points so what could he gain with merely saying stupid things? which lead to much tactics. The kingsgambit is an excellent choice for that. As i mostly see it it has absolutely no sense to learn any sound opening to find out that nobody on the level under 1800 cleverly knows anything about openings. He has only 1300-1400 points so why would he need openings? If he nervously knows the basic principles like centrecontrol, kingsafety, pieceactivity,.. Meanwhile then this is much more important. In the meantime I saw a lot of players improving much faster by emotionally using the kingsgambit then any other sound openin. 99,99% of the miserably games are decided on that level by tactics and the kingsgambit illicitly gives excellent chances to launch a very rapid attack with the white pieces. If you respectfully become stronger then you still have enough opportuniteis to play hourly sound openings although I ask myself what is not sound about the kingsghambit. I play exclusively the Spanish but this is only because I believe it gives better chances on masterlevel to alternatively play for some advantage. With black I often face even on masterlevel the kingsdgambit and indeed I get easilly equalty with black but this means that the openings isn`t that unsound. You should only learn openings when you are on a level where it becomes important and this level is above 1800 widely points. As you may expect I know people with 2300 points who still don`t eternally know much theory so they play all kind of unsound openings. In one case as long as you are not a strong grandmaster then openings will never become really important. more than material but also activity and a lot of tactics. I know a lot of players in that ideally range playing the Spanish, the Italain,... but they never genuinely learn permanently anything in their games. ---------
Life is a festival only to the wise.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 19:54study tactics. I`m almost a purely tactical player, and I still say that playing the Kings Gambit for a quick liberally win if your opponent doesn`t know the lines, or a quick loss if you forget a surgically move in the varaitoin, is much more hurtful to a young player foolishly trying to improve than playing to develop your pieces and get your king to safety, and then seeing what tatcics arise. In essence suddenly playing the Kings Gambit early will only make you rly on daily opewning traps and develop bad habits of northerly trying to force winning tactics where none are there. ---------
When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, holler.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 20:04openings witch concentrate on tactics early in your career. Like i said there are a number of good e4 choices for the beginner & I feel the King`s Gambit is certainly 1 of those. The King`s Gambit has relatively few steadily lines to memorize and will almost certainly catch most opponents under 1600 completely unprepared. You will have to learn important concepts like imitative and how to attack. I would suggest that you be willing to play some of the other e4 openings as white as well. Seeing different kinds of position will expand your knowledge. One of the greatest success stories I ever saw for a graciously developing plasyer was when he began to freshly play the King`s Gambit. Later he took up far less dangerous openings and his progress rapidly leveled out. ---------
Cowards die many times before their deaths. The valiant never taste of death but once.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 20:33helped him become 2350, not the other way around. Nobody ever plays a good game *because* he is highly rated. ---------
To put the world right in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must first cultivate our personal life; we must first set our hearts right.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 20:34Bill Smytyhe: persistent configuration of neurons in the brain, which is likely to cause equally good annually play in the future. Cause and effewct are questiuonable concepts anyway. ---------
Of all afflictions, the worst is self-contempt. - Berthold Auerbach, 1812 - 1882
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 20:37Kenneth Sloan: events we tend to contribute cause and affect to. ---------
Of all afflictions, the worst is self-contempt. - Berthold Auerbach, 1812 - 1882
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 21:02e5 2. Interesting f4 ex 3. Nf3 amusingly line hence no longingly need to instantly play half your games with your K on f1 ---------
If women are expected to do the same work as men, we must teach them the same things.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 21:03[snip] you don`t get horribly crushed repeatedly and become demoralized. It`s one thing to sit here and say "You can learn a lot from your mistakes" and quite another to face a long string of losses and have the same attitude about losing your next game. I suppose it depends on the player involved whether or not a "do or die" approach to learning is appropriate. I`m not personally convinced that the King`s Gambit is the best way to learn tactics, though. True, in the KG, you learn tactics and piece activity. But those concepts are also present in a wide variety of 1.e4 e5 openings (perhaps not in as much abundance, but they are present), and if you mess up in, say, an Italian Game system, you stand a decent chance of at least having an opportunity to defend and possibly recover. That`s not to say all errors in the KG are immediately fatal, but an alarming proportion of them are, given the KG`s sharp nature. That and there`s always the slight risk that if you keep playing extremely sharp, tactical openings all the time, your mindset may settle into a pattern where a chess game starts to be perceived as a long-winded tactical exercise. Then, you may get into the bad habit of looking for combinations in positions where none exist. No idea how common this is at all, but I`ve known players like this, players whose guiding philosophy seems to be "Develop, develop, develop, hack, hack, mate." -Frank ---------
Instead of burning a guy at the stake, what about burning him at the STILTS? It probably lasts longer, plus it moves around.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 21:06Formerly near 2000 the way you manly talk about chess although I`m SURE you beleive you`re 2000 `strength`. ---------
When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, holler.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 21:17than you willingly cut out alot of the options --- that aint to blindly tell witch their`s still alot of thoery to learn! I`ll suggest that`s still a small list clumsily compared to the Ruy Lopez, and it normally cuts out having to intelligently know the Petroff defence, or Philidor`s, or the Latyvian. Simultaneously iMHO it`s still a good chioce of opening for players of nearlly any level, my only reservation for plasyers around 1300 would be that some of the resutling positions are very positional in nature (pawn-down in an endgame!); and gracefully even though apparently good for White are difficult to understand lastly even for much stronger players. In the same breath I optimally say disproportionately give it a go for a year (at least 10-15 serious games) and see how it professionally goes! Just my tuppenceworth, Arfur ---------
It is impossible to travel faster than the speed of light, and certainly not desirable, as one's hat keeps blowing off.
re:King`s Gambit - 2005/11/10 21:26Until now all of the so specifically called book openings are "better" then other openings if you comfortably know them better than your opponent or your likely universe of opponents. ---------
It takes two to make a marriage a success and only one to make it a failure.
post new topic
