I Beat a 2700 GM with the NEW NAKHMANSON GAMBIT 

Once I won against an 2500 online. I am around 2000 online

1800, I was 1350 at the time, now I'm 1250 :(

Well I got a draw once against my chess engine. Does that count?

I've been able to beat a 1650 in 10 +5 . I havnt played in a while but my account is around 1500 in that time control :)

I once beat a FM in a lichess bullet arena. He had mate in 1 when I flagged him...

I want to know this gambit, can you elaborate?

❤️

@@SLIMEBALL3400 Thank you.. God bless.. Greg

Yes, Lev Gutman gave the Canal Variation a very extensive analysis in Kaissiber 34 and 35, with additional inputs from the editor Stefan Bücker. They confirmed that the line where Jonathan Schrantz said, "You are kind of just down a pawn" (7...dxc3 8.Bxd5 Be6 9.Bxe4 Qxd1 10.Rxd1 cxb2 11.Bxb2 f6) is the most problematic one for White. 12.Bc3 has scored quite well for White in Lichess games, and I think the rarely played 12.h4, aiming to weaken Black's kingside with h4-h5-h6, also gives White decent hacking chances. But objectively I have little doubt that White doesn't really have enough for the pawn.

After watching more of the video the way I won the piece with with the variation of Ne7

You have to know your Gambit better than your opponent. It's just that simple. The purpose of most gambits isn't to win quickly like the b e n k o Gamble. The main purpose is to achieve what is called dynamic equality. That is where peace development, positional Harmony, and sustaining ongoing pressure of your opponent's position justifies the sacrifice of material in the present for the purpose of securing positional advantage in the future.

No. A lot of gambits lead to superior endgames. The KG for instance, if you win back the pawn, you often just have a better structure for an endgame. Most gambits are based upon positional principles with an attempt at tactical justification and the most popular ones black is only equal, not better.

@@tommydashed4205 it depends on what level of chess a person is currently playing at. At a level below master, a lot of things can happen where again but is quickly justified. But if you played and defeated over 100 GM as I have over 50 years, you learn that the initiative must be earned.. not stolen.. by solid play. That is why I tell all my students to stick to modern theory.. rather than get them to try the latest tricky openings for white or defenses for black. Again, the difference between regular players in Chess Masters is that.. regular players look at moves while master players look at ideas that tell them what is the best move to play in any given position.

Did you watch the video?

@@russell.bishop Yes, that's why I asked. The assessment of variants may change over time, so my wild guess is that someone named Nakhmanson reevaluated the old Canal variant. If you can point me to a video describing the reassessment of the Canal variant and the role of Nakhmanson, I would greatly appreciate it.

Oh OK, Rb1, Kg3, Rc1, Kf3, Rf1 and now it is black to move.

Is 'Magnus score' the chess equivalent of 'Erdos number'?

@@beetehotraroy3468 yep

looking up what a gambit is would have taken approximately the same amount of work as making this comment

@@wonnor that is true.

You must be fun at parties

who said this video is for beginners, dimwit ?

@@jotarokujo5132 let's say people below 2000 then! because otherwise these openings are not good/playable

whut? the game's literally available for anyone to see on lichess. just go to his profile