The Electrifying Elephant Gambit

First of all, check out the fantastic cover design for this book!

We have received a number of draft chapters from our Danish friends Michael Agermose Jensen and Jakob Aabling-Thomsen, the Elephant enthusiasts – that is, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5. They are doing excellent work and I can see the finished book having a ‘Mayhem-in-the-Morra-esque’ effect, whereby people realize the gambit is much better than its reputation.

Having seen snippets of the work, I have not been able to resist experimenting with the Elephant every now and then. I tried it in two rapid games against lower-rated opponents, both of whom accepted the gambit. I went slightly astray in the opening (the relevant chapters have not been delivered yet, so I had to rely on my own guesswork rather than the authors’ expertise) but won both games after some adventures. Perhaps more significantly, I played the Elephant in two local league games against guys in the 2250-2300 range. Both of them were too fearful of the Elephant’s tusks to accept the gambit pawn, and opted for a more timid line involving an early queen exchange. In both cases I equalized quickly and pressed for an advantage, eventually eking out a win in one game and settling for a draw in the other.

Obviously I won’t be playing the Elephant in every game, but so far it has been a delight to get it on the board and force my opponents to think hard at such an early stage. What do our blog readers think? Can you see yourself adding the Elephant to your repertoire as a 6,000 kg surprise weapon?

131 thoughts on “The Electrifying Elephant Gambit”

  1. Great cover (see previous thread!) and I’m glad that QC has lowered the threshold from ‘play the main lines ‘ to include this and other ‘dodgy’ openings.
    Like Smerdon’s Scandinavian it might be slightly unsound but you can almost guarantee to get it on the board and you’ll know it back to front. Sveshnikov had a similar approach with his blitz repertoire with eg Alekhine against e4 to get your prep in early. Think Caruana was much better able to get his prep in too during the WC and that was a major part of his success eg 7.Nd5 against Sveshnikov and the rare …Rd8 line against the Bf4 QGD- I’m sure Magnus was super prepared in the main lines but as he never got the chance to use it some mug will get it both barrels in the future.
    I’d bet your opponent would be similarly unprepared for the Elephant (I know one brief line myself that probably isn’t deep enough) and with a bit of work eg learn the plans for resulting endings it will probably be as 0.00 as any other opening in the real world – maybe not the best choice against an engine though!
    Best of luck to any future rogue elephants- if they don’t hit you between the eyes you’ll trample all over them!

  2. There was a time when Quality Chess wrote only about main lines. I’m happy with this change but please, now give us a repertoire on Alekhine defense and many other slightly inferior variations.

  3. PS Forgot to say I play the 3. Nxe5 as white rather than exd5 line which most books I know recommend as ‘safer’- black often takes with his queen on g2 after playing qg5 but loses f7 pawn- be interesting to hear what the authors think what black does here and what other readers of this blog play
    PPS Is Michael Jensen related to the Niels Jensen that wrote a book on the Elephant in the 80s?

  4. I would be quite surprised if this opening would turn out to give black equal chances, but if, so, I think an update of John’s 1.e4 tome is on order 🙂 .

    By the way, an easy way to avoid it altogether is 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.d4, and black has no easy way to complicate things…

  5. @JB
    3.Nxe5 was played against me in the two league games I mentioned, and 3…Bd6 4.d4 dxe4 was my reply, following the authors’ recommendation.
    I don’t know if Michael is related to Niels.

  6. @Ray

    No one is claiming the Elephant equalizes in all variations. The authors are quite open about the fact that White can get at least a slight advantage with optimal play, but they will show how Black can still get an interesting game.

    And sure, White can play stuff like 2.Nc3 and 2.Bc4 (not to mention 2.f4!?) to avoid the Elephant, but 2.Nf3 remains by far the most popular choice, so anyone intending to use the Elephant will have a good chance of getting it on the board.

  7. i am quite suspicious about this gambit. I am sure there are lots of lines with much fun for black…but as usual there is probably one line (just one is enough) that cut everything leaving black with no counterplay and a difficult game ( bishop pair vs permanent weakness or Something like).
    So white just have to read a few pages and you will be in trouble.? yes or no?
    I have a quite recent book by J.Watson about ” wild chess openings” where the elephant gambit is called Bad black opening: 4 pages for Nxe5 and 4 more pages for exd5 giving white an advantage. How does this new book deal with it ?

  8. If the book lives up to the cover it will be quite impressive.

    I know people are suspicious but after seeing what ALPHA ZERO has cooked up I have changed my mind from my initial reaction and am now highly intrigued.

    And since somebody mentioned AZ … wow…. really shows how UNLIMITED chess still is for us carbon life forms and really how little we understand.

    As far as Equality ? HIGHLY OVER RATED

  9. RYV :
    How does this new book deal with it ?

    Very good question. A hint for the answer could be to buy the book and have a look.
    But I’m afraid this is another book that QC won’t give you for free.

  10. @Ray
    you have a problem with information?
    you have a problem with free books ?

    In fact Andrew G already give me part of the answer: Black is worse . The only point is now, does JW gives the right refutation?

    By the way , i dont have any problem with such a book on “strange” openings and everyone can play what he wants ( i play 2..Df6 in king’s gambit !) .

  11. @RYV
    I don’t have Watson’s book so I have no idea how effective his recommendations are. However, I’m confused as to why he devoted four pages to each of two separate replies to the Elephant. If the opening was so bad, then one ‘refutation’ should have been enough.

    In any case, you can’t expect me to reproduce the authors’ analysis of critical variations on the blog. However, I think 3.exd5 is the critical test, and after 3…Bd6 White has a number of ways to hang on to the extra pawn. It is reasonable to assume that Black will objectively not have full compensation for the pawn, but he will reach a complex middlegame with active pieces and the initiative, which could be used to build an attack.

  12. @Andrew Greet
    Andrew, Watson classes them both as bad in his ‘Good bad and ugly’ theme but his book isn’t a repertoire so he covers a load of different lines from a variety of openings . He says 3.Nxe5 is still better for white but 3.exd5 is safer.
    Hopefully the editor looks at the lines he proposes if you haven’t looked at his book yourself- sounds like it’s someone else if you have only seen snippets

  13. @JB
    Thanks for the info; we will make sure the authors check the Watson/Schiller recommendations, as well as those of other prominent 1.e4 repertoire books.

  14. King of hears :
    There was a time when Quality Chess wrote only about main lines. I’m happy with this change but please, now give us a repertoire on Alekhine defense and many other slightly inferior variations.

    I would also like an Alekhine repertoire, but the problem is getting the right author. I know one GM who would be ideal, and I have asked him a few times, but he is too busy with other things.

  15. Hello Andrew / John.

    Your 1. e4 repertoire give some solutions vs the Elephant where White is better (which is fine) and Black seems to have little fun (which is a problem). Does this new book bring a significant improvement versus the already published antidote?

    Ty – Jay

  16. The elephant gambit might be a good surprise weapon but not more than that.
    It is however of course nice with books on some offbeat opening.

    Still waiting for QC-books on the Classical Sicilian and the Leningrad Dutch.
    The Classical Sicilian is highest on my wishlist. Malaniuk already wrote a good
    and fairly recent (2014) book on the Leningrad Dutch.

  17. @Jay
    As I mentioned in the original post, the authors have not yet delivered the chapters analysing 3.exd5 when White accepts the gambit pawn. Therefore I don’t know what they are recommending, but they are diligent researchers and will surely have some ideas for Black.

  18. @Andrew Greet

    I dont think white should try to keep an extra pawn if it give black some initiative. In such situation,( as always) there will be a way to give it back and secure a long term plus letting black struggle for a draw.

  19. @RYV
    This kind of outcome is certainly desirable for White, but Black also gets a say in how the game develops. I hope and expect that the Elephant authors will look for ways to remain a pawn down but with practical compensation instead of taking back the pawn and sacrificing all counterplay.

  20. Just a maybe little weird question…:

    Isn’t the eye of the might elephant covered too much with a name from one of the authors?

  21. Maik Naundorf :
    Just a maybe little weird question…:
    Isn’t the eye of the might elephant covered too much with a name from one of the authors?

    I meant mighty elephant of course…too bad one could not edit afterwards…

  22. Maik Naundorf :

    Just a maybe little weird question…:

    Isn’t the eye of the might elephant covered too much with a name from one of the authors?

    Not weird at all. We were discussing that in the office. I could see moving the authors’ names to the bottom of the page. And maybe putting “The” and “Electrifying” on the same top line, to clear our elephant. We might experiment with that. At this point the cover is more of a draft than a guaranteed final version.

  23. John Shaw :

    Maik Naundorf :
    Just a maybe little weird question…:
    Isn’t the eye of the might elephant covered too much with a name from one of the authors?

    Not weird at all. We were discussing that in the office. I could see moving the authors’ names to the bottom of the page. And maybe putting “The” and “Electrifying” on the same top line, to clear our elephant. We might experiment with that. At this point the cover is more of a draft than a guaranteed final version.

    That is very nice tho hear, as this moving of the names to the bottom or something similar to clear the elephant would make the cover so much better in my opinion! 🙂

  24. @Andrew Greet

    from your experience and knowledge, how would you compare Elephant gambit and 2knights defence ( 4.Ng5 d5 variation)? Is it the same kind of play ? is the elephant more or less justified/correct compare to 2N

  25. Cover no. 2 please.

    I thought the days I played such wacky openings were well behind me but I´m so curious about this book that I promise I will buy it as soon as it appears on Forward Chess.

  26. @Thomas
    I’m particularly looking forward to seeing the cover of the ‘Monkey’s Bum’ when QC agree to publish it.

    Frankenstein-Dracula Vienna, Kalashnikov and halloween gambit all deserve a decent cover too.

  27. @RYV
    I consider the 4.Ng5 d5 gambit to be every bit as ‘correct’ as the Petroff or Berlin, and it would be unrealistic to claim the same level of soundness for the Elephant. However, there are similarities in certain lines; for instance, if Black meets an early Bb5+ with …c6 in the Elephant, the ensuing positions may start to resemble the Two Knights line.

  28. An Ordinary Chessplayer

    Everyone knows the elephant is terrified of the humble mouse. The book needs to have little mice in the margins to indicate variations where the elephant is running away.

  29. Andrew Greet :
    @Jay
    As I mentioned in the original post, the authors have not yet delivered the chapters analysing 3.exd5 when White accepts the gambit pawn. Therefore I don’t know what they are recommending, but they are diligent researchers and will surely have some ideas for Black.

    Very brave playing it without the notes to the main line! Were you just going to wing it if your opponents played exd5 or were you following some theory of someone else or your own?

  30. Alright, I’ve been able to resist asking so far…but tonight I cave in to temptation.

    GM Jacob Aagaard. You’re playing black and your opponent has opened with 1.e4. You’ve got three choices: The Elephant Gambit, the Classical Sicilian or death. Which do you choose?

  31. John Shaw :
    @Maik Naundorf
    We tried moving the text, and updated the post. Which cover does everyone prefer? Original at the top of the post or updated at the bottom. Seems a clear choice to me.

    Yes, it is so much better with the elephant in full so to speak! 🙂

  32. The concept is the éléphant shaking the white pieces so I would lire to see them also. Resize thé original image so to put title and authors names out of the white pieces…imo

  33. @RYV
    Thanks for the suggestion but I don’t think it’s worth shrinking the entire image just for the sake of these few unimportant pieces on the periphery. The focal point of the cover is the Elephant smashing through the wall, and the updated cover shows this perfectly.

  34. The éléphant running over all white’s central pawns & over the Nf3 was à good illustration. Just keeping the pachyderme is a bit too simplistic to me…..

  35. Pachyderm – excellent word! (Despite the minor spelling mistake, which is certainly forgivable for a non-native speaker.) We’ll see if anyone else in the office likes your suggestion, but personally I think the cover is perfect as it stands.

    Considering that we have the word ‘electrifying’ in the title though, I do have a vision of an alternative cover design with lightning bolts coming out of the elephant’s tusks. In one of the the Austin Powers movies, Dr Evil equipped his sharks with laser beams so an elephant with lightning tusks seems only natural.

  36. I hope you included all the obligatory warning notices. “Don’t use the Elephant Gambit at home”, “Keep it away from kids”, “Electricity can be harmful”, “Don’t play it if you have a cardiac pacemaker” etc…

  37. @Michel Barbaut
    It’s much too early for a formal publication date. However, since both the authors are Danish and involved in organizing the Copenhagen Open, it would certainly be nice to have the book published in time for that event, which takes place in late July 2019. So there are no guarantees – but that’s what we are aiming for.

  38. @Thomas
    Yes indeed, these days we’d better include all such disclaimers to avoid getting sued. Elephants can be brilliant for trampling your enemies but they can also be dangerous for the rider, which is why everyone should read the instruction manual before jumping in the saddle.

  39. It could be interresting to get a comparison between elephant & latvian gambit.
    As i remember, It was one of Jonny Hector’s weapon . He says (!?) : Objectively, white get the advantage …but the good new is that it is better than it’s reputation.

    maybe both openings are close or even twin Brothers ?

  40. @RYV
    No doubt there are some similarities in the sense that both openings are objectively not fully correct, but could nevertheless be worth having up your sleeve as surprise weapons. However, when it comes to picking a surprise gambit for my own use, I’ll take the Elephant all day. Clearly I am somewhat biased due to the forthcoming book, but I will give three additional reasons:
    1) The Latvian leaves the black king too exposed for my taste. (This is by far the most important point of the three.)
    2) According to my database, the Latvian has been played in more than 2.5 times the number of games as the Elephant, so the latter is clearly a bigger surprise weapon.
    3) The Elephant has achieved a surprisingly respectable practical score of just 56.6% in White’s favour. Statistics don’t necessarily mean all that much, which is why I mentioned this point last, but it’s worth noting. For comparison, the more popular options after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 are 2…Nc6 (most successful at 55.8%), 2…Nf6 (57.3%), 2…d6 (61.1%) and 2…f5 (59.0%).

  41. From what you are saying I will take thé éléphant gambit as a training for playing with initiative.. for training games only.
    I cant accept to Play uncorrect moves Just in case my opponents doesnt know thé right variation.

  42. RYV :
    By thé Way. I love your concern about King safety in an open game gambit. I though it should be a low priority.

    Why should it be a low priority? Don’t assume that just because one side offers the gambit, the other side can’t attack. Consider a line such as 3.Nxe5 (or even 3.Nc3) 3…Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 against the Latvian, where White plays for a lead in development and initiative, and Black has to be careful to survive the opening. Nothing like this is likely to happen in the Elephant, unless Black seriously misplays it.

  43. Well, first priority is active pièces play When we play à gambit. Then unless we can convert the position to à stable advantage or equality , we should keep running for activité even if it implie weakening king’s position.
    Of course, if you have both initiative and king safety: great !
    But if you have to choose : activity first. The king will take care of himself alone.
    That’s my view of gambit play….but I rarely play gambit. I prefer safety and solid play .!

  44. @Mark

    I remember a story about a GM who only wanted to write about “serious” chess openings. When pressed, he confessed that he only thought that the Ruy Lopez main lines and the Najdorf were “serious” enough to merit his attention!

    Imagine if QC had those standards! They’d really be in trouble, since it will probably be a year at least before Negi finishes volume 6 of his series (covering the Ruy), and they don’t seem to have an author to rewrite GM Repertoire 6 on the Najdorf.

    I don’t see a problem with books on sub-standard openings, as long as they are objective. If they sold the Elephant Gambit as equal to the Ruy Lopez, I’d have problems.

  45. It’s a book I quite look forward to, there has to be space for good books on not fully sound openings. I thought the Smith Morra book was great and QC could have done worse than publishing something like Smerdon’s Scandinavian (which was nicely honest about where the problems are, but still instilled enthusiasm).

  46. @RYV

    But then the question becomes, what constitutes a good book, especially on an opening?

    One view is that Opening Books teach you the “right” way to play an opening, in which case, a book on the French written for Black would see 50 games where 49 of them are drawn or won by Black, but I think we all know that the French doesn’t score 80+ percent!

    Another view is that an opening book should match reality, and so a book on the French with 50 games should see Black score about 46 percent or so (haven’t looked up the actual percentage in any database) in those 50 games, or 23 points out of 50 games.

    Then there is the question of advertising. Take Tim Taylor’s book on the Budapest (I do not own it – have only seen the sample on Amazon). In the introduction, where you try to boost the morale of the reader, Black wins all 3 games. You get to the Introduction to part 1, and there is a game where White wins, and then in Chapter 1, White wins the first three games. Is this poorly written? Are you hoping the reader browses the introduction, buys the book, and then suddenly White starts winning every game?

    I don’t see how one can judge an opening book except maybe if there is outright bad analysis, like if it says that 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.cxd5 exd5 6.Nxd5 wins a pawn for White (which we all known is wrong). There’s too many ways to interpret how an opening book should be laid out, especially those with…

  47. @Patrick
    >But then the question becomes, what constitutes a good book, especially on an opening?

    Good books force you to think and write down your discoveries. Consider the following task-driven structure, pioneered by Reinfeld in the 1930s.
    1.The author asks you questions at various points in a game (what is the idea?, calculate Bxh6 etc) but offers minimal commentary.
    2. You write own the answers and variations.
    3. After you finish the game you check the answers IN THE BACK. There the moves are explained.

  48. I think the number one priority of an opening book should be that the analysis and accompanying explanations are first class. The rest is imo pretty much a matter of taste. Personally I prefer the ‘tree’ format, but many people will prefer the ‘illustrative games’ format. I think the result of a game is irrelevant, as long as the analysis of the opening phase is good. I like the way Chess Stars are trying to offer something for everyone by offering (in many of their books) for each chapter a quick guide, a more detailed analysis in tree format and a section on illustrative games. I also liked the ‘Easy Guide’ approach, giving just the basic knowledge and some good explanations of plans. With a little more work you can get the basics from the GM Repertoire books by just putting the bold moves + explanations in a database.

  49. Ray :I think the number one priority of an opening book should be that the analysis and accompanying explanations are first class. The rest is imo pretty much a matter of taste..

    agreed 99% ..

  50. Jimmy :
    Any plans to publish something on the Leningrad Dutch?

    Well, there is the Malaniuk book on 7…Qe8 and there is the recent work by Karolyi on 7…c6. And then soon there will be Avrukh with an announced novelty on a serious Leningrad mainline. Should be enough for the moment for any Leningrader.

  51. Hi
    I suspect the QC dongeon to be by now full of prisoners working hard on late books from the 2018 catalog. Can we get some news on the latest progress ?
    thx

  52. @Thomas
    Another book by Kornev, the Russian Lakdawala 🙂 . But seriously, I like his other repertoire books, so this should indeed be interesting.

    I wonder if there is any news on the QC publishing schedule? It’s a bit silent on this blog lately…

  53. Thomas :Chess Stars is coming up with an Alekhine book. Interesting.

    Plus the 2nd Volume on the English Opening…considering the high standard of the chess content of the Chess Stars opening series they do seem to be able to produce these books in a relatively short period.

  54. The Doctor :
    @Ray
    Yes seems like the QC team are on ‘blog strike’

    No official strike: just busy with other things. We will give an update on our publishing schedule soon, including announcing at least one new book. But I want the front cover of that new book ready before I announce it.

  55. Good game by Shankland today. Full of control and self control.
    ..Qd6 looks à bit strange… but it is theorical ? We need that QC GMREP on taimanov sicilian asap !

  56. @Mstewart
    The authors are making steady progress completing various chapters, but it’s too early to announce a printing date when we don’t yet have a completed book.

  57. Andrew Greet :
    @Mstewart
    The authors are making steady progress completing various chapters, but it’s too early to announce a printing date when we don’t yet have a completed book.

    what kind of progress ?
    we are aware the whole variation is “incorrect” but with practical possibilities for black.
    the more analysis , the better for white. Don’t you think so ?

  58. @RYV
    Not at all. The authors are quite open about the fact that Black cannot equalize in every line, but they give a lot of valuable information about how to deal with the critical lines, as well as how to capitalize on common mistakes that White makes when surprised by this opening. I think it’s shaping up to be a fine book, just on a different subject from our usual stuff.

  59. this is Something i still dont get. Why will you volontary play an opening with the ONLY hope that if your oponnent will make a mistake, you will have a chance to play a game. Otherwise, you are in deep trouble.
    Where is the interest ?

    ps: my comment is not directed against the book. but i would like to understand where is the interest of such bluff

  60. @RYV
    Most people make mistakes in all kinds of openings. It is a normal thing to hope for. If you get what you want out of a gambit, dubious or not, you might get a good attack and a nice win.

  61. Possible interests in this opening:
    – not everybody plays chess for a living. Some just wanna have fun 🙂
    – not everybody plays with or against computer.
    – some people enjoy gambits with either colour, or need chaos with Black. If the authors are honest (as it seems), we’ll see if this gambit has any merit.
    – I have no clear idea of the status of this gambit, presumably it will give Black some compensation for a material deficit. Amount of compensation typically depends on players strength and time (blitz, classical, corr). Maybe there is a window of opportunity !?

    It would be sad, though, if White could corner Black straight from the opening into a couple of depressing lines which could fit on the back cover. Say it ain’t so 🙂

  62. @RYV

    I tend to agree with you….you may catch a few by surprise at the club, or in a lightening event with an off beat line but after that I think those that you play frequently will be well prepared. Playing any off beat line still requires a lot of preparation, so isn’t it just better to spend this time on your existing repertoire or some other aspect of the game?

    Or perhaps I just lack the romance/spirit of adventure when it comes to risking playing an off beat line!!

  63. @RYV

    In addition to the many valid points made by Cowe above, I would add that the Elephant may not be as objectively bad as you imagine when you talk about Black being in “deep trouble”. In the critical lines that I have seen, Black could be a pawn down with objectively insufficient compensation, but nevertheless he is likely to have some initiative and practical chances.

    And to address Cowe’s question, although I have not seen the full book yet, I am not aware of any line where White can force Black to regain the sacrificed pawn but suffer a positional crush.

    Moreover, while the authors are passionate about the opening, they advise the readers to avoid using it in every game, as obviously the practical effectiveness of the gambit will be greatest when the opponent has not spent all morning preparing for it.

    Obviously the Elephant is not for everyone, but we think the book has a right to exist and we are certain that those who do read it will find it interesting.

  64. My practical experience on the White side of this gambit probably reflects reality for many players. I faced it once many years ago played by someone around 1600-1700 rating (I was around 1800-1900 at the time). I had never seen it before and had no idea what to do, so I played passively but carefully. I came out of the opening probably slightly worse, which would likely not have been the case with a more mainstream opening. After the opening I continued to play carefully and eventually outplayed my opponent and won.
    My takeways are twofold:
    1) When played against someone who doesn’t know it you can get a much better position than you might by playing a mainstream opening.
    2) Playing strength still counts, and you have to be able to make good moves after the opening. Depending on your opponent to fall over and die in the opening isn’t good enough.

  65. @Andrew Greet
    so white is forced to accept a tactical game where he is not better, or he can suffer from black lasting initiative. not so bad

    by the way, there is an anouncement for an other animal book : the hyppopotamus

  66. The authors are making steady progress on the Elephant. We will announce a publication date when the time comes.

    We have no immediate plans for a Hippo book. One giant mammal at a time…

  67. Haha that’s true! We need someone to invent the Rhinoceros Opening so that we can do a book on that next.

  68. I remember some old Suttles games with « the rat «  .
    That rat looked like sort of Tiger .
    A pity there is no opening called the Monty Python Rabbit ( for the moment )

  69. Hi all,

    Perhaps not the correct place for this question but I wanted to ask if there is any update on Negi 5 and if it will be released in 2019 please?

    Thank you.

    James

  70. James2 :
    Hi all,
    Perhaps not the correct place for this question but I wanted to ask if there is any update on Negi 5 and if it will be released in 2019 please?
    Thank you.
    James

    I thought this project was long abandoned.

  71. John Shaw :
    @James2
    @Topnotch
    The series is delayed, but is certainly not abandoned. No exact dates are possible now, but a lot of preliminary work has been done by Negi on Book 5.

    Very welcome news to hear. Looking forward to when I can get Book 5 in my hands as I absolutely love Negi’s writing style.

  72. [ Andrew Greet (Quote) ‘I played the Elephant in two local league games against guys in the 2250-2300 range. Both of them were too fearful of the Elephant’s tusks to accept the gambit pawn, and opted for a more timid line involving an early queen exchange.’]

    The Queen exchange line that I know and sometimes employ is known to be a bit better for White, namely:

    1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nxe5 Bd6 4.d4 dxe4 5.Bc4 Bxe5 6.Qh5 Qe7 7.Qxe5 Qxe5 8.dxe5 Nc6 9.Nc3 Nxe5 10.Bb3!? With a two result type of game, White wins or Black manages to grovel a draw.

    Funnily enough Andrew Martin released a Chessbase 60min Video series on the Elephant, but somehow failed to address this simple and annoying antidote.

    How did your League games develop?

    Postscript: Just wanted to mention that The Elephant Gambit seems to be GM Mark Hebden’s pet system in Bullet Chess on the ICC, as I have seen him play many many games with it there. So clearly it has its appeal. 🙂

  73. @Topnotch
    My league games featured the 5.Nc3 Bxe5 endgame line. The 5.Bc4/6.Qh5 version is more challenging but so far no one has played it. I guess when people are surprised by this opening, they want to play safe and the tactical finesse of 6.Qh5 does not seem to occur to them as a way of reaching the endgame. It’s certainly a reasonable option for White although our Elephant authors have concluded that Black can neutralize the pressure with correct play.

  74. Ultimately I do not think shinning a light on The Elephant will be good for it’s health. Maybe the authors are encountering insurmountable challenges. Anonymity is this Gambit’s greatest asset, although considering the size of an Elephant, you won’t be able fly under the radar for very long. 🙂

  75. @Barbaut Michel
    Most of the work has been done; it’s mostly just minor lines which need to be finished off at the authors’ pace.

    @Topnotch
    On the contrary: although we all know it’s not equalizing in the same way as the Berlin or Petroff, I was surprised at the amount of resources Black has. I would never take it as my main defence to 1.e4 but I’ll certainly continue to enjoy playing it at fast time limits. We invite our audience to keep an open mind and judge the Elephant after the book comes out.

  76. Andrew Greet :
    @Barbaut Michel
    Most of the work has been done; it’s mostly just minor lines which need to be finished off at the authors’ pace.
    @Topnotch
    On the contrary: although we all know it’s not equalizing in the same way as the Berlin or Petroff, I was surprised at the amount of resources Black has. I would never take it as my main defence to 1.e4 but I’ll certainly continue to enjoy playing it at fast time limits. We invite our audience to keep an open mind and judge the Elephant after the book comes out.

    Will do Andrew, and I will definitely be getting this one when its released as I’m way too curious about the lines and what has been found to pass this up.

  77. @Topnotch
    the elephant gambit comes in the open game after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5.
    What about his cousin ( mammoth gambit ?!) in the sicilian after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d5 !?
    do you think it also deserve some attention ?

  78. Haha I like the concept of a Mammoth Gambit but unfortunately I think 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d5 needs to remain extinct.
    However, for those looking for a weapon against the Petroff, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bd3!? offers an Elephant with an extra tempo, so Black can practically resign already.

  79. Andrew Greet :
    Haha I like the concept of a Mammoth Gambit but unfortunately I think 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d5 needs to remain extinct.
    However, for those looking for a weapon against the Petroff, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Bd3!? offers an Elephant with an extra tempo, so Black can practically resign already.

    Interesting. Chessbase has only 18 games, but White has scored 58.3%, so it might be worth further investigation.

  80. Nick :
    Did this book get cancelled? Or is it still planned?

    “The Electrifying Elephant Gambit” is very definitely still planned. It will be in 2020, but no fixed month yet.

  81. I have the book “Elephant Gambit” by Jensen, Purser and Pape. Also it is dealt with in some issues of Blackmar-Diemer gambit Review. I tried it in an allegro tournament today. It completely confused my opponents. I scored one win and one loss against much higher rated opponents not having lookedat the theory for years.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top