On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 4:21:17 PM UTC+2, Ken Blake wrote:
> On 12/16/2021 10:39 PM, William Hyde wrote:
> > On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 4:28:52 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> >> On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 10:32:43 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> >> > On Saturday, December 11, 2021 at 12:13:25 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> >> > > On Wednesday, December 8, 2021 at 11:08:56 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> >> > > > On Wednesday, December 8, 2021 at 3:38:44 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> >> > > > > Bs"d
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Another innocent victim of the fishing pole trap. A 1765 bit the dust on move 20 after I fed him a horse of mine, then took his horse, and proceeded to checkmate him: https://lichess.org/kB4ckXzX1nIg
> >> > > > Playing terrible players certainly hurts your game.
> >> > > Bs"d
> >> > >
> >> > > I don't care about my game getting hurt. I do care about me getting hurt, and that's what happens when I loose.
> >> > Can't help you there. I'm not a psychiatrist.
> >> Bs"d
> >>
> >> That's OK, I don't need help. I already found the solution; play weak players, and you won't lose too often. It really is that simple.
> >> > > So terrible players it is for me.
> >> > >
> >> > > Anyway, the average rating in Lichess is between 1550 and 1600. So a 1765 is way above that. Can't call that a terrible player.
> >> > Oh yes I can. Lichess ratings are terribly inflated. Your 1765 is about 1200 in the rating pools I have participated in or run (Canadian chess federation, US chess federation, world blitz chess, and so on).
> >> That would mean that the vast majority of players on lichess are terrible players.
> >
> > Let us say that they are terrible compared to the ratings that they hold. We are all, of course, terrible compared to the people at the top, but some are terrible even compared to other terrible players.
> >
> >> I don't think it is realistic to say that. I think that players which are far below the average can be called "terrible players", but not the majority of all players.
> >> > You normally play fairly well, given your trappy style. I commented because in this game, unlike other games, you made two moves that were not blunders but were otherwise pretty bad.
> >> Gambits themselves are considered bad: https://tinyurl.com/dashing-gambit
> >
> > Mostly they are, no doubt about it.
> If by "mostly," you don't mean all of them, sure. The Queen's gambit,
> perhaps the Marshall Attack, and a few others are counterexamples.
> > But not so bad as to be unplayable, even in serious chess, where the
> > opponent has a long time to work out a response. As someone once said
> > "No gambit works in theory, but all work in practice". With some
> > exaggeration.
> "No gambit" is a giant exaggeration.

Bs"d

The queen's gambit is not a real gambit, because you can always get the pawn back. So you cannot bring that as an example that some gambits are solid and playable.

https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit

On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 9:21:17 AM UTC-5, Ken Blake wrote:
> On 12/16/2021 10:39 PM, William Hyde wrote:
> > On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 4:28:52 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> >> On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 10:32:43 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> >> > On Saturday, December 11, 2021 at 12:13:25 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> >> > > On Wednesday, December 8, 2021 at 11:08:56 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> >> > > > On Wednesday, December 8, 2021 at 3:38:44 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> >> > > > > Bs"d
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Another innocent victim of the fishing pole trap. A 1765 bit the dust on move 20 after I fed him a horse of mine, then took his horse, and proceeded to checkmate him: https://lichess.org/kB4ckXzX1nIg
> >> > > > Playing terrible players certainly hurts your game.
> >> > > Bs"d
> >> > >
> >> > > I don't care about my game getting hurt. I do care about me getting hurt, and that's what happens when I loose.
> >> > Can't help you there. I'm not a psychiatrist.
> >> Bs"d
> >>
> >> That's OK, I don't need help. I already found the solution; play weak players, and you won't lose too often. It really is that simple.
> >> > > So terrible players it is for me.
> >> > >
> >> > > Anyway, the average rating in Lichess is between 1550 and 1600. So a 1765 is way above that. Can't call that a terrible player.
> >> > Oh yes I can. Lichess ratings are terribly inflated. Your 1765 is about 1200 in the rating pools I have participated in or run (Canadian chess federation, US chess federation, world blitz chess, and so on).
> >> That would mean that the vast majority of players on lichess are terrible players.
> >
> > Let us say that they are terrible compared to the ratings that they hold. We are all, of course, terrible compared to the people at the top, but some are terrible even compared to other terrible players.
> >
> >> I don't think it is realistic to say that. I think that players which are far below the average can be called "terrible players", but not the majority of all players.
> >> > You normally play fairly well, given your trappy style. I commented because in this game, unlike other games, you made two moves that were not blunders but were otherwise pretty bad.
> >> Gambits themselves are considered bad: https://tinyurl.com/dashing-gambit
> >
> > Mostly they are, no doubt about it.
> If by "mostly," you don't mean all of them, sure. The Queen's gambit,
> perhaps the Marshall Attack, and a few others are counterexamples.

I think the Marshall and the Benko are sound and playable. I'm not sure if the last word on the King's gambit has been written, I'd take it to be sound at the moment. There is a sound gambit in the Queen's Indian (best known from the Denker-Pinkus game in a US championship. Larsen once took the pawn and won, but he said later "of course it is very bad") and a friend, rated 1900, beat an IM who took the Bxc7 gambit in the Grunfeld.

But you can do well with any gambit, especially if your opponent has read somewhere that it isn't sound, but didn't learn just why it isn't sound.

> > But not so bad as to be unplayable, even in serious chess, where the
> > opponent has a long time to work out a response. As someone once said
> > "No gambit works in theory, but all work in practice". With some
> > exaggeration.
> "No gambit" is a giant exaggeration.

It was a humorous comment. Many of these are attributed to Tartakower, but in this case I think it was a British player.

William Hyde

On 12/18/2021 4:18 PM, William Hyde wrote:
> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 9:21:17 AM UTC-5, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 12/16/2021 10:39 PM, William Hyde wrote:
>> > On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 4:28:52 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
>> >> On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 10:32:43 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
>> >> > On Saturday, December 11, 2021 at 12:13:25 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
>> >> > > On Wednesday, December 8, 2021 at 11:08:56 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
>> >> > > > On Wednesday, December 8, 2021 at 3:38:44 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
>> >> > > > > Bs"d
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Another innocent victim of the fishing pole trap. A 1765 bit the dust on move 20 after I fed him a horse of mine, then took his horse, and proceeded to checkmate him: https://lichess.org/kB4ckXzX1nIg
>> >> > > > Playing terrible players certainly hurts your game.
>> >> > > Bs"d
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I don't care about my game getting hurt. I do care about me getting hurt, and that's what happens when I loose.
>> >> > Can't help you there. I'm not a psychiatrist.
>> >> Bs"d
>> >>
>> >> That's OK, I don't need help. I already found the solution; play weak players, and you won't lose too often. It really is that simple.
>> >> > > So terrible players it is for me.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Anyway, the average rating in Lichess is between 1550 and 1600. So a 1765 is way above that. Can't call that a terrible player.
>> >> > Oh yes I can. Lichess ratings are terribly inflated. Your 1765 is about 1200 in the rating pools I have participated in or run (Canadian chess federation, US chess federation, world blitz chess, and so on).
>> >> That would mean that the vast majority of players on lichess are terrible players.
>> >
>> > Let us say that they are terrible compared to the ratings that they hold. We are all, of course, terrible compared to the people at the top, but some are terrible even compared to other terrible players.
>> >
>> >> I don't think it is realistic to say that. I think that players which are far below the average can be called "terrible players", but not the majority of all players.
>> >> > You normally play fairly well, given your trappy style. I commented because in this game, unlike other games, you made two moves that were not blunders but were otherwise pretty bad.
>> >> Gambits themselves are considered bad: https://tinyurl.com/dashing-gambit
>> >
>> > Mostly they are, no doubt about it.
>> If by "mostly," you don't mean all of them, sure. The Queen's gambit,
>> perhaps the Marshall Attack, and a few others are counterexamples.
>
> I think the Marshall and the Benko are sound and playable. I'm not sure if the last word on the King's gambit has been written, I'd take it to be sound at the moment. There is a sound gambit in the Queen's Indian (best known from the Denker-Pinkus game in a US championship. Larsen once took the pawn and won, but he said later "of course it is very bad") and a friend, rated 1900, beat an IM who took the Bxc7 gambit in the Grunfeld.
>
> But you can do well with any gambit, especially if your opponent has read somewhere that it isn't sound, but didn't learn just why it isn't sound.

I agree with all the above.

>> > But not so bad as to be unplayable, even in serious chess, where the
>> > opponent has a long time to work out a response. As someone once said
>> > "No gambit works in theory, but all work in practice". With some
>> > exaggeration.
>> "No gambit" is a giant exaggeration.
>
> It was a humorous comment. Many of these are attributed to Tartakower, but in this case I think it was a British player.

Yes, I understood what you meant. I was pointing that out for anyone
here who didn't.

On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing..
>
> So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1.Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
>
> Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate..
>
> Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
>
> Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
>
> Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
>
> I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
>
> https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit

Bs"d

Bagged another on with my new Reti opening, followed by the Tennison gambit: https://lichess.org/RiMUkizcxcZW

OK, it was a measly 1676?, but it was still funny. The enemy came out of the opening with a castle missing. :)

https://tinyurl.com/winning-only

Bs"d

Bagged another with the Reti opening, followed by the Tennison gambit. A 1700 bit the dust after falling in the trap in the Tennison: https://lichess.org/lRbxFWRH4zpJ

He came out of the opening with a bishop missing, and the rest was disaster for him.

I hope for him that he learned something from this painful experience.

https://tinyurl.com/Nigel-kill

Bs"d

A 1750 blundered away a bishop in the Englund gambit: https://lichess.org/glesDGOCwlEt He surrendered unconditionally on move 7.

These are the kind of chess games I like.

https://tinyurl.com/last-blunder

On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing..
>
> So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1.Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
>
> Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate..
>
> Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
>
> Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
>
> Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
>
> I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
>
> https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit

Bs"d

Like I said: A Tennison gambit was a rare occurrence, because not many people play the Scandinavian. But thanks to that GM in the above youtube, they are now coming thick and fast. Just slaughtered an 1828 with the Tennison. He came out of the opening with a bishop missing, and on move 20 it was all over: https://lichess.org/bG8u0JPzz7SJ

You've got to love those traps!

https://tinyurl.com/trappish

Bs"d

A 1722 met the fishing pole trap: https://lichess.org/G4Jgv7fmpcMN He swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. I reeled him in on move 13.

https://tinyurl.com/trappish

Bs"d

Things come in clusters. All things. Also fishing poles. Here an 1833? took the bait, and got hooked. He got reeled in on move 11: https://lichess.org/Uxhu9UD8TxVo

https://tinyurl.com/fish-pole-trap

On Saturday, December 25, 2021 at 9:58:32 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > Bs"d
> >
> > I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing.
> >
> > So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1.Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> > Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
> >
> > Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate.
> >
> > Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
> >
> > Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
> >
> > Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
> >
> > I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> > I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
> >
> > https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit
> Bs"d
>
> Like I said: A Tennison gambit was a rare occurrence, because not many people play the Scandinavian. But thanks to that GM in the above youtube, they are now coming thick and fast. Just slaughtered an 1828 with the Tennison.. He came out of the opening with a bishop missing, and on move 20 it was all over: https://lichess.org/bG8u0JPzz7SJ
>
> You've got to love those traps!
>
> https://tinyurl.com/trappish

Bs"d

And thanks to my new Reti opening yet another Tennison gambit! An 1822 reacted weird on it, started defending the pawn on e4 with f5. But with a simple tactical trick which I picked up somewhere along the trappy line, a deflection of the king while the queens were eyeing each other, the enemy had to part with his queen for 2 light pieces: https://lichess.org/NPXLEDO0Rag4

It all started with a horse fork, however, that didn't come to anything, because the enemy king consumed the horse. That was a deliberate but painful horse sacrifice. Sometimes the horse has to go for the greater good, the greater good here being the catching of the enemy queen.

And then the enemy queen fell.

The enemy limped on to move 29, before he surrendered unconditionally.

All in all a satisfying game.

https://tinyurl.com/quote-happy

On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing..
>
> So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1.Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
>
> Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate..
>
> Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
>
> Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
>
> Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
>
> I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
>
> https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit

Bs"d

Got another Tennison gambit, thanks to that Reti opening: https://lichess.org/67gp9bRhBYoA

The enemy came out of the opening a horse short, and after that a relatively innocent horse fork, which was only going to yield me an exchange, finished him off. He committed hara kiri by pressing the resign button.

https://tinyurl.com/beerklem

On Wednesday, January 5, 2022 at 5:14:10 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > Bs"d
> >
> > I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing.
> >
> > So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1.Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> > Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
> >
> > Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate.
> >
> > Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
> >
> > Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
> >
> > Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
> >
> > I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> > I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
> >
> > https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit
> Bs"d
>
> Got another Tennison gambit, thanks to that Reti opening: https://lichess..org/67gp9bRhBYoA
>
> The enemy came out of the opening a horse short, and after that a relatively innocent horse fork, which was only going to yield me an exchange, finished him off. He committed hara kiri by pressing the resign button.

He committed suicide with Nb3. He might be about 1200 in our speed rating system.

"Resigns" was perhaps his best move in the game, though he should have played it much earlier.

Usually your games have some amusement factor, seeing how people cope with your trappy openings. But not this time. You'd beat this guy about as fast with 1a3.

I've advised a couple of (real) 1500 players I know to get on lichess. I'd like to see what ratings they wind up with. One is a big Stafford gambit fan.

William Hyde

On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 3:34:59 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 5, 2022 at 5:14:10 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > Bs"d
> > >
> > > I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing.
> > >
> > > So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1.Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> > > Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
> > >
> > > Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate.
> > >
> > > Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
> > >
> > > Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
> > >
> > > Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
> > >
> > > I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> > > I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
> > >
> > > https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit
> > Bs"d
> >
> > Got another Tennison gambit, thanks to that Reti opening: https://lichess.org/67gp9bRhBYoA
> >
> > The enemy came out of the opening a horse short, and after that a relatively innocent horse fork, which was only going to yield me an exchange, finished him off. He committed hara kiri by pressing the resign button.
> He committed suicide with Nb3. He might be about 1200 in our speed rating system.
>
> "Resigns" was perhaps his best move in the game, though he should have played it much earlier.
>
> Usually your games have some amusement factor, seeing how people cope with your trappy openings. But not this time. You'd beat this guy about as fast with 1a3.

Bs"d

I think you're right. It was not so much a trap as a course blunder by the enemy.

But this one is closer to a trap I think, even though it is also a good pair of blunders: https://lichess.org/cRkZCwOvcVLR

First blunder was h6, giving me Qh5+, second blunder was resigning on move 5. Because if I would have made the fork on f7, he could play Qe8, pinning the horse on my queen, and things are not clear from there.

But be that as it may; fact is that the Tennison gambit came through for me.. Again. :D

> I've advised a couple of (real) 1500 players I know to get on lichess. I'd like to see what ratings they wind up with. One is a big Stafford gambit fan.
>
> William Hyde

Might be interesting.

"real 1500 players", is that 1500 FIDE?

https://tinyurl.com/Tennison-tank-missile

On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 10:21:15 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 3:34:59 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 5, 2022 at 5:14:10 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > > Bs"d
> > > >
> > > > I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing.
> > > >
> > > > So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1.Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> > > > Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
> > > >
> > > > Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate.
> > > >
> > > > Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
> > > >
> > > > Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
> > > >
> > > > Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
> > > >
> > > > I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> > > > I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
> > > >
> > > > https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit
> > > Bs"d
> > >
> > > Got another Tennison gambit, thanks to that Reti opening: https://lichess.org/67gp9bRhBYoA
> > >
> > > The enemy came out of the opening a horse short, and after that a relatively innocent horse fork, which was only going to yield me an exchange, finished him off. He committed hara kiri by pressing the resign button.
> > He committed suicide with Nb3. He might be about 1200 in our speed rating system.
> >
> > "Resigns" was perhaps his best move in the game, though he should have played it much earlier.
> >
> > Usually your games have some amusement factor, seeing how people cope with your trappy openings. But not this time. You'd beat this guy about as fast with 1a3.
> Bs"d
>
> I think you're right. It was not so much a trap as a course blunder by the enemy.
>
> But this one is closer to a trap I think, even though it is also a good pair of blunders: https://lichess.org/cRkZCwOvcVLR
>
> First blunder was h6,

I think f5 is the first blunder. Not that it is necessarily a terrible move - I have no idea - but exposing your king like
that without any idea of what to do next is a blunder. And as he showed with h6, he had no such idea.

> giving me Qh5+, second blunder was resigning on move 5. Because if I would have made the fork on f7, he could play Qe8, pinning the horse on my queen, and things are not clear from there.

Actually, white has several ways of winning. Resigning is the best move here.

>
> But be that as it may; fact is that the Tennison gambit came through for me. Again. :D
> > I've advised a couple of (real) 1500 players I know to get on lichess. I'd like to see what ratings they wind up with. One is a big Stafford gambit fan.
> >
> > William Hyde
> Might be interesting.
>
> "real 1500 players", is that 1500 FIDE?

USCF. I'll keep you posted if they bother.

William Hyde

On Friday, January 7, 2022 at 12:04:17 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 10:21:15 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > On Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 3:34:59 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, January 5, 2022 at 5:14:10 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > > On Monday, December 13, 2021 at 8:19:15 PM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > > > Bs"d
> > > > >
> > > > > I like the Tennison gambit, but the problem was, it just didn't happen too often. I had to wait with white after 1.e4, until somebody was kind enough to play the Scandinavian defense, 1... d5. Then my horse goes to f3, the enemy usually takes my pawn on e4, and the Tennison gambit is in full swing.
> > > > >
> > > > > So I found this youtube, that speaks about the Tennison gambit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwFdW7s9I7c The GM gives another approach to the gambit, I tried it, and I like my old approach better. BUT, I got something very important out of that youtube, namely that as white I can force unsuspecting opponents into the Scandinavian defense, without them willing, wanting, or knowing it. I should start as white with the Reti opening; 1..Nf3, and most of the time the enemy then reacts with 1... d5, and then I do e4, and lo and behold; we have a Scandinavian opening on the board, and to be more precise: A Tennison gambit. And that works like a charm.
> > > > > Almost always the enemy takes my e4 pawn, at the same time attacking my horse of f3. My horse then goes to g5, attacking the enemy pawn on e4, and the game is on. Most of the time they start defending the pawn, trying to hang on to their extra pawn, and most of the time then disaster hits black hard an merciless. What you get then is an Englund gambit with reversed colors.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a freshly played example: https://lichess.org/H4JcKTBsT82P The enemy was slaughtered on move 10. He fell for the typical Englund gambit mate.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is an older game of 3 days ago, where I played the same opening against an 1822?, and he resigned on move 4: https://lichess.org/Xv7L6IngdSHZ
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a game of 4 days ago, in which I followed the line advocated by the GM in that youtube: https://lichess.org/fNhzQw8p0X8J I started again with the Reti opening, and forced the enemy into a Scandinvian defense.. It worked, but it is not so devastating as that inverted Englund gambit. The enemy kept on resisting until move 20, and that is just too long. So I switched back to my old trap.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is another example from 6 days ago in which I followed the advise of the GM. It didn't work out too bad, I came out of the opening with a piece more, and went on to win: https://lichess.org/bNDweLcoxSUD But I like the other trappy line better. However, it is always good to have an alternative line in a trappy gambit, for when the opponent gets conditioned to the first trap, then you can get him with the other line.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have had that forced Scandanivian line many more times, but not always does the opponent start to defend his pawn, and sometimes I blunder, so not every Tennison gambit is a guaranteed win, but many are.
> > > > > I'm very happy with this new addition to my bag of tricks. :)
> > > > >
> > > > > https://tinyurl.com/trappy-gambit
> > > > Bs"d
> > > >
> > > > Got another Tennison gambit, thanks to that Reti opening: https://lichess.org/67gp9bRhBYoA
> > > >
> > > > The enemy came out of the opening a horse short, and after that a relatively innocent horse fork, which was only going to yield me an exchange, finished him off. He committed hara kiri by pressing the resign button.
> > > He committed suicide with Nb3. He might be about 1200 in our speed rating system.
> > >
> > > "Resigns" was perhaps his best move in the game, though he should have played it much earlier.
> > >
> > > Usually your games have some amusement factor, seeing how people cope with your trappy openings. But not this time. You'd beat this guy about as fast with 1a3.
> > Bs"d
> >
> > I think you're right. It was not so much a trap as a course blunder by the enemy.
> >
> > But this one is closer to a trap I think, even though it is also a good pair of blunders: https://lichess.org/cRkZCwOvcVLR
> >
> > First blunder was h6,
> I think f5 is the first blunder. Not that it is necessarily a terrible move - I have no idea - but exposing your king like
> that without any idea of what to do next is a blunder. And as he showed with h6, he had no such idea.
> > giving me Qh5+, second blunder was resigning on move 5. Because if I would have made the fork on f7, he could play Qe8, pinning the horse on my queen, and things are not clear from there.
> Actually, white has several ways of winning. Resigning is the best move here.
> >
> > But be that as it may; fact is that the Tennison gambit came through for me. Again. :D
> > > I've advised a couple of (real) 1500 players I know to get on lichess.. I'd like to see what ratings they wind up with. One is a big Stafford gambit fan.
> > >
> > > William Hyde
> > Might be interesting.
> >
> > "real 1500 players", is that 1500 FIDE?
> USCF. I'll keep you posted if they bother.

Bs"d

Thanks. And the Stafford gambit is an excellent choice. Just had another taker, a 1795. He had to part with an exchange in the opening, and even though he played on until the mate, he had to bite the dust: https://lichess.org/ylDI8oY0DpKv

The Stafford gambit rocks!

https://tinyurl.com/Deadly-Staff

Bs"d

Bagged another victim with the Reti opening, which so very often turns into a Tennison gambit. An 1852? bit the dust after falling in the trap in the Tennison gambit: https://lichess.org/1r7F6D1oDTF2

I went for the old trap, which gives an Englund gambit stile position. It worked like a charm, and on move 9 I happily checkmated the enemy.

https://tinyurl.com/Black-lost-Tennison

Bs"d

Here yet another Tennison gambit: https://lichess.org/0Z0N1FO7xcDX On move 11 the enemy was down a horse, and he surrendered unconditionally.

I have to send that GM a thank you, for telling me about the Reti opening, which can lead to so many Tennison gambits.

https://tinyurl.com/Tennison-tank-missile

Bs"d

In this game I went for the good old fishing pole: https://lichess.org/5TY437n1lFX6 Unfortunately it must have been that the enemy had previous experience with that trap, because he refused to take my horse with his pawn. He must have thought it looked fishy.
In the end I forced him to take it with his bishop, but it was not the real thing. But I had a little bit of a fishing pole situation, with a half open h-line for my castle toward his king. This made the enemy so nervous that he tried desperately time and again to exchange queens, with me running from the exchanges. In the end he was successful in exchanging queens, it was just that he overlooked that the exchange would cost him a horse, so he resigned on move 19.

https://tinyurl.com/fishy-pole

Bs"d

The fishing pole is a golden oldie. I tried it again today, and lo and behold, the enemy took the bait, and got hooked: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/321124

On move 11 it was all over, the enemy saw that mate on move 13 was inevitable, and surrendered.

https://tinyurl.com/fish-pole-trap

On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 12:41:40 AM UTC+2, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> The fishing pole is a golden oldie. I tried it again today, and lo and behold, the enemy took the bait, and got hooked: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/321124
>
> On move 11 it was all over, the enemy saw that mate on move 13 was inevitable, and surrendered.
>
> https://tinyurl.com/fish-pole-trap

Bs"d

Oops wrong link: https://lichess.org/gWhhH2oFZGOy

https://tinyurl.com/keep-calm-play

Bs"d

Here yet another Tennison gambit: https://lichess.org/2UJXEijOPqIH

On move 7 the enemy was down a bishop, and he surrendered unconditionally.

I have to send that GM a thank you, for telling me about the Reti opening, which can lead to so many Tennison gambits.

https://tinyurl.com/beerklem

Bs"d

Disaster struck.

The enemy started with d4. I'm getting a bit tired of the Englund gambit, so I decided to go for the Budapest gambit, which has a handful of traps in it. So I played after his d4 my horse to f6. He was supposed to now do c4, but he did c3. I didn't let this put me off my stride, and I played e5 anyway, even though this was not exactly a Budapest gambit.

He took my pawn on e5, and attacked my horse on f6. My horse jumped to g4, and attacked the pawn on e5, that selfsame pawn that a second ago was attacking my horse. Oh how I turned the tables on him.
Then his horse came out to f3, protecting his lone pawn on e5.
Me seeing that the pawn on e5 was no longer ripe for the taking, decided to turn this into a real gambit, and played d6, offering my d6 pawn to his e5 pawn.
He accepted. He took my d6 pawn with his e5 pawn. Then my bishop retaliated, and went from f8 to d6, taking his pawn.
So I was a pawn down, but had nice development, and had set a nice trap for the enemy. A trap that he fell into head over heels. What did he do? He played the natural move h3, trying to kick away my horse on g4. And as we all know, the road to chess hell is paved with natural moves.
Yes, he did kick away my horse, it was just that my horse went to a square he had totally absolutely not expected. My horse smacked in on f2, thereby forking both his queen and his castle, so one of the two was going to get lost.

Oh oh, these horse forks.

He decided to take my horse on f2 with his king, thereby saving his castle from certain death. But like I said; either his castle or his queen had to go.
He just saved his castle by eating my horse, so therefore, now his queen had to go.
I played my bishop from d6 to g3, checking the king on f2. That bishop also prevented the king from going back to e1, right next to his queen. That bishop, by moving away from the d line, had also totally opened up the d line, to the extend that the queens where now eyeing each other. His problem was that his queen was undefended, and because the bishop prevented the king from going back to e1 and protecting the bishop, therefore his queen was lost.
He took my bishop on g3, and suddenly his king was on a weird square right out of the opening. You don’t see that in too many openings, the white queen on g3, on move 8, and I doubt it is very good. And also on move 8, after his king went to g3, my queen on d8 took his queen on d1. And then I was a queen ahead for a horse and a bishop.
And with my horse smacking in on f2, I had also gotten back the pawn I gambiteered. I was a happy camper.

OK, he got by means of a skewer an exchange back, but I was happily hunting for his castle in the corner on a1, I was in a position where I was going to win more material, en then disaster struck. What happened was, my comp froze. Wouldn’t do anything at all anymore. I had to restart the beast to get it working again. And then, when I came back to Lichess, I had lost the game because I supposedly “left the game”: https://lichess.org/0X3HWM475pWz

Oh horror…. :(

Sorry that this is such a long story, longer than any I wrote about my successful traps, but my psychiatrist says that talking about it is therapeutic.. That I should not keep it all inside, until suddenly it will all come out in a burst of mad violence.

So I cannot end this story with a nice or funny tinyurl.

I try some poetry to express how I’m feeling deep inside…

And may we see each other again in better times.

https://tinyurl.com/roses-wilted

Bs"d

Thank God, the tides have turned.

I had white, so I played the Reti opening, which was advised to me by that GM. And lo and behold, the enemy played d5, after which I played e4, and there it was, yet another Tennison gambit on the board. Well, a virtual board, since I played on Lichess: https://lichess.org/UL2dsq3J3VFH

My opponent was no noob, and 1831, but still, he started to defend his pawn.. I kept on attacking his pawn, he threw his queen in the fray, and then, suddenly, he had to say goodby to his castle on a8, and then suddenly, in stead of being a pawn up, he was a rook down. Soon there after I took another pawn, and I was on +6. He limped on to move 21, but then surrendered.

That was more like it.

https://tinyurl.com/Reti-vs-Scand

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:27:46 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> Thank God, the tides have turned.
>
> I had white, so I played the Reti opening, which was advised to me by that GM. And lo and behold, the enemy played d5, after which I played e4, and there it was, yet another Tennison gambit on the board. Well, a virtual board, since I played on Lichess: https://lichess.org/UL2dsq3J3VFH
>
> My opponent was no noob,

Yes he was.

and 1831,

Meaningless on that server.

William Hyde

On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 1:21:27 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:27:46 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > Bs"d
> >
> > Thank God, the tides have turned.
> >
> > I had white, so I played the Reti opening, which was advised to me by that GM. And lo and behold, the enemy played d5, after which I played e4, and there it was, yet another Tennison gambit on the board. Well, a virtual board, since I played on Lichess: https://lichess.org/UL2dsq3J3VFH
> >
> > My opponent was no noob,
> Yes he was.
>
>
> and 1831,
>
> Meaningless on that server.

Bs"d

De average rating on that server is somewhere between 1550 and 1600, so an 1830 is far from a noob on that server.

I doubt if he would be invited to the Tata steel tournament, but that is a whole different level.

http://tinyurl.com/50-proc-math