A BUST TO THE KING'S GAMBIT1 Bobby Fischer

The King's Gambit has lost popularity, but not sympathy. Analysts treat it with kid gloves and seem reluctant to demonstrate an outright refutation. The Chessplayers Manual by Gossip and Lipschtz, published in 1874, devotes 237 pages to this gambit without arriving at a conclusion. To this day the opening has been analyzed romantically - not scientifically. Moderns seem to share the same unconscious attitude that caused the oldtimers to curse stubborn Steinitz: He took the beauty out of chess. To the public, the player of the King's Gambit exhibits courage and derring-do. The gambit has been making a comeback with the younger Soviet masters, notably Spassky (who defeated Bronstein, Averbach and myself with it). His victories rarely reflected the merits of the opening since his opponents went wrong in the mid-game. It is often the case, also, as with Santasiere and Bronstein, that the King's Gambit is played with a view to a favorable endgame. Spassky told me himself the gambit doesn't give White much, but he plays it because neither does the Ruy Lopez nor the Giuoco Piano.

1. Published in American Chess Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Summer 1961), pp. 3-9.

The refutation of any gambit begins with accepting it. In my opinion the King's Gambit is busted. It loses by force. 1. e2-e4 2. f2-f4 3. g1-f3 e7-e5 e5xf4 d7-d6!

with his King and Queen reversed, Black wins easily. 4. h7-h6!

This is the key to a troublesome position, a high-class waiting move. At Mar del Plata, 1959, I played 3... g7-g5; against Spassky, but this is inexact because it gives White drawing chances in the ensuing ending: e.g., 4. h2-h4 g5-g4; 5. f3-e5 g8-f6; 6. d2-d4 d7-d6; 7. e5-d3 f6xe4; 8. c1xf4 f8-g7; and now 9. c2-c3! (replacing Spassky's 9. b1-c3) 9. ... d8-e7, 10. d1-e2 c8-f5; 11. b1-d2 leads to an ending where Black's extra Pawn is neutralized by White's stranglehold on the dark squares, especially f4. Another good try, but also inexact, is the Berlin Defense: 3. ... h7-h6; 4. d2-d4 g7g5; 5. h2-h4 f8-g7; 6. g2-g3 g5-g4; (also playable is 6. d6; 7. g3xf4 g5-g4) 7. f3h2 f4xg3; 8. h2xg4 (8. d1xg4 loses to 8. g3xh2; 9. g4-g7 d8xh4+; 10. e1-d1 h4f6) 8. d7-d5; 9. e4-e5 c8-f5; 10 c1-f4, where Black cannot demonstrate any advantage. Of course 3. d7-d5; equalizes easily, but that's all. 4. f1-c4 ...

This in conjunction with Black's previous move I would like to call the Berlin Defense Deferred. By this subtle transposition Black knocks out the possibility open to White in the last note (to move 3). 5. d2-d4 6. 0-0 7. c2-c3 g7-g5 f8-g7 ...

Necessary to protect the Queen's Pawn. 7. g2-g3 is always met by g5-g4; 7. b8-c6

Here there is disagreement as to Black's best move. Puc and Rabar, Euwe, Keres, and most analysts give the text as the main line and mention 7. g8-e7(!); in passing. I think 7. g8-e7; is best because there is no reason why Black should not strive to castle King-side: e.g., 8. g2-g3 d6-d5!; 9. e4xd5 f4xg3; 10. h2xg3 (if 10. f3-e5 g3xh2+!; 11. g1-h1 0-0; 12. d5-d6 d8xd6; wins) 10. 0-0; 11. d1-b3 d8d6; 12. g1-g2 e7-f5; wins. There is little practical experience with this subvariation. 8. d1-b3 ...

4. d2-d4 transposes, the only difference if White tries to force matters after 4. g7g5; 5. h2-h4 g5-g4; 6. f3-g5 (White also gets no compensation after 6. c1xf4 g4xf3; 7. d1xf3 b8-c6; or 6. f3-g1 f8-h6 ) 6. f7-f6!; 7. g5-h3 g4xh3; 8. d1-h5+ e8-d7; 9. c1xf4 d8-e8!; 10. h5-f3 d7-d8; and

If 8. g2-g3 g5-g4; 9. f3-h4 f4-f3; 10. b1d2 ... (Euwe and other analysts betray their soft-mindedness toward this opening by giving the inferior 10. g7-f6(?); 11. d2xf3 g4xf3; 12. d1xf3 unclear!!). 2

This is yet another example of sentimental evaluation - after 12. d8e7; followed by c8-h3 and 0-0-0 Black wins easily. The Black's Pawn on f3 is a bone in White's throat so why force him to sacrifice when he must anyway? 10. d8-e7; is the strongest move. In this last variation (instead of 10. b1-d2) White can vary with 10. d1-b3 but then comes Nimzovitch's beautiful winning line: 10. d8-e7; 11. h4-f5 c8xf5; 12. e4xf5 (if 12. b3xb7 a8-b8; 13. b7xc6+ e7d7; 14. c6xd7+ f5xd7; and Black has a winning endgame) 12. ...0-0-0; 13. c4xf7 e7-e2; 14. b3-e6+ (if 14. f1-f2 c6xd4!; 15. f2xe2 fxe2; wins) 14. d8-d7!; 15. f1-f2 e2-d1+; 16. f2-f1 d1-c2; 17. b1-d2 g8-f6; (threatening c6-d8) 18. f7-g6 (if 18. e6-b3 c2xb3; 19. f7xb3 d6-d5; with a winning endgame) 18. d6-d5; followed by c6e7 with a winning game for Black. 8. 9. h2-h4 d8-e7 g8-f6

e1-h4; 15. c4xf7+ e8-d8; 16. b3-d5 c6xe5!; 17. d4xe5 g7xe5; (threatening Bishop on h2 and mate) 18. f1-d1 h4-g3; wins - owing to the threat of h8-h1+. 12. 13. g5xe4 e8-d8 ...

Not 13. g5-e6+ c8xe6; 14. b3xe6 e7xe6; 15. f7xe6 c6xd4!; 13. 14. c1xf4 e7xe4 ...

14. f1xf4 also loses to 14. e4-e1+; 15. f4-f1 h8-h1+; 16. g1xh1 e1xf1+; 17. h1h2 f1xf4; etc. 14. And Black wins... Of course, White can always play differently, in which case he merely loses differently. (Thank you, Weaver Adams!)2 3 . c6xd4

Again theoretical disagreement. Perfectly good is 9. g5-g4!; 10. c1xf4 (forced, not 10. f3-d2 c6xd4!; 11. c3xd4 g7xd4+; etc.) 10. g4xf3; 11. f1xf3 - given by analysts again as unclear but after g8-f6 followed by 0-0, White has nothing for the piece. 10. h4xg5 11. f3xg5 h6xg5 f6xe4

2. Fischer was alluding to a statement by Adams, author of the controversial book White to Play and Win, who famously claimed that White won by force with best play, and that if Black played differently than the lines given by Adams, he merely loses differently. 3. Weaver Warren Adams (April 28, 1901 in Dedham, Massachusetts January 6, 1963 in Cedar Grove, New Jersey) was an American chess master, author and chess opening theoretician. His greatest competitive achievement was winning the U.S. Open Chess Championship in 1948. He played in the U.S. Chess Championship five times.

A wild position, but Black is still master. 12. c4xf7+ ...

The game is rife with possibilities. If 12. g5xe4 e7xe4; 13. f1xf4 e4-e1+; 14. f4-f1