In early 1982 I had discovered an amazing gambit in one of my blitz games with Malcolm Kirkpatrick. I did not know what to name it. Therefore I used a combined name of another familiar opening, the Grob's Attack. It was thus named the Queens Pawn Grob. My first actual game with this opening did not occur til my 2 game match with Reynolds Takata in 1982.
It was not until I had written a letter to Hugh E. Myers of Myers Opening's Bulletin, that I had discovered that the Queen's Pawn Grob had been played much earlier by other players and Masters dating to the 1930's with Humphrey Bogart's game and to Bronstein's game during the 1950's. It was also known as the "Bullfrog" and "Weidenhagen Gambit".
This gambit is very transpositonal in nature. It could easily transpose into a number of other openings such as a form of the Budapest Defense, Alekhine's defense, Sicilian Defense and etc.
The opening moves are 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4! The move 2.g4 tends to disrupt Black's normal development. If black declines the gambit with 2...d5 then 3.g5 can be very troublesome. In some lines white gets play on the half open g file with Rg1. If black captures the g pawn with 2...Nxg4 white picks up 2 tempi and a long lasting strategic attack. Like most other gambits White gets good control of the center, good development of his pieces and a strong center. Black may have to defend throughout most of the game.
One of the most interesting ideas that has been tried against the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit has been Oshima's line (1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 e5.). This is a form of the Budapest Gambit. This was first played by Oshima against me in 1985. And also in 1986 where Oshima had analyzed this line extensively but was still busted over the board in 1986. Black gets good development and counterplay for his e5 gambit pawn.
It has taken me a long time to fully realize that the Gibbins- Weidenhagen Gambit is not a true Queen's Pawn opening. A good majority of the games lead to king pawn positions. This is the very reason that the gambit is so potent.
Bronstein - Simagin Irreg.Openings-Harding [A45] Moscow Team Ch. 1967 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 d5 3.g5 Ne4 4.f3 Nd6 5.e4 [5.e4 appears to be a bit too premature. Better was 5.Nc3 attacking the d5 pawn and supporting the e4 pawn thrust.] 5...dxe4 6.fxe4 e5! [Black could have played 6...Nxe4 winning a pawn but White could have compensation with 7.Bg2 Nd6 etc.] 7.dxe5 Nxe4 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8 [There appears to be still a lot of play left on both sides. David Bronstein might not have liked his shattered pawn structure and a difficult endgame.] 1/2-1/2
Nakamura,C - Takata,Reynolds [A45] Match vs Takata 10/10/82 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 d5 3.g5 Ne4 4.f3 Nd6 5.Nc3 c6 6.e4 dxe4 7.fxe4 g6 8.Be3 Bg7 9.Bd3 Na6 10.a3 Nc7 11.Qf3 [There was a question on where I should have developed my Queen. 11.Qf3 was the most aggressive line.] 11...Be6 12.0-0-0 Qd7 13.Nge2 Nc4 14.d5 Bg4 [Not 14...cxd5 because 15.Bxc4 drops a N.] 15.dxc6 Qxc6 [If 15...Bxf3 16.cxd7+ (16...Kf8 17.Bxc4 threatening d8 queen) Kxd7 17.Bxc4+ and White is up a N.] 16.Qf2 Bxe2 17.Bxe2 Nxb2 18.Rdf1 [If 18.Kxb2 Qxc3+ 19.Kc3 Qb2+ 20.Kd2 Bc3+ 21.Kd3 0-0-0+ and White drops at least a piece or gets mated.] 18...Qxc3? 19.Qxf7+ Kd8 20.Bc5! Qe5 [Black does not play 20...Qxc5 because he loses his material advantage to 21.Qxg7 Re8 22.Kxb2] 21.Bxe7+ Kc8 [21...Qxe7 is bad because of 22.Rfd1+ Nxd1 23.Rxd1+ and black drops the Q.] 22.Bd6 Qc3 [Black could have played 22.Qxd6 and give back the piece and shut down White's tactical shots with a slightly inferior game, but decided to retain the material advantage which was fatal.] 23.Bg4+ Kb8 24.Rf3 Qc4 25.Qxg7 Rd8 26.Rc3 1-0
Nakamura,C - Vasquez,Enrique (2005) [A45] National Open '83 3/17/83 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 Nxg4 3.e4 d6 4.Be2 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nbd7 6.Be3 e6 7.Qd2 a6 8.0- 0-0 b5 9.a3 Bb7 10.d5 Nxe4?! [Black made a strategic mistake. He starts to open up the center when his pieces are much less developed.] 11.Nxe4 exd5 12.Bg5! f6 13.Nxf6+! Nxf6 14.Bh5+ g6 15.Re1+ Kd7 16.Bg4+ Nxg4 [16...Kc3 17.Qc3+ Kb6 18.Bxf6 d4 19.Qxd4+ c5 20.Bxd8+ should win.] 17.Bxd8 Rxd8 18.Qd4 Bh6+ 19.Kb1 Ne5 20.Qh4 d4 21.f3 Be3 22.c3 c5 23.cxd4 Bxd4 24.Ne2 Nxf3 25.Qh3+ Kc7 26.Nxd4 Nxd4 27.Re7+ Kb6 28.Rhe1 Bc8 29.Qe3 Bf5+ 30.Ka2 d5 31.Qg3 Rc8 32.Qe5 Nc6 33.Qf6 Rhf8 34.Rf7 Rxf7 35.Qxf7 d4 36.Qxh7 d3 37.Qh6 Rd8 38.Qe3 Nd4 39.b4 c4 [Not good was 39...Nc2 40.Qxc5+ Kb7 41.Re7+ (41...Kb8 or 41...Ka8 leads to mate, 41...Rd7 drops the pawn at d3, 41...Bd7 also drops the pawn at d3)] 40.a4 c3 41.Qe7! Be6+ 42.Rxe6+ Nxe6 43.a5+ Kc6 44.Qxe6+ Rd6 45.Qc8+ Kd5 46.Qxc3 Ke4 47.Qd2 Rd4 48.Qg2+ Ke3 49.Qg3+ Kd2? 50.Qg2+ Ke3 51.Qg3+ Kd2? [Up until Black's last error the game was still very close. It was still very difficult to win this game.] 52.Qf2+ 1-0
Druke - Becker [A45] GWG Thematurnier 1984 (30 min. partien) 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 d5 3.g5 Ne4 4.Nf3 c5 5.c3 Nc6 6.Bf4!! Qb6 7.Nbd2 Qxb2 8.Nxe4 dxe4 9.d5 exf3 10.dxc6 fxe2? [Black got a little too greedy. Now White develops another piece.] 11.Bxe2 Qxc3+ 12.Bd2 Qe5 [Black had other possible Q moves such as 12....Qa3 13.cxb7 Bxb7 14.Bb5+ Kc8 15.Ba5+ Kc8 16.Qd8+mate, but they all seem to lose.] 13.cxb7 Bxb7 14.Qa4+ Kd8 15.Ba5+ Qc7 [If 15...Kc8 16.Qd8+mate.] 16.Rd1+ Kc8 17.Qe8+ 1-0
Nakamura,C - Tsoy,Victor (2200) [A45] Hi St Champ Qual '84 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 Nxg4 3.e4 d6 4.Be2 Nf6 5.Nc3 c5 6.Nf3 cxd4 7.Nxd4 g6 8.Be3 Bg7 9.Qd2 Nc6 10.0-0-0 Nxd4 11.Bxd4 a6 12.f3 Be6 13.Nd5 Bxd5 14.exd5 Rc8 15.Kb1 Qc7 16.c4 h5 17.Qe3 h4 18.Rhe1 Nh5 19.Bf1 Bxd4 20.Qxd4 0-0 21.Bd3 Nf6 [Black's kingside is very weak and there is no real counterplay on the Queen side.] 22.Rg1 b5 23.Qxh4 bxc4? [23...Kg7 should have been played. It appears that Black under estimated the Bishop sac on g6.] 24.Bxg6! fxg6 25.Qh6! [Black expected 25.Rxg6+ and 25...Kf7 should escape the king side attack.] 25...e5 26.Rxg6+ Kf7 27.Rxf6+ Ke7 28.Qg7+ 1-0
Nakamura,C - Oshima,Daniel (1815) [A45] Quad Tournament 3/29/86 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 e5 [The "Oshima" variation of the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit. Daniel Oshima had studied this variation extensively and is said to have created a mini booklet .] 3.dxe5 Nxg4 4.Nf3 Bc5 5.e3 Nc6 6.Nc3 Ngxe5 7.Nxe5 Nxe5 8.Qh5 d6 9.Be2 g6? [A key error. Now the dark squares f6, g7 and h6 become very weak.] 10.Qh6 Qf6? 11.f4 Ng4 12.Bxg4 Bxg4 13.Nd5! Qd8 14.b4! Bb6? [14...c6 15.Bb2 was better.] 15.Bb2! Bh5 16.Nf6+ Ke7 17.Nxh5 Ke6 18.0-0-0 Qf8 19.Bg7 Qe8 20.f5+ Kxf5 21.Qf4+ 1-0
Nakamura (2105) - Rubsamen,Rogelio (2000) 2/19/95 [A45] Dick Dole Memorial Rd4 Gibbins-Weidenhagen 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 [The "Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit".] 2...Nxg4 3.e4 d5 4.Be2 Nf6 5.e5 Nfd7 6.e6 fxe6 [White is 2 pawns down, but Black is really tied down. For a long time I had thought that White's game was unsound. But recent practice games with my Chess Programs has proven that White has good winning chances.] 7.Bd3 [The other option was to play the Q to d3 then g3 with other moves such as Bf4 and h4, if Black decides to castle kingside.] 7...Nf6 8.Nf3 b6 9.Qe2 [9.Qe2 had a twofold function. 1. To prevent Black from playing Ba6 exchanging my attacking Bishop. 2. To attack the weak point at e6.] 9...Nc6 10.c3 Bb7 11.Bf4 [I could have played 11.Qxe6 but Black could free his game by exchanging Queens. The other interesting move was 11.Ng5 which required exact calcul- ation. I opted instead to further develop my pieces.] 11...Nh5 12.Bg3 Nxg3 13.hxg3 Qd6 14.Rxh7 Rxh7 15.Bg6+ [15.Bg6+ played to prevent normal castling.] 15...Kd7 16.Bxh7 g6! [Black's last move was played to give back the pawn to free his game. Otherwise the B at f8 could be trapped at f8.] 17.Bxg6 Bg7 18.Ng5? [This was too dangerous. 18.Nbd2 was much safer. I got too greedy. I saw a chance to win the Black Q at d6 by playing my N to f7. Also if Black played 18...e5 then I had some tricks with 19.Bf5+ Ke8 20.Qh5+ etc.] 18...Rh8! 19.Nd2 Nxd4! [The first shock! I did not expect this N sacrifice. 20.Qf1 or 20.Qe3 were not possible because of 20...Nc7+.] 20.cxd4 Rh1+ 21.Nf1 Qb4+ 22.Kd1 Qxd4+ 23.Ke1 [23.Kc1 was not possible because of 23...Rxf1+ 24.Qxf1 Qxb2+. 23.Kc2 also not possible because of 23...Qxb2+.] 23...Qb4+ 24.Kd1 [At this point I already accepted the fact that this game would be drawn by perpetual check.] 4...Qa4+ [Black could have tried for a draw with perpetual check with 24...Qd4+ but tried for the win instead.] 25.Kc1 Kc8 26.Bc2 Qd4 27.Rb1 Bh6 28.f4 e5! 29.Ne6! Qg1 30.Kd2 exf4 31.gxf4 d4 32.Bf5 Kb8 33.Bd3 Bd5 34.Kc2 Qg8 35.Nxd4 Bxa2 36.Qf3! Bxb1+? [Best was 36...Bd5 to slow down White's attack on the a8-h1 diagonal. However after 36...Bd5 White had 37.Be4 playing for control of the diagonal.] 37.Kxb1 Rg1 [37...Qg1 was also loses to 38.Nc6+ Kb7 39.Nb4+ Kb8 40.Na6+ Kc8 41.Bf5+ e6 42.Bxe6+ Kd8 43.Qd5+ Ke8 44.Qd7+ Kf8 45.Qf7+mate.] 38.Nc6+ [The Q drops with either 38...Kc8 39.Nxe7+ or with 38...Kb7 39.Nxe7+] 1-0
Nakamura,C (2100) - Felber,Joseph (2120) Game 30 minutes [A45] Match-Game 2 10/12/95 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 d5 3.g5 Ne4 4.f3 Nd6 5.Nc3 c6 6.e4 g6 7.Be3 Be6 8.Qd2 Bg7 9.0-0-0 b5 10.exd5 Bxd5 11.Nxd5 cxd5 12.h4 Nc6 13.h5 gxh5 14.Rxh5 Nc4 15.Bxc4 [15.Bxc4 was forced since I could not allow Black to post a N on a key strategic square.] 15...bxc4 16.c3 Qa5 17.a3 Qb5 18.Qc2 Rb8 19.Rd2 [19.Rd2 played to further guard my b2 square.] 19...Na5 20.Rdh2 Nb3+ 21.Kb1 h6 22.g6 Rf8 23.Bxh6 Bxh6 24.Rxh6 Kd7 25.g7 Rg8 26.Qf5+ Kc7 27.Qxf7 Qd7 28.Re2 Rxg7 [An very tricky R sac, but it was unsound.] 29.Qxg7 Qf5+ 30.Rc2! [This move is the key to White's defense.] 30...Nd2+ 31.Ka2! [Black cannot play 31...Qxc2 because 32.Qxe7+ Kc8 33.Rh8+ mate.] 31...Qd7 32.Rxd2 Kb7 33.Re2 Ka8 34.Rh8 [Black had no more counter play. White had only a minute left on the clock but this should be no problem.] 1-0
brobishkin
14 ( +1 | -1 ) Hmmm...Interesting article Paulvalle... I will look into the various lines of play... The article brought a smile to my face... Thank you...
paulvalle
411 ( +1 | -1 ) Recent comment by Clyde;Listed below is the email I recently received from Nico Vandenbroucke about the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.g4). Yes, I really racked my brains on this one.
-----Hello Clyde
I've seen on the internet you're also a fan of this opening ! there's one line that I find interesting and I would love to share some info on it.it's your game against Rubsamen,Rogelio Nakamura (2105) - Rubsamen,Rogelio (2000) 2/19/95 [A45] Dick Dole Memorial Rd4 Gibbins- Weidenhagen 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 Nxg4 3.e4 d5 4.Be2 Nf6 5.e5 Nfd7 6.e6 fxe6 and now you quote :[White is 2 pawns down, but Black is really tied down. For a long time I had thought that White's game was unsound. But recent practice games with my Chess Programs has proven that White has good winning chances.] Well I tried it out myself but with few luck.I play 7.Qd3 and after 7...g6 i'm somewhat stuckWith c5, Bg7, Nc6,Qb6 black has some serious counterplay , and white doesn't really have a target to hit at !care to share your analysis.
Regards Nico
-----------
Listed below is my reply to Nico:
I spent the last 2 days reanalyzing the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit line (1. d4 Nf6 2. g4 Nxg4 3. e4 d5 4. Be2 Nf6 5. e5 Nfd7 6. e6 fxe6 7.Qd3) and have concluded that black is clearly better in almost all lines. Black has the 2 pawn breaks of c5 and e5 and with Bg7 has pressure on white's d pawn. White's d pawn is actually weak. There are a few lines that give white chances but black would have to blunder or play 2nd or 3rd best moves. Once black gets one of 2 pawn breaks of c5 or e5, black frees his game and activates his pieces. Black does not seem to have any weaknesses in his game. It is difficult for white to mount an attack. Below is the analysis that I did with Fritz5 on this line.
Below is the recommended line of the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit (1. d4 Nf6 2. g4 Nxg4 3. e4 d5 4. Be2 Nf6 5. e5 Nfd7 6. Bg5). I did a preliminary analysis, but the final verdict on this line is still not out yet.
keiserpaul
34 ( +1 | -1 ) The counter gambit !A few years ago I often played this opening with good results. I remember one particular game that started with 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 Nxg4 3.e4 and now my opponent played the totaly shocking and unexpected move 3. .. e5 After 4.Qxg4 exd4 5.Qe2 Nc6 6.a3 d6 7.Nd2 g6 8.Nb3 Bg7 it was Black who had initiative for material. Finally I was very happy to reach a draw after 23 moves.
paulvalle
505 ( +1 | -1 ) Another e-mail from Clyde;The Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit – Oshima Defense (1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 e5) was first played against me in 1985 by Daniel Oshima in a tournament game. He had prepared this line for my Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit. It is said that he had created a mini-booklet on this line. He had tried the line 2 times in 2 different tournament games against me, but lost both games. This is a very interesting counter gambit to the Gibbins- Weidenhagen Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.g4). I have taken another look at this Oshima line and listed below is my analysis. I have compiled a database of 17 Oshima Defense games plus analysis lines in a file called gwoshima.cbv a chessbase compressed file, which I posted in the files section. What really is the Oshima Defense? I realized before that it has elements of both the Englund Gambit (1.d4 e5), the Budapest Defense (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5), the Scandinavian (1.e4 d5) and other independent lines. A good majority of actual games played have been with the g pawn chase line (13 of 17 games).
1. d4 Nf6 2. g4 e5 3. h3 exd4 4. Qxd4 Nc6 5. Qa4 b5 6. Qxb5 Rb8 7. Qd3 {this is an interesting line. This is like the Mieses-Kotroc Gambit in the Scandinavian.} *
1. d4 Nf6 2. g4 e5 3. h3 exd4 4. Qxd4 Nc6 5. Qd3 $11 {Fritz5 gives the position as equal. This line is like one of the regular Scandinavian lines except the g pawn is at g4 and the h pawn is at h3.} *
1. d4 Nf6 2. g4 e5 3. g5 Ne4 (3... Nd5 $2 4. dxe5 4... Nb6 $16 { this line is not good for black since he dropped a pawn for no compensation.})(3... Ng4 $4 4. h3 $18 {The black N drops.}) (3... Ng8 $2 4. dxe5 $14 {black also drops a pawn in this line.}) 4. Nf3 exd4 5. Qxd4 d5 6. Nc3 Nxc3 7.Qxc3 Nc6 8. Qb3 $11 {Fritz5 says that this position is equal. Clyde: White actually has good prospects for an attack on the kingside. After developing the black square B to e3 or f4, white castles queenside. Black has problems in developing his queenside. The B at c8 cannot move for awhile because of Qxb7. Therefore black will try to castle kingside. White can then roll his pawns down the kingside for a kingside attack.} *
The flexible move Bg2: There are 4 games in the database. See games 24, 27, 29 & 31.
Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit Theory (The 2…e6 Variation)
In the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit (1.d4 Nf6 2.g4) there exists an interesting way for Black to decline the gambit. This is by playing the move 2…e6 which is like a cross between an Alekhine's Defense (1.e4 Nf6) and a French Defense (1.e4 e6). After 2.e6 White can chase the Black N at f6 by playing 3.g5. Black has several possibilites:
3…Nd5 4.c4 or 4.e4 then 4…Nb6. Actually 4.e4 is preferable since with 4.c4 Black has 4…Bb4+ exchanging off some minor pieces. This is like an Alekhine's Defense where Black is trying to lure White's pawns to come forward and be over extended. Listed below are 2 sample games with the 3…Nd5 4.e4 line.
1. d4 Nf6 2. g4 2... e6 {[2...e6 is not a common reply to the Gibbin's-Weidenhagen Gambit.]} 3. g5 Nd5 4. e4 Nb6 5. Nc3 d5 6. Nf3 dxe4 7. Nxe4 Be7 8. Bd3 8... O-O {[Castling kingside is a strategic error. All of White's forces are aimed at the kingside.]} 9. Rg1 Nc6 10. Be3 {[10.Be3 guards the center as well as develop a piece.]} 10... Na4 11. Qc1 {[11.b3 is not good because of 11...Nb2 and my good B at d3 is exchanged.]} 11... a6 12. b3 Nb6 13. c3 e5 14. Qc2 {[14.Qc2 was played because the B at d3 was unguarded plus White is preparing to castle kingside.]} 14... exd4 15. Nxd4 Nxd4 16. Bxd4 Nd5 17. O-O-O Ba3+ 18. Kb1 Re8 19. Nf6+! {[A powerfull move. Now the kingside is ripped open.]} 19... gxf6 20. gxf6+ Kh8 21. Rg7 Nf4 22. Rxh7+ Kg8 23. Rg1+ Bg4 24. Rxg4+ Ng6 25. Rg7+ Kf8 26. Rxf7+ Kg8 27. Rxg6+ Kxf7 28. Bc4+ Qd5 29. Bxd5+ Re6 30. Rg7+ Ke8 31. Bxe6 b6 32. Qh7 Bd6 33. Re7+ Kd8 34. Qg8# 1-0
3…Ng8 This is like the Brooklyn Defense in the Alekhine's Defense which has the moves 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Ng8. The game below is the only known game with the move 3…Ng8.
This particular variation (2…e6) of the GWG is new territory and has not been extensively explored. Over ten years ago someone played this variation against me in a blitz game and gave me a very difficult game before resigning to my GWG. Unfortunately I do not have that game score.
paulvalle
47 ( +1 | -1 ) more 2...e6I had a strange thought. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 e6 White can play an Omega (1.d4 Nf6 2.e4) type of Gambit with the move 3.e4 gambiting the e pawn. The g pawn is now guarded. After 3...Nxe4 4.Nc3 Nxc3 5.bxc3 White has that familiar Omega Gambit pawn structure with pawns at d4, c3 & c2 and with the e pawn missing. The only difference is that White has a pawn at g4. I am not sure if this new gambit will lead to a good game for White.