Answers.Body: <pre><code>  [FEN ""]
  
  1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 f5?!
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>This is the Colorado Gambit. </p>
  
  <p>If you are looking for a good solid opening, try looking up some of the following:</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li><a href="http://www.chess.com/opening/eco/C46_Four_Knights_Game" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Four Knights Game</a> </li>
  <li><a href="http://www.chess.com/opening/eco/C50_Italian_Game" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Italian Game</a> </li>
  <li><a href="http://www.chess.com/chessopedia/view/ruy-lopez" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Ruy Lopez</a> </li>
  <li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Defence" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The French Defence</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.chess.com/chessopedia/view/sicilian-defence" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Sicilian Defence</a></li>
  <li><a href="http://www.chess.com/chessopedia/view/queens-gambit" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Queens Gambit</a></li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>This is more than enough for the beginning. All the best! </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-08-17T10:57:17.983Z
Answers.Text: in my days you didn't need rep to post links, is it a new rule?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Lynob
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-08-17T11:00:59.047Z
Answers.Text: Maybe it was done in order to avoid spam? Either way, I edited my post and added links for all openings, so its not a problem anymore.
Answers.UserDisplayName: vs97
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-08-17T16:51:27.067Z
Answers.Text: @Fischer You [need 10+ rep](http://chess.stackexchange.com/help/privileges) to put more than two links in a post. As Vas87thRD says, it's to [prevent spam](http://chess.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/new-user).
Answers.UserDisplayName: David Richerby
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-08-17T18:38:00.867Z
Answers.Text: @DavidRicherby okay, when was the rule invented?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Lynob
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-08-17T19:48:23.307Z
Answers.Text: @Fischer No idea. Try asking on Stack Exchange Meta if you can't find it by searching.
Answers.UserDisplayName: David Richerby
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-08-16T23:54:04.820Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-11-13T02:48:12.810Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2019-11-13T02:48:12.810Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: vs97
Answers.Body: <p>9 years later...</p>
  <p>The idea behind the Colorado Gambit is that if Black successfully exchanges their f5 pawn with White’s e4 pawn, they might be able to gain a foothold in the centre and use the half-open f file for their Rook. If Black successfully gains back the pawn and manages to play ...e5, they’ll be fine. This is helped by several traps lying in wait for an unwary White.</p>
  <p>On the other hand, Black seriously weakens their King’s position and the h5-e8 diagonal. And after the mainline 3.exf5 d5, the e5 square is weak along with a backward “e” pawn.</p>
  <pre><code>[Event &quot;Colorado Gambit&quot;]
  [FEN &quot;RNBQKBNR/PPPPPPPP/8/8/8/8/pppppppp/rnbqkbnr b KQkq - 1&quot;]
  
  1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5?! 3.exf5 d5 4.Bb5! {White wants to exert control over the e5 square by exchanging pieces that control it} Bxf5 5.Ne5! Bd7 (5...Qd6?! 6.d4 Nf6 7.O-O e6 8.Bf4) 6.Bxc6! (6.Qh5+?! g6 7.Nxg6 Nf6 8.Qh4 hxg6! 9.Qxh8 Nb4! {Black has good counterplay}) 6...Bxc6 (6...bxc6? 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Nxg6 Nf6 9.Qh4 {Now there's no more ...Nb4}) 7.d4! (7.Qh5+?! g6 8.Nxg6 Nf6 9.Qh4 Rg8 10.Nxf8 d4! {With some complications}).
  </code></pre>
  <p>White has control over the central e5 square and Black’s backward “e” pawn. White also has 3 minor pieces to fight for the e5 square while Black has only 2 pieces to defend it.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2023-09-25T17:05:33.947Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2023-09-25T17:05:33.947Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: HTTP 410
Answers.Body: <p>First, an off-beat opening like this isn't going to help you improve. You might get some cheap wins but you aren't learning anything. </p>
  
  <p>However, I've never seen this gambit and am fairly intrigued by it. The natural moves that you're likely to see (e5,Nc3,d3) score really bad for white. White can only really play 3.exf5 after which 3...d5 wins the pawn back, gives black an equal share of the center and a lead in development. The resulting pawn structure reminds of a mirror-image Boleslavsky structure in the Sicilian in that black could get receive a very good endgame if he could get e5 in and trade it for white's d-pawn. I'm not sure how all the tactics work out (especially after 5. Bb5) but it looks interesting enough to take a look at especially given how little theory there is in 1...Nc6. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-11-14T02:30:57.317Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-11-14T02:30:57.317Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Savage47
Body: <p>I recently heard of an opening called the "Colorado Gambit". My chess opening is pretty weak and my friend suggested I might try it. What is Colorado Gambit and what is the reasoning behind the moves?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-07-29T13:52:18.253Z
Comments.Text: 1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 f5?! is the Colorado Gambit. If your opening is pretty weak, I would definitely not recommend even studying the Colorado Gambit. You will spoil your game.
Comments.UserDisplayName: NM Wesley Falcao
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-07-29T13:55:29.487Z
Comments.Text: Thanks. Well, do you have any better opening?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Abhishek
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-07-29T13:56:52.247Z
Comments.Text: study the games of Capablanca and Lasker and see the openings they played. You will learn a lot from them. 
  http://www.chessgames.com/player/jose_raul_capablanca.html
  http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=19149
Comments.UserDisplayName: NM Wesley Falcao
Tags: <opening><gambits>
Title: What is the Colorado Gambit?
ThreadText: # What is the Colorado Gambit?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2014-07-29)
  
  I recently heard of an opening called the "Colorado Gambit". My chess opening is pretty weak and my friend suggested I might try it. What is Colorado Gambit and what is the reasoning behind the moves?
  
  **Tags:** opening, gambits
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: 1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 f5?! is the Colorado Gambit. If your opening is pretty weak, I would definitely not recommend even studying the Colorado Gambit. You will spoil your game.  
  > **username_0**: Thanks. Well, do you have any better opening?  
  > **username_1**: study the games of Capablanca and Lasker and see the openings they played. You will learn a lot from them.  http://www.chessgames.com/player/jose_raul_capablanca.html http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=19149  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2014-08-16. Score: 7
  
  [FEN ""]
  
  1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 f5?!
  
  This is the Colorado Gambit. 
  If you are looking for a good solid opening, try looking up some of the following:
  
  The Four Knights Game 
  Italian Game 
  The Ruy Lopez 
  The French Defence
  The Sicilian Defence
  Queens Gambit
  
  This is more than enough for the beginning. All the best!
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_3**: in my days you didn't need rep to post links, is it a new rule?  
  > **username_2**: Maybe it was done in order to avoid spam? Either way, I edited my post and added links for all openings, so its not a problem anymore.  
  > **username_4**: @Fischer You [need 10+ rep](http://chess.stackexchange.com/help/privileges) to put more than two links in a post. As Vas87thRD says, it's to [prevent spam](http://chess.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/new-user).  
  > **username_3**: @DavidRicherby okay, when was the rule invented?  
  > **username_4**: @Fischer No idea. Try asking on Stack Exchange Meta if you can't find it by searching.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2023-09-25. Score: 0
  
  9 years later...
  The idea behind the Colorado Gambit is that if Black successfully exchanges their f5 pawn with White’s e4 pawn, they might be able to gain a foothold in the centre and use the half-open f file for their Rook. If Black successfully gains back the pawn and manages to play ...e5, they’ll be fine. This is helped by several traps lying in wait for an unwary White.
  On the other hand, Black seriously weakens their King’s position and the h5-e8 diagonal. And after the mainline 3.exf5 d5, the e5 square is weak along with a backward “e” pawn.
  [Event "Colorado Gambit"]
  [FEN "RNBQKBNR/PPPPPPPP/8/8/8/8/pppppppp/rnbqkbnr b KQkq - 1"]
  
  1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5?! 3.exf5 d5 4.Bb5! {White wants to exert control over the e5 square by exchanging pieces that control it} Bxf5 5.Ne5! Bd7 (5...Qd6?! 6.d4 Nf6 7.O-O e6 8.Bf4) 6.Bxc6! (6.Qh5+?! g6 7.Nxg6 Nf6 8.Qh4 hxg6! 9.Qxh8 Nb4! {Black has good counterplay}) 6...Bxc6 (6...bxc6? 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Nxg6 Nf6 9.Qh4 {Now there's no more ...Nb4}) 7.d4! (7.Qh5+?! g6 8.Nxg6 Nf6 9.Qh4 Rg8 10.Nxf8 d4! {With some complications}).
  
  White has control over the central e5 square and Black’s backward “e” pawn. White also has 3 minor pieces to fight for the e5 square while Black has only 2 pieces to defend it.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2019-11-14. Score: 0
  
  First, an off-beat opening like this isn't going to help you improve. You might get some cheap wins but you aren't learning anything.
  
  However, I've never seen this gambit and am fairly intrigued by it. The natural moves that you're likely to see (e5,Nc3,d3) score really bad for white. White can only really play 3.exf5 after which 3...d5 wins the pawn back, gives black an equal share of the center and a lead in development. The resulting pawn structure reminds of a mirror-image Boleslavsky structure in the Sicilian in that black could get receive a very good endgame if he could get e5 in and trade it for white's d-pawn. I'm not sure how all the tactics work out (especially after 5. Bb5) but it looks interesting enough to take a look at especially given how little theory there is in 1...Nc6.
  
  
  ---
  
  