Over the

Horizons
Stefan Bcker

Play through and download
the games from
ChessCafe.com in the
DGT Game Viewer.
The Complete
DGT Product Line
Repairing the Englund Gambit
In March 2006 this column discussed critical lines in the Englund
Gambit 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Qe7 (there are other third moves, but
3Qe7 is the most popular if popular pertains to only 1,200 games in
the database). One of those lines seemed to come close to a refutation of
3Qe7. Ian Simpson (Norwich, UK) sent a new idea that slightly
improves Blacks chances. It is probably not sufficient to make the
variation attractive, but at least the following analysis shows several
inaccuracies in the earlier article. If you feel the desire to play 1e5, just
do so. The risk to run into this concrete variation is relatively small. In
more than 160 games with 1 d4 e5 played since 2006, the position after
the strong 9 Rb5! didnt occur even once. Does anyone read my articles?
The Englund Gambit is neglected, and so it remains playable. In an
Internet forum someone wrote: You have to wonder why anyone would
suppose that 1 d4 e5? would have the slightest chance of producing a
playable game for Black. [] Chess would be a trivial game [] if 1 d4
e5? worked; also a game not worth playing. The opposite is true:
because chess is such a rich game, even the Englund Gambit is full of
interesting possibilities.
1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Qe7 4 Bf4
The first book on the Englund Gambit was written by Henry Grob. In his
correspondence practice the text move was seen more often than the
alternatives 4 Qd5, 4 Nc3 or 4 Bg5. So I named 4 Bf4 the Grob
Variation. However, our database shows a different picture: the
committal 4 Bf4 is chosen in only eighteen percent of the games. In
modern tournament play apparently safety comes first: 4 Nc3 and 4 Qd5
(ECOs favorite) are the top choices. On fourth place, behind 4 Bf4, there
is 4 g3, followed by 4 e4, 4 Nbd2 and some others. None of these
alternatives is a reason to give up the Englund Gambit.
Visit Shop.ChessCafe.com for
the largest selection of chess
books, sets, and clocks in
North America:

Unsound Openings and
How to Exploit Them
by Roman Dzindzichashvili

Ideas Behind the Modern
Chess Openings
by Gary Lane

Understanding the
Sacrifice
by Angus Dunnington

Henry Grob (right; in play against Turiansky at Vienna 1947)
explored the Englund Gambit in numerous correspondence games.
Could this situation allow us to continue playing the Englund Gambit,
hoping for the eighty-two percent of uninformed opponents, while
preparing an emergency line (perhaps 4f6 or 4Qb4+ 5 Bd2 Qe7 6
Bc3 f6) for the eighteen percent of opponents who play 4 Bf4? My first
thought was that these numbers must be misleading. In games between
Elo-rated players the percentage of 4 Bf4 games would certainly be much
higher. But to my surprise from 220 rated games (Elo 1800+) with the
Englund Gambit only twenty-one games had that 4 Bf4. The only
explanation that I can offer is that experienced players know about 4 Bf4,
but they also know that it is dangerous for both sides and that Henry Grob
won the majority of his correspondence games against 4 Bf4. Tournament
players avoid unnecessary risks, and so they opt for a safer refutation.
4Qb4+ 5 Bd2 Qxb2 6 Nc3 Bb4 7 Rb1 Qa3 8 Nd5!
Already mentioned by Henry Grob. Most theoretical works recommended
8 Rb3 Qa5 9 a3, and the last move used to be garnered with an
exclamation mark. In the diagrammed position, which could well be
critical for the Englund Gambit 3Qe7, Black has two alternatives. Lets
start with 8Ba5, which I didnt take serious enough.
A. The Bishop Retreats: 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Qe7 4 Bf4 Qb4+ 5
Bd2 Qxb2 6 Nc3 Bb4 7 Rb1 Qa3 8 Nd5 Ba5
9 Rb5
The text move used to be attributed with an !, but 9 e4!? also comes
into consideration: 9Nge7 10 Bc4 Bxd2+ 11 Qxd2 Nxd5 12 exd5 Na5
13 Bd3 b6 14 0-0 Bb7 15 c4 0-0 (150-0-0 16 Rfc1 +/-) 16 Qe3! Qe7
(White threatened 17 Bxh7+, and 16Qc5?? was impossible because of
17 Qxc5 bxc5 18 Rb5 +-) 17 Rfe1 and White is clearly better.
9Bxd2+
Or 9Rb8 10 Bxa5 Nxa5 11 Nxc7+ Kd8 12 Nd5.
10 Qxd2 Kd8 11 e4
11a6!? (Ian Simpson)
Improving upon Grobs old analysis 11...h6 12 h4 b6 13 Bc4 Qf8
unclear, Grob, because 12 Bc4! (Simpson) would then be strong (not to
mention other problems with Grobs analysis). For the moment Black can
ignore the threats against his king: The immediate Qg5+ doesn't seem to
cause too much trouble because of the checks Black has on the first rank,
Ian Simpson.
12 Rb3
We are following a correspondence game given in [3]. The source doesnt
give the names of the players.
12 Rb1 Qxa2 13 Rd1 Qa5 14 c3 (14 Qxa5 Nxa5 15 Ng5 Nh6 +=) 14
Nge7 15 Bc4 Qc5 16 Bb3 (perhaps 16 Be2!?) 16Nxd5 17 Bxd5 (17
exd5? Nxe5) 17Ke8 18 0-0 h6 19 Qf4 Qe7
At first 20 e6! looked devastating, but Black seems to be able to defend:
20fxe6 21 Bxc6 Rf8 22 Qxc7 dxc6 23 Qa5 Rxf3! 24 gxf3 e5
(threatening Bh3) 25 Rfe1 Bd7 26 Rd3 c5 27 Qb6 Bc6, with reasonable
chances for Black (+=).
12Qxa2
Creates a familiar situation for the Bf4 variation: Black has a passed pawn
on the a-file. But before he can convert the pawn, he has to survive
Whites attack.
13 Be2 Qa1+ 14 Bd1 Qa5 15 Qxa5 Nxa5 16 Ng5 Nh6 17 Rh3
Threatening 18 Rxh6 and 19 Nxf7+. Note that 17Re8 wouldnt be a
solution either, because of 18 Rxh6 gxh6 19 Nxf7 mate.
17Rf8
17c6 is an interesting idea: 18 Nb6 Rb8 19 Rxh6 gxh6 (19Kc7 20
Rxh7 Rxh7 21 Nxc8! Rh6 22 Nd6 f6 23 Ngf7 Rh7 24 h4 +/-) 20 Nxf7+
Kc7 21 Nxh8 Kxb6 22 Nf7 Kc5 23 f4 b5. The situation is difficult to
assess, but if I had to bet, Id say that Blacks passed a-pawn is not strong
enough to compensate Whites menacing pawns on the other side of the
board.
18 Nxh7 Re8
In the anonymous correspondence game there followed 18Rg8 19 g4,
and White was better. Attacking the pawn e5 somewhat limits Whites
options.
19 Ng5
Or 19 f4 b5 20 Ng5 (threatening Rxh6 again) 20Bb7. Whites pieces
are much more active than Blacks, but there is still the pawn a6, waiting
for a great future. It must be +=, but in such an ending a lot of things can
go wrong.
19Rf8 20 f4 d6 21 Rd3 Rb8 +=
Blacks position isnt impressive, but what can White do? If 22 0-0 Bd7,
or 22 Be2 dxe5!? 23 fxe5 c6 24 Ne3+ Kc7. In both cases Black should be
able to consolidate.
B. Immediate Exchange: 1 d4 e5 2 dxe5 Nc6 3 Nf3 Qe7 4 Bf4 Qb4+ 5
Bd2 Qxb2 6 Nc3 Bb4 7 Rb1 Qa3 8 Nd5 Bxd2+
This was my main line in [2], but I am not sure anymore whether it is
better than 8Ba5 (A).
9 Qxd2 Qxa2 10 Rd1 Kd8 11 Ng5 Nh6 12 e6! d6
13 exf7!
There were a few problems with my analysis in [2], which ran: 13 e7+
Kd7 14 Nxh7! (14 g3) 14Nf5 15 Nf8+ Kd8 16 Nxc7+ Kxe7 17 Nxa8
Kxf8 +/. First of all, 14 g3 is not really an alternative, because of 14
Qa5 15 Bh3+ f5. Secondly, the last move in the variation isnt forced.
Instead of 17Kxf8, Black might postpone the decision how to take the
Nf8 for a happier moment: 17Nfd4!
For example, 18 f3 and then:
(a) 18Rxf8 19 Nc7 Kd7 20 e3 Qxc2 21 Nb5 (21 Nd5 Qc5) Qxd2+ 22
Rxd2 Nxb5 23 Bxb5 Rh8. Black has only one pawn for the exchange, but
to create open lines for his rooks, White will have to find a very
intelligent plan (which I fail to see) or he has to exchange a few pawns.
Since there are only four white pawns left, Black has realistic drawing
chances.
(b) 18Qxc2 19 Qg5+ (of course there are alternatives, all leading to
endings where Black still has to work hard for a draw. The text line is a
tactical attempt, but again Black seems to survive) 19Kxf8 20 Rxd4 f6
21 Qd5 Nxd4 22 Qxd4 (22 Qxd6+ Kf7 23 Qxd4 is similar) 22Qc5 23
Qxc5 dxc5 24 Nc7 a6 25 e4 Ke7 26 Nd5+ Kd6 27 Be2 Be6 28 Nf4 Bf7
29 Kd2 Kc6 30 Kc3 b5
I have my doubts whether White can convert his advantage into a full
point: 31 Ra1 Kb6 32 Rd1 Kc6 33 h3 a5 34 Nd5 c4 35 Ne7+ Kc5 36 Rd7.
Finally, the rook breaks into Blacks position. But apparently Black has
enough counter play with 36Ra8 or 36b4+.
The text move (13 exf7!) wasnt even mentioned in my article [2], but it
offers substantial winning chances for White.
13Qa5
13Rf8? 14 Nxc7 Kxc7 15 Qxd6+ Kb6 16 Ne4 (threatening 17 Nc3!)
16Qxc2 17 Nd2! Rxf7 18 Rb1+ Qxb1+ 19 Nxb1 Nf5 20 Qd5. White
has traded R + N for his opponents queen, and should win.
14 c3
More promising than 14 Qxa5.
14Rf8 15 Nxh7 Rxf7 16 Ng5 Rf8 17 g3 Ne5 18 Bg2 Nhf7 19 Nxf7+
Rxf7 20 Qd4 +/-
Black is in serious trouble. White doesnt have an extra pawn, as in
Variation A (8Ba5), but most players will prefer the diagrammed
position, with all kind of attacking chances and the queens still on board.
The computer suggests 20c6 21 Nb4 Ke8, when White can take on d6
and continue the attack, or he can allow the exchange of his queen, but
under very favorable circumstances: 22 f4 c5 23 Qxd6 cxb4 24 cxb4 Qc7
25 fxe5, and again Black is struggling in a difficult ending.
But is that ending lost? If this line were relevant for the correctness of the
Englund Gambit, we should perhaps look closer. There are only a few
pawns left, pawn e5 is weak, Whites Bg2 doesnt control the square h8,
and all rook endings are drawn anyway. After 25Qc3+ 26 Qd2 Qxd2+
27 Rxd2 a5 28 Bf3 Rc7 29 0-0 Ke7, an easy win for White is not in sight
(and perhaps there is no win at all).
Both lines, A and B, are unpleasant for the second player. Objectively, the
situation hasnt changed much since my last article. But the picture has
become more complicated, in comparison with the relatively short
analysis that I published three years ago.
Sources:
[1] S. Bcker: Englund-Gambit. Drei Gambits in einem, Dsseldorf 1988
[2] ChessCafe March 2006. Visiting Planet Englund
[3] www.chesspub.com
Send your games or comments to redaktion@kaissiber.de.



[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Columnists]
[Endgame Study] [The Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe.com] [Contact Us]
2009 BrainGamz, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
"ChessCafe.com" is a registered trademark of BrainGamz, Inc.