♡ 30 ( +1 | -1 ) my rating......is only high because one 1600 was extremely over rated a 1700 timed out and the other 1700 resigned in a book opening??? the 1 game i did lose i should have easily won verse the 1600 but got careless....and finally my 5th game verse another 1600 was the only good game of the 5 i had....
♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 ) Budapest ...Is a decent opening. White gets a small plus IF they know their stuff, otherwise there are lots of traps for White to fall into. The most well-known is 1.d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. Bf4 Nc6 5. Nf3 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 Qe7 7. a3 Ngxe5 8. axb4?? Nd3# !!
♡ 32 ( +1 | -1 ) chessbase ...puts out a great training cd on this gambit, and I am learning it right now .. in fact, as black against d4, i'm trying to solely use this opening right now. I have had nice results with it. I like it because most people arent' 'booked up' on it, and it really does give some interesting tactical chances.
♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 ) Not the worst openingI have played the Budapest several times and I can say that it isn't bad, but only thing I dont like in that opening is that white can avoid any complications and get a little bit better play.
♡ 17 ( +1 | -1 ) 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qe7 6.Nbd2 This is what GM Dima Tyomkin plays against Budapest.... supposedly White gets best play by eventually returning the pawn.
♡ 7 ( +1 | -1 ) What happens if white plays 3.d5 Isn't that a good alternative?
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.d5!?
♡ 13 ( +1 | -1 ) If you don't want to accept the pawn, I think the best way for white is to play 3.Nf3. If you play 3.d5 black can play 3...Bc5 with an easy game.
♡ 11 ( +1 | -1 ) Better is to accept.Why not accept the pawn? Better is accept and then return when whitw will get better play.
♡ 27 ( +1 | -1 ) ...2 e4 would seem to show a lot of chess hubris, though the opening is used for surprise value and complications. I wouldn't play it in correspondence chess, however, because If I am white I can look up the lines for my possible fourth move: like Nf3, which has promise for white.
♡ 3 ( +1 | -1 ) e61. d4,Nf6 2. c4,e5 3.dxe5,Ng4 4. e6 is very interesting.
♡ 59 ( +1 | -1 ) what if....white doesn't accept the gambit? maybe the options aren't quite as dxe, but they should be looked at for people who decide to use this gambit as black. i have seen three different moves made decline the budapest a) Bg4 b) d5 c) e3 and maybe there are options that are better than the above listed ones.
i played a game OTB just tonight that went like this: 1.d4,Nf6 2.c4,e5 3.d5,c6 4.Nc3,cxd 5.cxd,Qa5 6.e3,Bb4 7.Bd2,d6 8.a3?,Bxc3 9.Bxc3,Qxd5 10.Qc2,o-o 11.aRd1,Qc6 12.Nf3,Bg4 and i won the game, but i think white could have made a few better opening moves. it doesn't seem like i played properly.
♡ 30 ( +1 | -1 ) Some often played lines3.dxe5 is played in over 90% Frequently) 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. Nf3 Bc5 5. e3 Nc6 6. Be2 Ngxe5 (7. Nxe5 OR 7. 0-0)
As I said in earlier post, 3. d5 would be in my taste to try. /matta
♡ 33 ( +1 | -1 ) tricky, but not very goodI think this defense is tricky for lowrated players, there are a LOT of opening traps (like here: board #912202)
but I think in a higher level white has a little, but constant better position...
the best is to accept the pawn and return it later....
♡ 141 ( +1 | -1 ) The setup is probably okay, but I personally find it too difficult to generate meaningful counterplay as Black. If White keeps the pawn, Black has some good play, although whether he has enough play for the pawn is open to debate (I personally think he does, at least enough for a typical amateur or club player).
But if White gives back the pawn, it's not clear to me how Black is supposed to generate play:
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4. Bf4 Nc6 5. Nf3 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 (6. Nc3 keeps the pawn and forces Black to gambit with a later ...f6 to remove the e5-pawn with some decent attacking prospects) 6... Qe7 7. a3 Ngxe5 (threatening mate) 8. Nxe5 Nxe5 9. e3 Bxd2 10. Qxd2 d6. All logical moves from White's perspective, and I don't see that White would have to know any theory in order to reach this main line position.
Black has his nice knight on e5 and ...Bf5 is logical, gaining control of a nice diagonal, but how is Black supposed to put these assets to good use to form a meaningful plan? Meanwhile, White has the obvious plan of playing c5 and generating queenside play (among other ideas). And White has the two bishop is a rather wide open position to help him along, although one of the benefits of the knight on e5 is that it reduces the activity of White's dark-squared bishop. The position is perfectly playable for Black, I would think, but from a practical perspective, I wouldn't want to have the Black side.
♡ 59 ( +1 | -1 ) Berliner has ......come up with what he thinks is a refutation. Paul Valle passed on the info in a post on ItsYourTurn some time back. I have played the opening a few times and like it. At our level here it will probably work against most players. Schiller in his big book on gambits seems to think it is okay. Harding on the other hand thinks it suspect.
The general idea is the active posting of a knight on e5. The main plan is king bishop to c5 or b4, queen knight to c6, Qe7 and/or castles (the major pieces belong on the e file), then ...d6 and move the queen bishop.
♡ 5 ( +1 | -1 ) RefutationWhat line did Berliner think was a refutation?
♡ 57 ( +1 | -1 ) The Budapest Gambit is not....really a gambit in the purest sense of the word. The e5 pawn once captured cannot be held. It will be retaken. I play the Budapest often in USCF Golden Knights play. As my friend and team mate R_lawrence says above many players are not aware of many of it's intricacies. The Budapest and Modern Benoni are my standard answer to 1.d4, both are good responses. Then again I will play 1.d4 e6 and for some reason it most always transposes into the French. :-]
♡ 22 ( +1 | -1 ) Berliner's Budapest RefutationThis is from an article Berliner published in Kaissiber.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ 6.Nc3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 Qe7 8.Qd5 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Qd3 d6 11.g3 O-O 12.Bg2 Bg4 13.Rab1 Rab8 14.Rb2 with clear advantage to white according to the former correspondence world champion.
♡ 56 ( +1 | -1 ) Interesting...After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ 6.Nc3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 Qe7 8.Qd5 f6 9.exf6 Nxf6 10.Qd3 d6 11.g3 O-O 12.Bg2 Bg4 13.Rb1, 13... Rab8 looks awful. Instead, I'm curious what analysis Berliner gives for 13... Ne5. I had a go of it and came up with:
14. Nxe5 dxe5 15. Bg5 (or 15. Qe3 Rae8 16. Bg5 b6) c6 16. O-O h6 17. Bxf6 Rxf6 when White does have his extra pawn but Black has some active chances. Perhaps Black doesn't have quite enough play to offset the missing pawn, but it doesn't strike me that White is significantly better.
♡ 38 ( +1 | -1 ) Yes, it is interesting.I don't have the Berliner article so I can't answer your question. I got the above info from a Paul Valle post on ItsYourTurn. I didn't look at 13 ... Ne5 (I varied earlier in my discussion with Paul) but I don't see where Black is all that bad either. After all look at the Halloween Gambit and the practical results it obtains even in correspondence! So for what it is worth, I'll keep playing the Budapest.
♡ 52 ( +1 | -1 ) First of all the Budapest is a true gambit, there is no way to force White to return the pawn (in the short term anyway:), the line given above is just one reasonable way to hang onto the extra pawn.
Personally I prefer the line given above except with Nbd2, White is only slightly better if at all. but holding for a draw usually doesn't fit the personality of a budapest player.
The berliner line seems somewhat unconvincing on the surface, although he is an excellent analyist and I'd love to see his original work.
♡ 13 ( +1 | -1 ) Unusual Linehany anyone got information about this line declining the gambit? :
1.d4 Sf6 2.c4 e5 3.e3
I think the best is: 3...Lb4 4.Ld2 Lxd2 5. Sxd2 exd4