Answers.Body: <p>You lose, basically. Assuming opponent is familiar with the theory and you aren't, then a single misstep will lose you the game. <strong>Don't enter sharp lines if you don't know the theory</strong>.</p>
  <p>If you are already in the sharp line, then the safest play is to avoid the most critical continuations and seek to simplify the position as quickly as possible. For gambits the most critical continuations are generally to take the material and try to keep it, which means your best bets are probably to either decline the gambit or to return the material to reach a tenable endgame. For the gambit you've listed, that means do not play 3...dxc3; go instead for something like 3...d5 or 3...Nc6.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-21T07:49:21.587Z
Answers.Text: Do you mean that, after 1 e4 e5 2 d4 (the Centre Gambit), if Black is not familiar with the theory, they should decine (2 ... d6 or Nc6 perhaps) on the basis that accepting (2 d4 exd4) might lead to sharp play? (This supposes that Black wants to avoid sharp play.)
Answers.UserDisplayName: Rosie F
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-21T08:01:16.983Z
Answers.Text: @RosieF 1. e4 e5 2. d4 is not a gambit; White usually plays 3. Qxd4.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Allure
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-21T02:48:17.017Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-12-21T02:48:17.017Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Allure
Answers.Body: <p>There are two approaches, accept the gambit or decline the gambit.</p>
  <ol>
  <li><p>Accept the gambit.  Follow the usual best practices for calculating paying special attention to safety checks.</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>Decline the gambit.  Here 3. ..d5 instead of 3. ..dxc3 looks like a great move and probably what I would play.</p>
  </li>
  </ol>
  <p>Here is a thread on thought process / calculation that I recommend</p>
  <p><a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1609/what-thought-process-should-one-use-to-find-candidate-moves">What thought process should one use to find candidate moves?</a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-12-20T14:14:13.843Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-12-20T14:22:41.063Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2021-12-20T14:22:41.063Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Michael West
Body: <p>For example, the Danish opening:</p>
  <pre><code>[FEN &quot;&quot;]
  1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Bc4 cxb2 5. Bxb2
  </code></pre>
  <p>where basically, White gives up two pawns for positional play. And if you don't know the theory, you can lose by falling into traps.</p>
  <p>So, how can you deal with this kind of gambits/traps opening, when you don't know the theory?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-12-21T09:45:00.267Z
Comments.Text: @YiFan 3... d5 or  3... Qd7 is definitely an interesting line.
Comments.UserDisplayName: TheFakeGrandmaster
Tags: <opening><gambits><opening-traps>
Title: How can you deal with gambits/traps opening, assuming you don't know the theory of the opening yet?
ThreadText: # How can you deal with gambits/traps opening, assuming you don't know the theory of the opening yet?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-12-20)
  
  For example, the Danish opening:
  [FEN ""]
  1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Bc4 cxb2 5. Bxb2
  
  where basically, White gives up two pawns for positional play. And if you don't know the theory, you can lose by falling into traps.
  So, how can you deal with this kind of gambits/traps opening, when you don't know the theory?
  
  **Tags:** opening, gambits, opening-traps
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: @YiFan 3... d5 or  3... Qd7 is definitely an interesting line.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-12-20. Score: 9 | Accepted answer
  
  There are two approaches, accept the gambit or decline the gambit.
  
  1. Accept the gambit. Follow the usual best practices for calculating paying special attention to safety checks.
  2. Decline the gambit. Here 3. ..d5 instead of 3. ..dxc3 looks like a great move and probably what I would play.
  
  Here is a thread on thought process / calculation that I recommend
  
  [What thought process should one use to find candidate moves?](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1609/what-thought-process-should-one-use-to-find-candidate-moves)
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2021-12-21. Score: 1
  
  You lose, basically. Assuming opponent is familiar with the theory and you aren't, then a single misstep will lose you the game. **Don't enter sharp lines if you don't know the theory**.
  
  If you are already in the sharp line, then the safest play is to avoid the most critical continuations and seek to simplify the position as quickly as possible. For gambits the most critical continuations are generally to take the material and try to keep it, which means your best bets are probably to either decline the gambit or to return the material to reach a tenable endgame. For the gambit you've listed, that means do not play 3...dxc3; go instead for something like 3...d5 or 3...Nc6.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: Do you mean that, after 1 e4 e5 2 d4 (the Centre Gambit), if Black is not familiar with the theory, they should decine (2 ... d6 or Nc6 perhaps) on the basis that accepting (2 d4 exd4) might lead to sharp play? (This supposes that Black wants to avoid sharp play.)  
  > **username_1**: @RosieF 1. e4 e5 2. d4 is not a gambit; White usually plays 3. Qxd4.  
  
  ---
  
  