Benko Gambit vs. Blumenfeld Gambit

Which gambit would you choose? The Benko and Blumenfeld often being identified as similar are anything but that! Even though these to "cousin" gambits both start with the letter b and sacrifice the b-pawn, they provide completely different compensation. The Benko Gambit, the more popular of the two, is a very positional queenside gambit. You sacrifice two pawns, gaining one back, to open lines on the queenside and you will eventually place your major pieces on the a and b files. In the Benko you are almost always committed to the queenside.

Benko Gambit:

On the other hand the Blumenfeld Gambit, not nearly as popular, focuses on a kingside attack. You normally sacrifice 1 pawn, not gaining it back, but getting huge attacking chances. You get a semi-open f file for the rook. A fianchettoed light-squared bishop, and the most significant part of this gambit which it is famous for, is the huge center, with pawns on e6, d5, and c5.

Blumenfeld Gambit:

So which one would you choose out of these dynamic b-pawn gambits?

I think the Benko is generally considered to be stronger, although still a bit dubious in longer time controls. It's also harder for white to avoid, since in higher elo ranges you can get the benko most games but for the Blumenfeld you'd have to learn the Nimzo Indian and catalan as well, neither of which are similar to the blumenfeld and they each have a bunch of theory. The flipside though is most people below 2200 won't know any theory against the blumenfeld.

I'm pretty sure the blumenfield isn't as sound but I don't know why 🙃 

I am not sure. Is the Benko more sound?

If you have to accept it then benko, otherwise Blumenfeld benko is refuted after 5.b6 where it looks like a sad Benoni 

“Refuted” by no means...

I definitely agree, the Blumenfeld is one of the few gambits in chess (aside from maybe the Queen's Gambit and a few other) that actually gives nearly full compensation for the lost pawn. Though if white does decline it black can sometimes get unpleasant positions.

Benko Gambit as Fischer would probably not haver been World Champ with out Pal Benko.

[thanks for analysis on the 2 gambits]

Blumenfeld is less sound than Benkö.

I don't know why so many claim Benko is more sound than Blumenfeld.

Maybe they didn't update or they don't know theory.

Benko is considered playable though perhaps dubious : because of a4 line in king's walk variation, though black found improvements, especially in modern move order with Qa5...

Blumenfeld was considered dubious but nowadays it is rehabilited and seen as quite sound.

So I think the theorical status is more positive with Blumenfeld.

There's a game of Alekhine crushing someone with it that scared the hell out of me. But of course I'll never face anyone of that level, Blumenfeld or not...

It's hard to make sense of what this question means, since Black isn't the one doing the choosing.  It's White who decides whether to insert Nf3 on move 1 or 2.  There's one Benko declined line (3. Nf3 -- declining even the first pawn, which is fairly infrequent relative to the more common Declined lines where you take the first pawn and decline the second) where Black can choose to transpose to the Blumenfeld. But we're talking about a position where White's made it clear they don't want to play a typical Benko game, so Black is deciding whether, in that circumstance, they want the Blumenfeld lines or some other lines enabled by White's move order.  Since those alternatives offer a pretty good game, they're usually taken, even by players who might choose to play the Blumenfeld if White played 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3.  I think there are a few other rarer places where Black can transpose from particular spots in the Benko declined to a specific  line in the Blumenfeld. But one is never forced to choose between the two openings in a general way.

After 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4, you can choose to play the Benko, or not, with 2 ... c5 3. d5 b5. (White has alternatives to 3. d5 but they're infrequent and unimpressive.) After some other move orders, dictated by White, such as 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 c5 3. d5 e6 4. c4, you can choose to play the Blumenfeld, or not, with 4 ... b5.  Nothing precludes making one, both, or neither, a part of your preferred repertoire.

It's like asking if you'd rather root for Bronstein against Botvinnik or for Korchnoi against Karpov.  They're different questions.

benko

Yeah definitely Bronstein - Botvinnik seems interesting

I'd go for Korchnoi against Karpov.  

I once played Korchnoi.

How did you play Korchnoi?????????????????

It was at a simul at the Manhattan Chess Club in 1970's when I was a teenager.

Wow that must have been very cool- did you draw or win

I lost the game.  I think I played the black side of the Cambridge Springs Defense.

I was invited to play because it was a simul for Juniors, and I was lucky because I hadn't been a member of the chess club for very long.

I also didn't know proper simul etiquette, since I offered him a draw while I was a pawn down.  He shook his head, and I dejectedly dropped my gaze.  My father and brother (standing behind me) said that when he walked away he muttered something and sneered.

Heh. I once played Karpov. 

In fact, to bring it back on topic, I played (and lost) a Benko Gambit.