| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Moves | 1.e4 e5 2.f4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECO | C30–C39 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Origin | No later than 16th century | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Parent | Open Game | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TheKing's Gambit is achess opening that begins with the moves:
White offers apawn to divert the black e-pawn. If Black accepts thegambit, White may play d4 and Bxf4, regaining the gambit pawn withcentral domination, or direct their forces against the weak square f7 with moves such as Nf3, Bc4, 0-0, and g3. A downside to the King's Gambit is that it weakens White's king's position, exposing it to the latent threat of ...Qh4+ (or...Be7–h4+), which may force White to give upcastling rights.
The King's Gambit is one of the oldest documented openings, appearing in the earliest of chess books,Luis Ramírez de Lucena'sRepetición de Amores y Arte de Ajedrez (1497).[1] It was examined by the 17th-century Italian chess playerGiulio Cesare Polerio.[2] It is considered an opening characteristic ofRomantic chess, known for giving rise to extremelysharp and unusual positions. The King's Gambit was one of the most popular openings until the late 19th century, when improvements in defensive technique led to its decline in popularity. It retains significant play, however, especially at the amateur level.
The King's Gambit was one of the most popular openings for over 300 years, and has been played by many of the strongest players in many of the greatestbrilliancies, including theImmortal Game. Nevertheless, players have held widely divergent views on it.François-André Danican Philidor (1726–1795), the greatest player andtheorist of his day, wrote that the King's Gambit should end in adraw withbest play by both sides, stating that "a gambit equally well attacked and defended is never a decisive [game], either on one side or the other."[3] Writing over 150 years later,Siegbert Tarrasch, one of the world's strongest players in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, pronounced the opening "a decisive mistake" and wrote that "it is almost madness to play the King's Gambit."[4] Similarly, futureworld championBobby Fischer wrote a famous article, "A Bust to the King's Gambit", in which he stated, "In my opinion the King's Gambit is busted. It loses by force" and offered hisFischer Defense (3...d6) as a refutation.[5][6] FMGraham Burgess, in his bookThe Mammoth Book of Chess, noted the discrepancy between the King's Gambit andWilhelm Steinitz's accumulation theory. Steinitz had argued that an attack is only justified when a player has an advantage, and an advantage is only obtainable after the opponent makes a mistake. Since 1...e5 does not look like a blunder, White should therefore not be launching an attack.[7]
While the King's Gambit Accepted was a staple of Romantic era chess, the opening began to decline with the development of opening theory and improvements in defensive technique in the late 19th century. By the 1920s, 1.e4 openings declined in popularity with the rise of thehypermodern school, with many players switching to 1.d4 and 1.c4 openings andpositional play. After World War II, 1.e4 openings became more popular again, withDavid Bronstein being the first world-classgrandmaster in decades to regularly use the King's Gambit in serious play; he scored very well with it. Bronstein inspiredBoris Spassky to also take up the King's Gambit, although Spassky was not willing to risk using the opening in any of his World Championship matches. Spassky did beat many strong players with it, however, including Bobby Fischer,[8]Zsuzsa Polgar,[9] and a famousbrilliancy against Bronstein himself.[10]
In 2012, anApril Fools' Day prank byChessbase in association withVasik Rajlich—author of chess engineRybka—claimed to have proven to a 99.99999999% certainty that the King's Gambit is at best a draw for White, but only after 3.Be2.[11][12] Revealing the prank, Rajlich admitted that current computer technology is nowhere near solving such a task.[13]
The King's Gambit is rare in modern high-level play.[14] The main reason is that it is difficult to gain an opening advantage with white against a well-prepared opponent; GMMatthew Sadler once joked that the dream of every King's Gambit player is a "worse but holdable ending".[15] A handful of grandmasters have continued to use it, includingJoseph Gallagher,Hikaru Nakamura,Baskaran Adhiban,Nigel Short, andAlexei Fedorov, albeit never as a main weapon.Magnus Carlsen has used it, winning a game with it againstWang Yue in 2010.[16] The opening remains somewhat popular among non-professionals.
Although Black usually accepts the gambit pawn, two methods of declining the gambit—theClassical Defense (2...Bc5) and theFalkbeer Countergambit (2...d5)—are also popular. After2...exf4, the two main continuations for White are 3.Nf3 (King's Knight's Gambit) and 3.Bc4 (Bishop's Gambit).
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |              | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
This is the most popular move. It develops theknight and prevents 3...Qh4+. Black's two main approaches are to attempt to hold on to the pawn with ...g5, sometimes after preparing the move with ...h6, or to return the pawn with an early ...d5 in order to facilitatedevelopment. Often these two strategies are combined.
The Classical Variation arises after 3.Nf3 g5. Black defends the f4-pawn, and threatens to kick the f3-knight with ...g4, or else to consolidate with ...Bg7 and ...h6. The main continuations traditionally have been 4.h4 and 4.Bc4. 4.h4 immediately undermines Black's attempts to set up a pawn chain, defends against the potential threat of ...Qh4+ and practically forces 4...g4, usually leading to the Kieseritzky Gambit. 4.Bc4 is usually played with intention of playing a Muzio Gambit after 4...g4 5.0-0!, however Black has the option of consolidating the pawn chain with 4...Bg7, intending ...h6 and ...d6. More recently, 4.Nc3 (the Quaade Gambit)[17] has been recommended by Scottish grandmasterJohn Shaw as a less explored alternative to 4.h4 and superior to 4.Bc4.[18]
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
With 4.h4 White practically forces 4...g4, thereby undermining any attempt by Black to set up a stable pawn chain with ...h6 and ...Bg7.
TheKieseritzky Gambit, 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5, is considered by modern writers such as Shaw and Gallagher to be the main line after 3...g5. It was popularized byLionel Kieseritzky in the 1840s and used successfully byWilhelm Steinitz.Boris Spassky used it to beatBobby Fischer in a famous game atMar del Plata in 1960.[19] The main line of the Kieseritzky Gambit is considered to be 5...Nf6 (Berlin Defense) 6.Bc4 d5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.d4 Nh5 9.0-0 Qxh4 10.Qe1 Qxe1 11.Rxe1 0-0 12.Bb3 Bf5. The Long Whip Variation, 5...h5?! 6.Bc4 Rh7 (or 6...Nh6) is considered old-fashioned and risky, as Black loses a lot of time attempting to hold on to the pawn.
4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 is theAllgaier Gambit,[20] intending 5...h6 6.Nxf7. This knight sacrifice is considered unsound.[21]
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The extremelysharp Muzio Gambit[22] arises after 4.Bc4 g4 5.0-0 gxf3 6.Qxf3, where White has sacrificed a knight but has three pieces bearing down on f7.[23] Such wild play is rare in modern chess, but Black must defend accurately. Perhaps the sharpest continuation is the Double Muzio after 6...Qf6 7.e5 Qxe5 8.Bxf7+!?, leaving White two pieces down in eight moves, but with a position that some masters consider to be equal.[24][25] In practice White's play seems to be easier, especially when the opponent is surprised by such daring tactics.
Similar lines are theGhulam Kassim Gambit, 4.Bc4 g4 5.d4, and theMcDonnell Gambit, 4.Bc4 g4 5.Nc3. These are generally considered inferior to the Muzio, which has the advantage of reinforcing White's attack along the f-file. Also inferior is theLolli Gambit, also known as the Wild Muzio Gambit, 4.Bc4 g4 5.Bxf7+?!, which leaves White with insufficientcompensation for the piece after 5...Kxf7 6.Ne5+ Ke8 7.Qxg4 Nf6 8.Qxf4 d6.
TheSalvio Gambit, 4.Bc4 g4 5.Ne5 Qh4+ 6.Kf1, is considered better for Black due to the insecurity of White's king. Black may play safely with 6...Nh6 (Silberschmidt Variation), or counter-sacrifice with 6...f3 (Cochrane Gambit) or 6...Nc6 (Viennese Variation).
A safer alternative to 4...g4 is 4...Bg7,[24] which usually leads to the Hanstein Gambit after 5.d4 d6 6.0-0 h6 or the Philidor Gambit after 5.h4 h6 6.d4 d6 (other move orders are possible in both cases).
The Quaade Gambit (3.Nf3 g5 4.Nc3) is named after a Danish amateur who discussed it in correspondence with theDeutsche Schachzeitung in the 1880s.[26] The move has received renewed attention following its recommendation by John Shaw in his 2013 book on the King's Gambit. A well-known trap here is 4...g4 5.Ne5 Qh4+ 6.g3 fxg3 7.Qxg4 g2+? (7...Qxg4 8.Nxg4 d5 is about equal) 8.Qxh4 gxh1=Q 9.Qh5! and White is close to winning. (Black's best defense is considered 9...Nh6 10.d4 d6 11.Bxh6 dxe5 12.Qxe5+ Be6 13.Qxh8 Nd7 14.Bxf8 0-0-0 and White will emerge a clear pawn ahead.) Instead, 4...Bg7 has been recommended. 4...d6 and 4...h6 transpose to Fischer's Defense and Becker's Defense, respectively. Also possible is 4...Nc6, recommended byKonstantin Sakaev.[27][28]
After 4...Bg7 5.d4 g4,Simon Williams advocates 6.Bxf4 gxf3 in his DVD andChess.com video series.[29] White is down a knight, but has a strong attack. The Quaade Gambit has recently been advocated byDaniel King in his PowerPlay series for Chessbase.
This is likely to lead to similar positions to the Quaade Gambit; however, 4...g4 5.Ne5 Qh4+ 6.g3 fxg3 7.Qxg4 g2+!? (7...Qxg4=) is now viable due to the threat against the pawn on e4. After 8.Qxh4 gxh1=Q Shaw recommends 9.Nc3 for White, with a complicated position.[30]
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The Fischer Defense (3.Nf3 d6), although previously known, was advocated byBobby Fischer after he was defeated byBoris Spassky in a Kieseritzky Gambit at the 1960Mar del Plata tournament. Fischer then decided to refute the King's Gambit, and the next year theAmerican Chess Quarterly published his analysis of 3...d6, which he called "a high-class waiting move" and claimed the gambit "loses by force".[5][6]
White usually responds with 4.Bc4 or 4.d4. In the line 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4, White cannot continue with 6.Ne5 as in the Kieseritzky Gambit, 6.Ng5 is unsound because of 6...f6! trapping the knight, and 6.Nfd2 blocks the bishop on c1. This leaves the move 6.Ng1 as the only option, resulting in a position where neither side has developed a piece on the sixth move. The resulting slightly odd position offers White good attacking chances. A typical continuation is 6.Ng1 Bh6 7.Ne2 Qf6 8.Nbc3 c6 9.g3 f3 10.Nf4 Qe7 with an unclear position (Korchnoi/Zak).
If White plays 4.Bc4, play often continues 4...h6 5.d4 g5 6.0-0 Bg7, transposing into the Hanstein Gambit, which can also be reached via 3...g5 or 3...h6. Another reasonable reply is 4...Be6. If Black plays 4...g5?, White can respond with 5.h4! and Black has no good way to defend the pawn. If 5...g4 6.Ng5 Nh6 7.d4 f6 8.Bxf4! (Morphy-Tilghman, Philadelphia 1859), and if 8...fxg5 9.Bxg5 Qd7 10.0-0 White has an overwhelming attack.[31]
Another option for White after 4.Bc4 h6 is 5.h4, preventing ...g5 but weakening the g3 and g4 squares.[32]
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
TheBecker Defense (3.Nf3 h6) has the idea of creating apawn chain on h6, g5, f4 to defend the f4 pawn while avoiding the Kieseritzky Gambit, so Black will not be forced to play ...g4 when White plays to undermine the chain with h4. The main line is 4.d4 g5, usually followed by 5.Nc3, 5.g3, 5.h4, or 5.Bc4. 4.Nc3 usually transposes to this line after 4...g5 5.d4. but there are independent lines. White also has the option of 4.b3, intending a queensidefianchetto.
Transpositions to lines of the Classical Variation and Fischer Defense are common. For example, after 4.d4 g5 5.Bc4 Bg7 6.0-0, the position is a common line of Hanstein Gambit, which is more commonly reached by 3...g5 4.Bc4 Bg7 5.0-0 (typically followed by 5...d6 6.d4 or 5...h6 6.d4). Similarly, 4.d4 g5 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Bc4 d6 reaches a line of the Philidor Gambit. 4.Bc4 most often transposes to theFischer Defense after 4...d6 (or later on, such as after 4...g5 5.d4 d6).
The most notable independent line of the Becker Defense, rarely reached by transposition, is 4.d4 g5 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.g3 fxg3 7.hxg3 d6 (or 5...d6 and 7...Bg7, and other orders). In most other lines where White plays g3, ...fxg3 would allow White to simultaneously capture a pawn, develop a piece, and attack Black's queen by playing Bxg5, but this is prevented by the pawn on h6 in the Becker Defense.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The Modern Defense, also known as theAbbazia Defense,[33] (3.Nf3 d5) has much the same idea as the Falkbeer Countergambit, from which it may be reached by transposition after 2...d5 3.exd5 exf4 4.Nf3. Black concentrates on gaining piece play and fighting for theinitiative rather than keeping the extra pawn. It has been recommended by several publications as an easy way to equalize and was once seen as a critical line, although White's extra central pawn and piece activity is considered to yield a slight advantage.
The most common continuation is 4.exd5 Nf6, with Black threatening White's pawn. White usually counterattacks with 5.Bb5+. The continuation 5...c6 6. dxc6 bxc6 7.Bc4 Nd5 is known as the Botvinnik Variation. Otherwise, White usually defends the pawn with 5.c4, 5.Bc4, or 5.Nc3. Black sometimes instead plays 4...Qxd5 (resembling theScandinavian Defence), 4...Bd6, or 4...c6, which is a delayed Nimzowitsch-Marshall Countergambit.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
TheCunningham Defense (3.Nf3 Be7) threatens a check on h4 that can permanently prevent White from castling; furthermore, if White does not immediately develop the king's bishop, Ke2 would be forced, which hems the bishop in. A sample line is 4.Nc3 Bh4+ 5.Ke2 d5 6.Nxd5 Nf6 7.Nxf6+ Qxf6 8.d4 Bg4 9.Qd2. White has strong central control with pawns on d4 and e4, while Black is relying on the White king's discomfort to compensate.
To avoid having to play Ke2, 4.Bc4 is White's most popular response.[34] This line is also frequently reached from theBishop's Gambit. Black can play 4...Bh4+ anyway, forcing 5.Kf1 (or else the wildBertin Gambit or Three Pawns' Gambit, 5.g3 fxg3 6.0-0 gxh2+ 7.Kh1, played in the nineteenth century). In modern practice, it is common for Black to simply develop instead with 4...Nf6 5.e5 Ng4, known as the Modern Cunningham. An underexplored but seemingly playable line here is 5...Ne4!?, theEuwe Variation, which has a number of trappy ideas.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
TheSchallopp Defense (3.Nf3 Nf6) is usually played with the intention of defending the pawn on f4 with ...Nh5. While it is not Black's most popular option, it has received increased interest in the 21st century, particularly in 2020, whenDing Liren used it to beat Magnus Carlsen in the onlineMagnus Carlsen Invitational tournament. The undefended knight on h5 means Black must be careful: for example 4.e5 Nh5 5.d4 d6 6.Qe2 Be7? (correct is 6...d5!=) 7.exd6 Qxd6 8.Qb5+ wins the h5-knight.[35]
The most common continuation is 4.e5 Nh5, often continuing with 5.d4. Also common is 4.Nc3, defending the pawn on e4 and allowing Black's knight to remain on f6. Black most often responds with 4...d5. White often responds with either 5.e5, usually continuing 5...Nh5 or 5...Ne4, or 5.exd5, transposing to the Abbazia Defense.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Of the alternatives to 3.Nf3, the most important is the Bishop's Gambit, 3.Bc4. White allows 3...Qh4+ 4.Kf1, losing the right to castle, but this loses time for Black after the inevitable Nf3 and White will develop rapidly. White also has the option of delaying Nf3, however, and can instead play g3, after which the game becomes quite sharp, with White having the option of Qf3 with an attack on f7, or Kg2 threatening hxg3 (if Black has played ...g5, this is theMcDonnell Attack). This idea is advocated, among others, by GMSimon Williams.[40] Despite these counterattacking ideas, 3...Qh4+ is still popular and has made a resurgence in the 21st century. 4...d6, theCozio Variation, has become highly regarded.
Korchnoi and Zak recommend as best for Black 3...Nf6 4.Nc3 c6, or the alternative move order 3...c6 4.Nc3 Nf6, leading to theBogoljubov (or Jaenisch) Variation. The main line continues 5.Bb3 d5 6.exd5 cxd5 7.d4 Bd6 8.Nge2. Black's other main option is 3...d5, theBledow Variation, returning the pawn immediately. Play might continue 4.Bxd5 Nf6 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Nf3 Bxc3 7.dxc3 c6 8.Bc4 Qxd1+ 9.Kxd1 0-0 10.Bxf4 Nxe4 with an equal position (Bilguer Handbuch, Korchnoi/Zak).
3...Nc6, Maurian Defense, has become better regarded over time, but if White plays 4.Nf3, Black can transpose into the Hanstein Gambit after 4...g5 5.d4 Bg7 6.c3 d6 7.0-0 h6 (Neil McDonald, 1998). It also often transposes to the Cozio Variation. John Shaw wrote that 3...Nc6 is a "refutation" of the Bishop's Gambit, as he says that Black is better in all variations.
Steinitz's 3...Ne7 and thecountergambit 3...f5 (best met by 4.Qe2!) are generally considered inferior. Black may offer transposition to theFischer Defense with 3...d6, but White most often declines to play 4.Nf3. Instead, most common is 4.d4, allowing the Qh4+ threat to remain for longer.
Other 3rd moves for White are rarely played. Some of these are:
Black can decline the offered pawn, or offer acountergambit.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The Falkbeer Countergambit is named after the 19th-centuryAustrian masterErnst Falkbeer. It begins 1.e4 e5 2.f4 d5. White usually plays 3.exd5 in response, as 3.fxe5 Qh4+ 4.g3 Qxe4+ wins White's rook. In the traditional line, Black plays 3...e4,sacrificing a pawn in return for quick and easy development.[44] It was once considered good for Black and scored well, but White obtains some advantage with the response 4.d3!, and the line fell out of favor after the 1930s. If Black plays 3...exf4 instead, this transposes to the Modern Variation ofKGA. White can also play 3.Nf3 instead of 3.exd5, known as the Blackburne Attack, whose typical continuation is 3...dxe4 4.Nxe5.
A more modern alternative move in the Falkbeer is 3...c6, theNimzowitsch-Marshall Countergambit.[45][46] Black aims for earlypiece activity instead of holding on to pawns. However, in addition being returned the gambited pawn, White has a better pawn structure and prospects of a betterendgame. The main line continues 4.Nc3 exf4 5.Nf3 Bd6 6.d4 Ne7 7.dxc6 Nbxc6, giving positions analogous to the Modern Variation. Another common move for White is 4.Qe2, dealing with the latent threat of Qh4+ and preventing 4...exf4 due to the pin on Black's king.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
A common way to decline the gambit is with 2...Bc5, the "classical"KGD. The bishop prevents White fromcastling and is such a nuisance that White often expends twotempi to eliminate it by means of Nc3–a4, to exchange on c5 or b6, after which White may castle without worry. The line usually continues with 3.Nf3 d6. After this, White commonly plays 4.c3 (intending 5.d4), 4.Bc4, or 4.Nc3.
The line also contains an opening trap for novices: if White continues with 3.fxe5?? Black continues 3...Qh4+, in which either therook is lost (4.g3 Qxe4+,forking the rook andking) or White ischeckmated (4.Ke2 Qxe4#). This line often comes about bytransposition from lines of theVienna Game orBishop's Opening, when White plays f2–f4 before Nf3.
One rarely seen line is the Rotlewi Countergambit:[47] 3.Nf3 d6 4.b4!?. The idea of the gambit is similar to that seen in theEvans Gambit of theItalian Game. White sacrifices a pawn to try to build a strong center with 4...Bxb4 5.c3 Bc5 (or 5...Ba5) 6.fxe5 dxe5 7.d4. This line is considered slightly dubious, however.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 | | 8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Other options in the KGD are possible, though unusual, such as the Adelaide Countergambit, 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 f5, advocated byTony Miles and also referred as the Miles Defense; 2...d6 (often reached via 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 d6), which is the way the King’s Gambit was declined the first known time it was played,[48] when after 3.Nf3, best is 3...exf4 transposing to theFischer Defense (though 2...d6 invites White to play 3.d4 instead); and 2...Nf6 3.fxe5 Nxe4 4.Nf3 Ng5! 5.d4 Nxf3+ 6.Qxf3 Qh4+ 7.Qf2 Qxf2+ 8.Kxf2 with a small endgame advantage, as played in the 1968 game betweenBobby Fischer andBob Wade inVinkovci.[49] The greedy 2...Qf6 (known as theNordwalde Variation), intending 3...Qxf4, is considered dubious. Also dubious are theKeene Defense: 2...Qh4+ 3.g3 Qe7 and theMafia Defense: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 c5.[50]
2...f5?! is among the oldest countergambits in KGD, known from a game published in 1625 byGioachino Greco.[51]Vincenz Hruby also played it againstMikhail Chigorin in 1882.[52] It is nonetheless considered dubious because 3.exf5 with the threat of Qh5+ gives White a good game. The variation is sometimes named the Pantelidakis Countergambit because GMLarry Evans answered a question from Peter Pantelidakis of Chicago about it in one of his columns inChess Life and Review.[citation needed]
In several lines of theVienna Game White offers a sort of delayed King's Gambit. In theVienna Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.f4), Black should reply 3...d5, since 3....exf4?! 4.e5 forces the knight to retreat. 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 exf4 may lead to theHamppe–Muzio Gambit after 4.Nf3 g5 5.Bc4 g4 6.0-0 gxf3 7.Qxf3, or to theSteinitz Gambit after 4.d4 Qh4+ 5.Ke2.
White may also offer the gambit in theBishop's Opening, e.g. 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nc6 3.f4, though this is uncommon.
The above lines may be reached via the King's Gambit proper if Black makes the rare response 2...Nc6!?, e.g. 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6 3.Nc3 exf4 etc.
TheEncyclopaedia of Chess Openings has ten codes for the King's Gambit, C30 through C39.
| Outline | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equipment | |||||||||
| History |
| ||||||||
| Rules | |||||||||
| Terms | |||||||||
| Tactics | |||||||||
| Strategy | |||||||||
| Openings |
| ||||||||
| Endgames | |||||||||
| Tournaments |
| ||||||||
| Art and media | |||||||||
| Related | |||||||||
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
