chess game

Chess Game

Participate and you will reveal!
Funny name, real hobbies
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
loreta 37 ( +1 | -1 )
On Elephant gambit I tried many gambits as Black after 1.e4 e5...
Now I went on Elephant gambit: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5
Yesterday I looked some lines of it... Not very encouraging...
[ but I looked a view from side "how to refute it"... I nead look from another side - "how to win with it"...]
Could we share some basic ideas about this gambit?
What about level of its soundness?
ionadowman 40 ( +1 | -1 )
Elephant Gambit... I recall seeing an article in the British "Chess" magazine (Pergamon?) about this. Its author seemed to think very highly of it. I seem to recall it featured an early ...Bd6 by Black, but I am unable to recall what issue this was. Late 1990s or maybe 2000? Perhaps this will jog someone else's memory? (I do wish I had copied that article, actually).
ionadowman 25 ( +1 | -1 )
Elephant Gambit... Check out
Not exactly "pro" the gambit, but does indicate that there is more to the beast than meets the eye! It mentions Mark Hebden as championing the line, and I do believe he was the author of the article I mentioned in my earlier msg.
schnarre 13 ( +1 | -1 )
Hmmnnnn.... After the usual 3. exd5 Black's replies are normally 3...e4 & 3...c6. It's a matter of preference as to which is used, But the gambit isn't for the faint of heart.
loreta 8 ( +1 | -1 )
Tnx I;ll look t that article of Tim Harding - but I want to hear an opinion of its users.... Too..
ionadowman 19 ( +1 | -1 )
QP Countergambit in play... It seems that the Elephant Gambit, strictly speaking, goes 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Bd6
Mark Hebden had been playing it, so his article (if you can trace it!) was from a user's point of view...
loreta 44 ( +1 | -1 )
... books Yesterday I got a bunch of old chess books (from 1975-1990 period). After quivk look there was Panov & Keres book Theory of openings - ant there Elephant gambit marked as looding... In Keres's King pawn openings only line 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5?! 3. exd5 e4 was given...
In my opinion - the critical line is the line pointed by ionadowman : 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Bd6
ionadowman 74 ( +1 | -1 )
loreta... Are you focusing specifically on the line 3...Bd6? It occurred to me you might want to expand the discussion to the other branch QP Countergambit beginning 3.Nxe5. Tim Harding discusses it, and this is the line I've seen more information on (Tal-Lutikov; Boleslavsky-Lilienthal; v. Fielitsch-Keres). The full score of this last game can be found in Fred Reinfeld's book on Keres's best games: a ding-dong affair ending in a draw. I shall always esteem Mr Reinfeld for including in this collection several correspondence games from Keres's youth... Unfortunately it is many years since I've seen a copy :-(
At any rate, there could be two distinct discussions here, which might indicate beginning a new, parallel thread...
loreta 81 ( +1 | -1 )
After some research ... Maybe, it could be interesting...
I found a reference to "ChessBase Magazine 102" where an article on the opening that begins with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5. The name “Elephant Gambit” comes from Danish chess circles, an is supposed to illustrate the role of the two bishops, which often decide how things will go in these games....
...I would not recommend this defense for very important games, but if from time to time you wish to escape from generally fashionable openings, you will have a good canvas here on which to try out some creative ideas. In over the board chess, in rapid chess and especially in blitz chess, this gambit is a good surprise weapon. It is somewhat of a positional risk in correspondence chess, but even there Black has some chances...
loreta 61 ( +1 | -1 )
To ionadowman I would like common discusion on 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5 - as there are no normal activity, so to split discussion into branches could only decrease number of messages...
As example of other possible line too:
[Event "Bank Pocztowy SA Open"]
[Site "Bydgoszcz POL"]
[Date "1999.??.??"]
[White "Ziolkowski, D"]
[Black "Pavlenko, O"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2123"]
[BlackElo "2295"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5 3. d4 dxe4 4. Nxe5 Bd6 5. Nc4 Nf6 6. Be2 Nc6 7. Be3 O-O
8. O-O Nd5 9. Nc3 Nxe3 10. fxe3 Qg5 11. Nxe4 Bxh2+ 12. Kxh2 Qh4+ 13. Kg1 Qxe4 14. Bd3 Qg4 15. Rf4 Qxd1+ 16. Rxd1 Be6 17. c3 f5 18. Rdf1 g6 19. b3 Kg7 20. e4 fxe4 21. Rxf8 Rxf8 22. Rxf8 Kxf8 23. Bxe4 Bxc4 24. bxc4 Nd8 25. Kf2 b6 26. Ke3 Ke7 27. Bd5 Ne6 28. Ke4 Kd6 29. Bxe6 Kxe6 30. g4 h5 31. g5 h4 32. Kf4 h3 33. d5+ Kd6 34. Kg3 Kc5 35. Kxh3 Kxc4 36. Kg4 Kxc3 37. Kf4 Kd4 0-1
ionadowman 13 ( +1 | -1 )
Fair comment... It did occur to me, after sending my last, that 3...d6 might well be the critical line after 3.Nxe5, as well...
ionadowman 13 ( +1 | -1 )
Fair comment... It did occur to me, after sending my last, that 3...d6 might well be the critical line after 3.Nxe5, as well...
ionadowman 46 ( +1 | -1 )
Ziolkowski v. Pavlenko... I've played it through quickly. My first impressions are that I don't like 3.d4 much... tho' it is possibly in the spirit of the opening. But rather than take on the countergambit in it own terms, it purports to confront Black with an altogether new challenge. Trouble is, after 5...Nf6 I feel that Black has a fine game, without having to fight for it... From then on Black retains the initiative throughout. OK, this isn't detailed analysis, merely my impressions. Your thoughts?
bogg 14 ( +1 | -1 )
loreta Tom Purser has included Elephant Gambit analysis in his magazine 'BDG World'. If you want to contact him the last address I have is:

loreta 0 ( +1 | -1 )
Tnx, bogg I'll try...