|
|
When putting pressure on Black's f7-pawn with Bc4 and Qb3, White must beware of the ...Nc6-a5 "fork", which can force the exchange of White's light-squared bishop (an important attacking piece in the Göring Gambit) for the black knight on c6. The position on the left can arise from the common sequence 4.c3 dxc3 5.Bc4 d6 6.Nxc3 (or 5.Nxc3 d6 6.Bc4) Nf6 7.Qb3 Qd7. The queen move looks awkward, blocking in the bishop on c8, but as well as defending f7, it blocks possible checks on the a4-e8 diagonal and so prepares ...Nc6-a5.
In that line White should increase the pressure on the f7-pawn with 8.Ng5, which typically leads to board-wide chaos, but instead White has rather naively castled, 8.0-0?, allowing 8...Na5. |
|
|
Another common motif is that White must often complicate matters to maintain the initiative. The position on the left arises from 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bb4 6.Bc4 d6 7.Ng5 Ne5 8.Bb3 h6. Black gets this h-pawn push in just in time, because otherwise White is threatening 9.f4, kicking the knight away from e5 and then crashing through on f7.
Black is hoping for 9.Nf3, which allows Black a relatively comfortable game, but here White can complicate matters by pressing forward with 9.f4 anyway, attacking the knight on e5. This sort of sequence is very common in the accepted lines of the Göring Gambit in which White plays Bc4 and Ng5 without playing Qb3 first. It can lead to an exchange of knights, but it also opens up more lines and makes the position more crazy. |
|
|
Black has to be wary of playing ...Nf6 without preparing it with ...d6 first, because White's initiative often accelerates after hitting the knight on f6 with the e4-e5 pawn push. This position is a particularly bad version for Black, arising from 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Be7?! 6.Bc4 Nf6?!. After 7.e5, Black can lash out with ...d7-d5 in some situations, counterattacking against the bishop on c4, but then lines open up and the position becomes messy and generally favourable for White.
Probably the best version of this sort of line for Black is 4.c3 dxc3 5.Nxc3 Bb4 6.Bc4 Nf6 7.e5, when after 7...d5!, White has nothing better than to head into a queenless middlegame with 8.exf6 dxc4 9.Qxd8+, but even here, the black king tends to get stuck in the centre, and it is not clear if Black can reach equality. In any case, White tends to score well. |
|
|
If Black declines the gambit, White often ends up with an isolated pawn on d4. The diagram on the left results from the 4...d5 declining variation, which initially gives Black the more active piece play, but if Black is not careful, the white pieces can become very active into the early middlegame.
Black will typically aim to play against the potentially weak pawn on d4, and exchanges of pieces generally help Black because the pawn would prove to be a weakness in the endgame. Black can also consider castling queenside and launching a kingside attack, although this leaves the black king exposed to attack down the half-open c-file. White will generally strive to keep pieces on the board and, after completing development, set about generating piece activity. The half-open c-file is also a useful avenue of attack for White, especially if Black boldly castles to the queenside. White will also hope to get in the d4-d5 push at some stage. |
|
|
White settles for sacrificing just one pawn, and develops a piece in the process. In return for giving up a centre pawn, White has an extra developing move and additional open lines, which will typically be used as a basis for launching an attack against the black king. White also has a lot of control over the important d5-square.
An important justification for this gambit is that Black has difficulty with kingside development. Black ideally wants to castle kingside in this gambit, as castling queenside is dangerous because of White's half-open c-file. However, …Ng8-f6 is often hit by e4-e5, and so Black tends to have to play …d7-d6 before …Nf6, and this gives White more time to try and catch the black king in the centre. So what does Black do with the dark-squared bishop? 5...Bb4 has tended to be regarded as the most critical reply, with the idea of exchanging off the knight on c3, reducing White's attacking potential. White's best way to get compensation against this is 6.Bc4 intending 6...d6 7.Ng5, attacking f7 immediately. 7.Qb3 is less likely to give enough compensation after 7...Bxc3+! intending 8.Qxc3 Qf6 or 8.bxc3 Qe7 9.0-0 Nf6, and 7.0-0 is also well met by 7...Bxc3. An interesting deviation is 6.Bg5 but this is less likely to give full compensation after 6...Nge7 or 6...Be7!?. |
|
|
With 5.Bc4 White offers a second pawn at b2. In practice Black often declines the second pawn. The most reliable way is 5...d6, leaving White with nothing better than 6.Nxc3 transposing into the 5.Nxc3 d6 6.Bc4 variation. 5...Nf6 6.Nxc3 d6 comes to the same thing. Note that 5...Nf6 6.Nxc3 Bb4 is slightly inaccurate because of 7.e5.
If instead 5...Bc5, White can exploit Black's move-order with 6.Bxf7+ intending 6...Kxf7 7.Qd5+ and Qxc5. If 5...Bb4, then White can persist in sacrificing a second pawn with 6.0-0, or play 6.bxc3 which leads to positions reminiscent of the Evans Gambit. Most theoretically critical, but also dangerous (for both sides!) is to grab the second pawn with 5...cxb2 6.Bxb2. Then Black can try 6...Bb4+ whereupon White can choose between a hyper-aggressive approach with Qc2, 0-0-0 and pushing the h-pawn, or a more positional approach with 0-0 and Nc3-d5, putting pressure on Black's f6-knight. Instead, 5...cxb2 6.Bxb2 d6 has been recommended for Black in various sources including John Watson's review of Danish Dynamite, John Emms's Play the Open Games as Black and in the older Batsford Chess Openings 2. It is more passive, but more solid. White then chooses between 7.Qb3 attacking f7 immediately, 7.0-0, and 7.Nc3 intending Qb3 and Nd5, and it is not clear which is best. |
|
|
4...d5 definitely equalises, and this is the response that puts a lot of people off from using the gambit. Many players use it according to standard principles, concentrating on development rather than grabbing pawns. However, particularly at higher levels of play, some use it with the specific aim of heading into the Capablanca Variation, which was first used in the game Marshall-Capablanca, Lake Hopatcong 1926. 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.cxd4 Bg4 7.Be2 Bb4+ 8.Nc3 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qc4! forces White to exchange queens or give up castling rights. Black tends to score well in that line because it throws White into positions that are hardly appealing to most gambiteers.
However, the line can be avoided by 7.Nc3, and if 7...Bb4 (7...Bxf3!? 8.Nxd5 Bxd1 9.Nxc7+ Kd7 10.Nxa8 leads to a tricky and tactical queenless middlegame), Mark Nieuweboer has pointed out 8.Be3, which steers the game into typical "isolated queen's pawn" channels. At club level most players probably won't be aware of the most critical lines, and White tends to score well in practice when Black doesn't head for the Capablanca Variation, despite many lines being theoretically equal, as the white pieces can become active very quickly. An interesting deviation is 5.Bd3, defending the e4-pawn and preparing kingside castling. It's less definitely sound for White than 5.exd5, because the double-pawn sacrifice after 5...dxc3 6.exd5 cxb2 7.Bxb2 Qxd5 is again very difficult to assess, but in practice Black more often persists with the refusal to grab pawns, continuing with 5...dxe4 6.Bxe4 Nf6, whereupon 7.Bxc6+ bxc6 8.0-0 gives us another isolated queen's pawn position with equal chances. 5...Nf6 6.e5 Ne4 can be met by 7.0-0, offering the pawn on c3 again. |