I think a good gambit doesn't make it so easy to return the material for compensation.
Win with the Halloween Gambit!!!
Sort:
As I just explained Optimissed, that is not how the term winning is used properly.
Just think in terms of one side being better and you won't have the problem of using the word differently from nearly everyone else.
Even if there's a minority that agrees with you, how you use it is still completely ambiguous because for most people, "winning" means "in the process of winning". It doesn't mean superior or better. Use English how it's meant to be used and you won't have the problem of being misunderstood.
May 10, 2022
0
#106
Optimissed wrote:
Colin20G wrote:
Hahahaha lol at people who genuinely the halloween gambit can be busted on the basis of general principles, without knowing it before. Dogmatism gets you too far and yes I can somewhat understand your impression (which was mine when I saw some dude playing it for the first time).
Halloween was playable in correspondence chess until computer centaur chess became the norm and the refutation lines aren't obvious at all (to people who would claim that the lines are logical. What would have you done before the computer era, with your lone brain and your books?)
I've been promised disaster a lot but keep winning against people who are in disgust, why is that?
Just play 6. ...Bb4. It isn't a refutation because it doesn't win by force but it did only take me 10 seconds to see it and it gives black the better game, because of better development. I can't believe the gambit would be played by strong players, because any half decent opponent will see that they don't need to work their way through any difficult position where they're only technically winning. All they need to do is play 6. ...Bb4 and they're slightly better..
Thats a good way of looking at it! With 5...Ng6 black may very well be objectively winning, but will have to do some serious defending until around move 30-40. Even with the refutation 5...Ng6 6...Ng8 7...c6/d5, white gets an attack for a long time before black can untangle, and not in the most intuitive manner either. 6...Bb4 avoids all the stress; a much easier position for black to play. However black no longer has a clear way to win, least not that I'm aware of yet, and the game could end in a draw where black may wonder "could I have won had I played 5...Ng6?" That is, Nc6 Bb4 declined line could be seen as relinquishing 1/2 a point if black is objectively winning?
But yes white is never "winning" or better, but just banking on black adhering to "play the board, not your opponent"/ aim to play the objectively best move. It's all in jest as a mind game, the ternary scoring system being inferior to the other sides discontentment in try to defend accurately, so 6...Bb4! refuse to play and return to normal chess is a neat approach 
May 11, 2022
0
#108
pfren wrote:
6...Bb4 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Bd3 is by transposition a mainline 4 knights Scotch, which is quite equal. Black can surely do better than that.
Is there anything wrong with simply 6...Bb4 7.dxc6 Nxe4 8.Qd4 Qe7 =/+
Steven-ODonoghue wrote:
pfren wrote:
6...Bb4 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Bd3 is by transposition a mainline 4 knights Scotch, which is quite equal. Black can surely do better than that.
Is there anything wrong with simply 6...Bb4 7.dxc6 Nxe4 8.Qd4 Qe7 =/+
Black's definitely better but it's only an edge and not a win.
6...Bb4 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Bd3 is by transposition a mainline 4 knights Scotch, which is quite equal. Black can surely do better than that.>>
Yes black can but in blitz, the pragmatic move may be to go for the edge rather than the outright refutation, if you don't know the lines. If you know the lines, then hang onto the material plus.
May 11, 2022
0
#111
pfren wrote:
Where is that =/+ evaluation based?
Chessable course. but we know how you feel about those, so I probably should have thought twice about writing it. 
" 9.Be3 is best but after 9...0-0 10.Bd3 we play 10...Nxc3 11.bxc3 Bd6 with an obvious structural advantage for black"
May 12, 2022
0
#113
sansuk wrote:
What's more important: finding the truth or winning?
finding the truth. 😁
technical_knockout schreef:
sansuk wrote:
What's more important: finding the truth or winning?
finding the truth. 😁
"The right standpoint is to play for pleasure". Dr. Tarrasch, Munich, January 1931
May 20, 2022
0
#116
technical_knockout wrote:
i enjoy searching for the best moves. 🙂
It’s a blunder gambit because you lose a knight
„The beauty of a move lies not in its appearance but in the thought behind it.“ — Aron Nimzowitsch
Emanuel Lasker - Arthur John Mackenzie, Simultaan, Birmingham, March 17 1908
Thanks @Sansuk I luv these games!
In any case, it should be pretty obvious that black is ahead after this dubious gambit. If black knows lines, he can hang onto the material. If not, return it for development.