The King's Gambit is a chess opening that begins with the moves: 1. e4 e5 2. f4
White offers a pawn to divert Black's e-pawn from the . If Black accepts the gambit, White will usually target the weak square f7, defended only by the king. A downside to the King's Gambit is that it weakens White's own king's position. Black can also decline the gambit, usually by the Falkbeer Countergambit (2...d5) or the Classical Defense (2...Bc5).
The King's Gambit is one of the oldest documented openings, appearing in the earliest of chess books, Luis Ramírez de Lucena's Repetición de Amores y Arte de Ajedrez (1497). It was examined by the 17th-century Italian chess player Giulio Cesare Polerio. It is considered an opening characteristic of Romantic chess, known for giving rise to extremely and unusual positions. It was one of the most popular openings until the late 19th century, when improvements in defensive technique led to a decline in popularity.
History The King's Gambit is a very old chess opening. One early is so old it features a move no longer possible under the modern rules of chess (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.d4 Qh4+ 4.g3 fxg3 5.Ke1-g2). The opening is recorded in a work credited to the medieval writer Luis Ramírez de Lucena, the earliest game in the ChessBase MegaDatabase to feature it dates from 1560, and the Spanish priest Ruy López de Segura () was the first to publish analysis of it. The opening's reputation was enhanced by Gioachino Greco, who used it excellently on several occasions in the early 17th century.
The King's Gambit was most popular during the era of Romantic chess, when bold attacking tactics were more important to chess-playing gentlemen than positional strategy. Romantic players enjoyed the opening's heroic and fearless spirit, the core of its appeal—White not only gambits a pawn, but also opens two key diagonals which normally protect his king, in search of initiative and . It was the opening used in the famous 1851 called the Immortal Game. Howard Staunton's Chess-Player's Handbook (1847) devoted 109 pages out of a total 343 on openings to the King's Gambit, while as late as 1883 George H. D. Gossip's Chess-Player's Manual discussed the opening for some 238 pages.
By the time of Gossip, however, the King's Gambit was already in decline, as leading players became aware that it and other popular gambits were likely . In the first six world chess championship matches, only one King's Gambit was played. The first world champion Wilhelm Steinitz argued that attacks should only be started when the opposing player made a mistake and was therefore disadvantaged. As 1...e5 was not a mistake, Steinitz believed the King's Gambit was thus logically flawed. The advances in and understanding in the early 20th century, led by players such as José Raúl Capablanca, saw the gambit decline in standing still further; it was similarly disdained by the hypermodernists such as Aron Nimzowitsch and Richard Réti, who knew that it could not achieve their goal of controlling the center from afar. In the 1960s, Bobby Fischer argued in a famous article, "A Bust to the King's Gambit", that the opening loses by force, including to his own Fischer Defense.
After Rudolf Spielmann, known as the "Last Knight of the King's Gambit", ceased playing it regularly, the opening has remained very rare at the highest levels. Nevertheless, it did not die out entirely and has been employed by adventurous players including Alexander Alekhine, Paul Keres, Mikhail Tal, Boris Spassky, and notwithstanding his article, even Fischer. More modern players include the Englishmen Mark Hebden and Joseph Gallagher, whose Winning with the King's Gambit (1992) was very popular, and the sisters Sofia and Judit Polgár. The opening has never lost its popularity among chess club-level players. Paul van der Sterren, a modern grandmaster, calls the gambit:
King's Gambit Accepted: 2...exf4
After Black accepts the gambit, 3.Nf3 (the King's Knight's Gambit) is the most popular move, the main alternative being 3.Bc4, the Bishop's Gambit. It develops the knight 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 facilitate . These two strategies can also be combined.
Although Black usually accepts the gambit pawn, two methods of declining the gambit, the Classical Defense (2...Bc5) and the Falkbeer Countergambit (2...d5), are also popular.
Classical Variation: 3.Nf3 g5 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)For the origin of the term "Quaade Attack" or "Quaade Gambit" see "A Chess Gamelet" by Edward Winter, 2014 has been recommended by Scottish grandmaster John Shaw as a less explored alternative to 4.h4 and superior to 4.Bc4.
Kieseritzky Gambit: 4.h4 g4 5. Ne5
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.
The Kieseritzky 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 by Lionel Kieseritzky in the 1840s and used successfully by Wilhelm Steinitz. Boris Spassky used it to beat Bobby Fischer in a famous game at Mar del Plata in 1960. 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.
Allgaier Gambit: 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 5.Ng5 commits to sacrificing the knight on f7, as the white knight is trapped and has no safe squares to retreat to after 5...h6.
The gambit now called the Allgaier was first mentioned by the Italian chess player Domenico Lorenzo Ponziani in his book The incomparable game of chess. In George Walker's A Selection of Games at Chess Actually Played by Philidor and His Contemporaries there were some games included between Bruhl and an English player named Cotter. So for a while, this opening used to be called the "Cotter Gambit".
Johann Baptist Allgaier published more thorough analysis on 5.Ng5 in the 1819 edition of Neue theoretisch-praktische Anweisung zum Schachspiel (New theoretical-practical instruction on the game of chess). According to modern theory, however, this knight sacrifice is unsound.
Muzio Gambit and others: 4.Bc4 g4
The extremely Muzio GambitFor the origins of the name "Muzio" and how the eponymous variation came to be labeled, see Polerio Gambit 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.Nakamura vs. Andreikin 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.Peter Millican 1989 In practice White's play seems to be easier, especially when the opponent is surprised by such daring tactics.
Similar lines are the Ghulam Kassim Gambit, 4.Bc4 g4 5.d4, and the McDonnell 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 the Lolli Gambit, also known as the Wild Muzio Gambit, 4.Bc4 g4 5.Bxf7+, which leaves White with insufficient compensation for the piece after 5...Kxf7 6.Ne5+ Ke8 7.Qxg4 Nf6 8.Qxf4 d6.
The Salvio 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).
Hanstein Gambit and Philidor Gambit: 4.Bc4 Bg7 A safer alternative to 4...g4 is 4...Bg7, 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).
Quaade Gambit: 4.Nc3 The Quaade Gambit (3.Nf3 g5 4.Nc3) is named after a Danish amateur who discussed it in correspondence with the Deutsche Schachzeitung in the 1880s.Edward Winter, A Chess Gamelet, 5 March 2014 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 by Konstantin Sakaev.
After 4...Bg7 5.d4 g4, Simon Williams advocates 6.Bxf4 gxf3 in his DVD and Chess.com video series. White is down a knight, but has a strong attack. The Quaade Gambit has recently been advocated by Daniel King in his PowerPlay series for Chessbase.
Rosentreter Gambit: 4.d4 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.
Fischer Defense: 3...d6
The Fischer Defense (3.Nf3 d6), although previously known, was advocated by Bobby Fischer after he was defeated by Boris Spassky in a Kieseritzky Gambit at the 1960 Mar del Plata tournament. Fischer then decided to refute the King's Gambit, and the next year the American Chess Quarterly published his analysis of 3...d6, which he called "a high-class waiting move" and claimed the gambit "loses by force".Bobby Fischer, "A Bust to the King's Gambit", American Chess Quarterly, Summer 1961, pp. 3–9.
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 "and White has good prospects in the center (Bhend)."
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.
Another option for White after 4.Bc4 h6 is 5.h4, preventing ...g5 but weakening the g3- and g4-squares.
Becker Defense: 3...h6