I've just realized that you can use the same defensive plan against the Stafford (playing f3 instead of e3). This might be an easy and effective refutation.
Hey Jonathan! I tried many different gambits against d4 to make the game more dynamic but had no luck until I stumbled on the Hartlaub-Charlick Gambit. Maybe you could make a video on it? It can even be played as white (one tempo up) against the scandinavian. It is very dubious but if black is prepared he's got good chances to win. Ideally, and more often than not, you give up a pawn and just get more and more initiative as white is trying to play it safe :D Personally, I really like it.
@@90DegreesAngle_ on lichess the score for black in Wagon Gambit is 44% and in Hartlaub-Charlick Gambit 47%... but of course it's also a matter of preference
As Jonathan states below, I can see this occurring more often if you play the Bishop's Opening, which is one of my main moves. However, you'd need to learn it well to deal with any other 2nd moves for black.
If black plays d6 im pretty sure you can just take the d5 pawn with the knight and if black recaptures, bxf7 wins the queen (or follow up with b g5 if the king moves to the black square)
The most useful gambit in my repertoire is this antidote to the London System: 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.c3 Nc6 4.e3 Qb6 5.Qb3 c4 6.Qc2 e5! sacrificing a pawn 6.dxe5 Bf5 the bishop can't be captured because of Qxb2 and white loses a rook 7.Qc1 black has a couple options here but probably the most fun is 7..g5 8.Bxg5 Nxe5. All of this is Stockfish-approved for both sides, the position is equal but highly asymmetrical, but clearly black is the one enjoying themselves. And you don't have to play boring London positions! It's not really dubious enough for the Schrantz brand but I've had a lot of fun with it. Shout out to Tony Rotella for his excellent video covering the theory.
Hi Jonathan! As an improvement on the d6 line. You should play Nxe5 instead of ng5. If pxN, You play Bxf7 and win the queen. If qe7, you play bxf7, kd8 and castle. QxN is a mating attack starting with Re1
If you really want to play the B-K Gambit, instead of 2. Nf3 and hoping for a Petroff, play the Vienna Game 2.Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nxe4 4. Nf3 or the Bishop's Opening 2. Bc4 Nf6 etc.
White's objective is to form the en potence at once and afterward to establish the grand left oblique, while the minor crochet covers the right wing against the adverse major front echelon. The minor left oblique refused is inferior to all strategic fronts directed either by the right or by the left or by the right refused..
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Se4: 4.Sc3 Boden-Kieseritzky gambit Sc6 Boden-Kieseritzky declined 5.0-0 Sc3: Boden-Kieseritzky delayed 6.dc: would also lead to your game.
I understand at the top level none of this ever gets played, but why the heck not? If Nepo uncorked this against Ding in the upcoming world championship, there’s almost no way he finds all the moves. Even if he does, he’s gonna have to spend so much time which will give him a practical disadvantage. Sure, you aren’t going to take this unnecessary risk if you don’t have to, but why haven’t we seen desperate GMs uncork venomous traps like this? Seems odd to me
??? The refutation is brain dead simple, a 1000 could find f6 over the board, let alone a 2800 at the world championship. There is no venom here, white only has superficial threats and black is safe by move 10
isnt it called Morphy gambit? I learned this from BigMio aka 'the Butcher' ua-cam.com/video/ZykcrXpkvrQ/v-deo.html and I dont think this is dubious, it's big surprise weapon vs boring Petrov players, black has to know deep theory with 5..f6, I mean non human engine moves like 5 in a row, imo this is very practical weapon for white
This is not "deep theory" and is covered by every single book or course on the Petroff. f6 is also extremely findable in rapid or slower. Not to mention every single Petroff player will have encountered this lame gambit many times in blitz, thanks to all the Bc4 premovers
@@soupisfornoobs4081 I don't think this is lame gambit, black has to know quite a lot of moves and white still has certain initiative, imo it's good pracical try and i dont agree that every petrov player studies this, so certainly not refuted
@@witcher-86 It's covered in Dhohade Swapnil's "Playing the Petroff" and Konstantin Sakaev's "Petroff: An expert repertoire". It's shown in the free sample of Christof Sielecki's chessable course on the Petroff. Nc3 is an obvious gambit move after a common opening mistake in the Petroff, and those 3 sources and common sense should dictate that most every resource on the Petroff covers and refutes it. If you only play
@@soupisfornoobs4081 'refutes' meaning engine shows about 0, which means white has compensation, which concrete lines refute it? So Morra gambit would also be refuted with this thinking, but humans not engines are playing. Btw i'm 2100 fide, so don't BS me with 1000 elos
@@witcher-86 I'm sorry you struggle to read engine evaluations at 2100fide. The position after dxc3 is -0.9 at depth 48, for the extra pawn black has. In contrast, the starting position of the smith morra is -0.2 at depth 47. Do you also think the albin countergambit isn't refuted? Another +1 opening As for the refutation, Swapnil gives the most testing try for white: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nxe4 4. Nc3 Nxc3 5. dxc3 f6 6. O-O Nc6 7. Nh4 g6 8. f4 f5 9. Nf3 e4 10. Ng5 Bc5+ 11. Kh1 Qf6 12. Qd5 d6 13. Nxh7 Qe7 14. Ng5 Nd8∓ You'll be happy to know the evaluation has dropped to -2
![Boden-Kieseritzky Gambit [Bishop's Opening Variation]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HyPy_tF33hk/mqdefault.jpg)
Using the "Bishops Opening" move-order, might improve your chances of getting the gambit.
Was thinking the same thing 😃
There are a lot of fun gambits in that line! You'd have to choose this over an Urosov, though.
Vienna move order is also viable
I tried in Bullet. Pretty much everyone plays 2... Nc6. I played for like 45min end never even got to 2... Nf6.
"But don't worry, it's still a very dubious opening". Phew, you had me doubting for a moment.
One of the most underrated chess channel
Congrats on 50k!!!
5...c6 (in place of 5....f6) is an instant equalizer, e.g. 6.Nxe5 d5 7.0-0! Bd6! etc.
Is it still a named gambit? perhaps you ticked off a different gambit?
3:16 I like to do Nxe5, because if they take my knight Bxf7+ and you are going to win the queen one way or another
I've just realized that you can use the same defensive plan against the Stafford (playing f3 instead of e3). This might be an easy and effective refutation.
it kinda is but the same attacking ideas applyes for Black in that line!
Hey Jonathan! I tried many different gambits against d4 to make the game more dynamic but had no luck until I stumbled on the Hartlaub-Charlick Gambit. Maybe you could make a video on it? It can even be played as white (one tempo up) against the scandinavian. It is very dubious but if black is prepared he's got good chances to win. Ideally, and more often than not, you give up a pawn and just get more and more initiative as white is trying to play it safe :D Personally, I really like it.
ever heard of the wagon gambit?
@@90DegreesAngle_ on lichess the score for black in Wagon Gambit is 44% and in Hartlaub-Charlick Gambit 47%... but of course it's also a matter of preference
@@scarletovergods i honestly don't care what the score is it is online blitz who cares have some fun
Try the Von Henning schara gambit against queens gambit too
Chess has never had a bigger controversy!
As Jonathan states below, I can see this occurring more often if you play the Bishop's Opening, which is one of my main moves. However, you'd need to learn it well to deal with any other 2nd moves for black.
If black plays d6 im pretty sure you can just take the d5 pawn with the knight and if black recaptures, bxf7 wins the queen (or follow up with b g5 if the king moves to the black square)
second best move, but if they don't retake it's *only* +2.5 instead of +5
I always knew that as the morphy gambit, great video btw
you should play Bc4 first, because Nf6 is more likely than when you play Nf3 first
Noooo you revealed my secret weapon!!! (Great content 👌)
That game on the vampirechicken channel technically transposed to a Boden-Kieseritsky declined.
The most useful gambit in my repertoire is this antidote to the London System: 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4 c5 3.c3 Nc6 4.e3 Qb6 5.Qb3 c4 6.Qc2 e5! sacrificing a pawn 6.dxe5 Bf5 the bishop can't be captured because of Qxb2 and white loses a rook 7.Qc1 black has a couple options here but probably the most fun is 7..g5 8.Bxg5 Nxe5. All of this is Stockfish-approved for both sides, the position is equal but highly asymmetrical, but clearly black is the one enjoying themselves. And you don't have to play boring London positions! It's not really dubious enough for the Schrantz brand but I've had a lot of fun with it. Shout out to Tony Rotella for his excellent video covering the theory.
Some of your moves dont make sense. Youve got 3.c3 twice as qell as e5. Might wanna update
@@joshwantstotravel9516 Fixed
Hi Jonathan! As an improvement on the d6 line. You should play Nxe5 instead of ng5. If pxN, You play Bxf7 and win the queen. If qe7, you play bxf7, kd8 and castle. QxN is a mating attack starting with Re1
I guess the good thing about this move order is the higher chance that you’re facing a Stafford player^^
If you really want to play the B-K Gambit, instead of 2. Nf3 and hoping for a Petroff, play the Vienna Game 2.Nc3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nxe4 4. Nf3 or the Bishop's Opening 2. Bc4 Nf6 etc.
in the vienna line you can just take and be up a piece
Nope, the pawn fork d5 wins the piece back.
@@fredgalvin9098 ooo i forgot about that loll 💀
“Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberry! Now go away…or I shall taunt you a second time! “
The true Gm!
Gambit master!!!!!
I said this on your other channel, but I’ll say it again: good luck on the Young gambit, because it simply blunders a queen.
notations?
borg defense have a lot nice traps too, try this in s video please
The Boden-Schrantz gambit?
OK -- Is Eric Rosen going to start playing this too Jonathan?
The move 5....f6 is such an obvious continuation, that I doubt that even lower rated players would miss that.
Jonathan reminds me Ned Flanders a little bit
White's objective is to form the en potence at once and afterward to establish the grand left oblique, while the minor crochet covers the right wing against the adverse major front echelon. The minor left oblique refused is inferior to all strategic fronts directed either by the right or by the left or by the right refused..
You need to make it right!
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Se4: 4.Sc3 Boden-Kieseritzky gambit Sc6 Boden-Kieseritzky declined 5.0-0 Sc3: Boden-Kieseritzky delayed 6.dc: would also lead to your game.
nooooo i've been playing this for years, don't tell people about it!
Wow
I understand at the top level none of this ever gets played, but why the heck not? If Nepo uncorked this against Ding in the upcoming world championship, there’s almost no way he finds all the moves. Even if he does, he’s gonna have to spend so much time which will give him a practical disadvantage. Sure, you aren’t going to take this unnecessary risk if you don’t have to, but why haven’t we seen desperate GMs uncork venomous traps like this? Seems odd to me
??? The refutation is brain dead simple, a 1000 could find f6 over the board, let alone a 2800 at the world championship. There is no venom here, white only has superficial threats and black is safe by move 10
isnt it called Morphy gambit? I learned this from BigMio aka 'the Butcher' ua-cam.com/video/ZykcrXpkvrQ/v-deo.html and I dont think this is dubious, it's big surprise weapon vs boring Petrov players, black has to know deep theory with 5..f6, I mean non human engine moves like 5 in a row, imo this is very practical weapon for white
This is not "deep theory" and is covered by every single book or course on the Petroff. f6 is also extremely findable in rapid or slower. Not to mention every single Petroff player will have encountered this lame gambit many times in blitz, thanks to all the Bc4 premovers
@@soupisfornoobs4081 I don't think this is lame gambit, black has to know quite a lot of moves and white still has certain initiative, imo it's good pracical try and i dont agree that every petrov player studies this, so certainly not refuted
@@witcher-86 It's covered in Dhohade Swapnil's "Playing the Petroff" and Konstantin Sakaev's "Petroff: An expert repertoire". It's shown in the free sample of Christof Sielecki's chessable course on the Petroff. Nc3 is an obvious gambit move after a common opening mistake in the Petroff, and those 3 sources and common sense should dictate that most every resource on the Petroff covers and refutes it. If you only play
@@soupisfornoobs4081 'refutes' meaning engine shows about 0, which means white has compensation, which concrete lines refute it? So Morra gambit would also be refuted with this thinking, but humans not engines are playing. Btw i'm 2100 fide, so don't BS me with 1000 elos
@@witcher-86 I'm sorry you struggle to read engine evaluations at 2100fide. The position after dxc3 is -0.9 at depth 48, for the extra pawn black has. In contrast, the starting position of the smith morra is -0.2 at depth 47.
Do you also think the albin countergambit isn't refuted? Another +1 opening
As for the refutation, Swapnil gives the most testing try for white:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bc4 Nxe4 4. Nc3 Nxc3 5. dxc3 f6 6. O-O Nc6 7. Nh4 g6 8. f4 f5 9. Nf3 e4 10. Ng5 Bc5+ 11. Kh1 Qf6 12. Qd5 d6 13. Nxh7 Qe7 14. Ng5 Nd8∓
You'll be happy to know the evaluation has dropped to -2
6
It was all a lie?
Day 42 of asking for a video on my funny English lines