---

Recently, I had this wonderful game of the Stockholm Variation of the Englund Gambit (1. d4 e5 2. dxe5 Nc6 3. Nf3 Qe7 4. Qd5) and was very excited when I encountered it. You see, the reason there is a rather funny, if macabre story behind why the Englund Gambit is named after Fritz Englund, a Swede, who didn’t develop this opening.

The story goes that Fritz Englund liked this opening so much that he sponsored a themed tournament where all games began with this opening with the Qd5 move. However, Fritz Englund died soon after this tournament and so the media reported the tournament as “Englund’s Gambit Tournament”. And thereafter, the name stuck with the “Englund Gambit”! The actual response of e5 to (1. d4) had been played many decades prior, for instance, by Charlick, the second Australian chess champion in the 1800s.

Anyway, Qd5 is a fascinating move. White is trying to hang onto the pawn aggressively and has abandoned all intention to play a typical 1. d4 type game! Although White remains ahead, after (4… f6) as strong move that pretty much allows for the capture of White’s pawn with development of the knight, potentially with tempo against White’s curiously placed queen.

My opponent decides that it’s too early for the queen and she goes home back to d1. Stockfish gives the evaluation as [+0.5] – Black is down on material but is better developed.

The game now takes on many of the characteristics that makes the Englund Gambit lines often winning, even without going down the trap lines. Black is more rapidly developed. The loss of centre pawns more often than not benefits Black, and this ends up being critically tactically. The Black queen on the e-file often ends up pinning White’s remaining e-pawn to the king, restricting its ability to control the centre. On move 10, White is forced to move their queen to recapture, and then on move 11, the queen is forced to return to d1 once again! Consider, in White’s first 10 moves, they moved their queen four times only for it to be still on her starting square!

This loss of temp results in a middle game where I control the full open centre files, while White’s king is stuck in the centre. On move 15, White blunders a [-M4], though I didn’t see it. However, I missed the mate for a trade of White’s queen for a knight – a bargain! I don’t play the most accurately afterwards, insofar as finding the quickest path to checkmate. However, a mating net had been woven and on move 29, I had a dominating victory! GG!

Game on chess.com: https://www.chess.com/game/live/77077869907

[Event "Live Chess"]
[Site "Chess.com"]
[Date "2023.05.06"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Ciccio57"]
[Black "vitualis"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Timezone "UTC"]
[ECO "A40"]
[ECOUrl "https://www.chess.com/openings/Englund-Gambit-Stockholm-Variation-4...f6-5.exf6-Nxf6"]
[UTCDate "2023.05.06"]
[UTCTime "02:07:04"]
[WhiteElo "1302"]
[BlackElo "1396"]
[TimeControl "1800"]
[Termination "vitualis won by checkmate"]
[StartTime "02:07:04"]
[EndDate "2023.05.06"]
[EndTime "02:38:08"]
[Link "https://www.chess.com/game/live/77077869907"]
[WhiteUrl "https://images.chesscomfiles.com/uploads/v1/user/38205792.9ba51a5c.50x50o.a66b29ba1019.jpeg"]
[WhiteCountry "3"]
[WhiteTitle ""]
[BlackUrl "https://images.chesscomfiles.com/uploads/v1/user/3711094.82046355.50x50o.c8c8e6b7296c.jpg"]
[BlackCountry "17"]
[BlackTitle ""]

1. d4 {[%clk 0:30:00]} 1... e5 {[%clk 0:29:58.8] Englund Gambit} 2. dxe5 {[%clk
0:29:53]} 2... Nc6 {[%clk 0:29:56.5]} 3. Nf3 {[%clk 0:29:35.4]} 3... Qe7 {[%clk
0:29:54.9]} 4. Qd5 {[%clk 0:29:07.3] Stockholm Variation - a fascinating line $1
[+0.8]. This is an aggressive line where White abandons any pretentions of a 1.
d4 type game $1 This variation is famous as Englund, a Swede, for whom the gambit
is named after, sponsored a themed tournament where all games began with this
opening $1} 4... f6 {[%clk 0:28:33.7]} 5. exf6 {[%clk 0:28:49.1]} 5... Nxf6 {[%clk
0:28:30.7]} 6. Qd1 {[%clk 0:28:20.6] [+0.5]} 6... d5 {[%clk 0:27:24.7]} 7. a3 $6
{[%clk 0:27:42.9][%c_effect
a3;square;a3;type;Inaccuracy;persistent;true][%c_arrow
g2g3;keyPressed;none;from;g2;opacity;0.8;to;g3;persistent;false][%c_highlight
g3;keyPressed;none;opacity;0.8;square;g3;persistent;false] The Englund Gambit,
evaluation-wise, is losing for Black. However, humans are not computers and by
taking the 1. d4 player down a path where their 1. d4 lines don't apply, it is
often the case that Black gets the advantage [-0.4]} 7... Bg4 {[%clk 0:26:55.8]}
8. e3 {[%clk 0:26:58.2]} 8... O-O-O {[%clk 0:26:44.6]} 9. h3 {[%clk 0:26:41.6]}
9... Bxf3 {[%clk 0:25:56.3]} 10. Qxf3 {[%clk 0:26:33.1]} 10... Nd4 $6 {[%clk
0:25:50.7][%c_effect d4;square;d4;type;Inaccuracy;persistent;true][%c_arrow
c6e5;keyPressed;none;from;c6;opacity;0.8;to;e5;persistent;false][%c_highlight
e5;keyPressed;none;opacity;0.8;square;e5;persistent;false] Often in the Englund
Gambit lines, the queen on the e-file pins White's e-pawn to their king with
good effect $1 Stockfish saw a better line, but I thought this move was more
aggressive with the knight's potential attack on c2, and the forcing of White's
queen to undevelop [+0.1]} 11. Qd1 {[%clk 0:25:57.9]} 11... Ne6 {[%clk 0:24:15]}
12. g3 {[%clk 0:25:24.7]} 12... d4 {[%clk 0:23:55.9]} 13. Qe2 {[%clk 0:24:52.5]}
13... Ne4 $2 {[%clk 0:22:30.8][%c_effect
e4;square;e4;type;Mistake;persistent;true][%c_arrow
h7h5;keyPressed;none;from;h7;opacity;0.8;to;h5;persistent;false][%c_highlight
h5;keyPressed;none;opacity;0.8;square;h5;persistent;false] Stockfish calls this
a mistake as White has the very strong follow up move Bg2, which I didn't see in
game [+2.8]. What I saw was that White might make a mistake thinking that they
could take my d-pawn with a discovered attack on my knight.} 14. exd4 $4 {[%clk
0:23:58.1][%c_effect d4;square;d4;type;Blunder;persistent;true][%c_arrow
f1g2;keyPressed;none;from;f1;opacity;0.8;to;g2;persistent;false][%c_highlight
g2;keyPressed;none;opacity;0.8;square;g2;persistent;false] And they did indeed
fall for the tactic $1 [-10.5]} 14... Nxd4 {[%clk 0:22:28.6]} 15. Qc4 $4 {[%clk
0:21:34.5][%c_effect c4;square;c4;type;Blunder;persistent;true][%c_arrow
e2g4;keyPressed;none;from;e2;opacity;0.8;to;g4;persistent;false][%c_highlight
g4;keyPressed;none;opacity;0.8;square;g4;persistent;false] This blunders [-M4],
though I didn't see it, but still win the queen $1} 15... Nd6+ {[%clk 0:22:06]}
({The checkmate line} 15... Nf3+ 16. Ke2 Ned2+ 17. Qe4 Qxe4+ 18. Kd1 Qe1#) 16.
Qe2 {[%clk 0:20:19.3]} 16... Nxe2 {[%clk 0:22:03.6]} 17. Bxe2 {[%clk 0:20:18.1]}
17... Re8 {[%clk 0:21:31.2]} 18. Nc3 {[%clk 0:19:57.3]} 18... Ne4 {[%clk
0:20:28.5]} 19. Nd5 {[%clk 0:19:22.7]} 19... Qe5 {[%clk 0:20:07.6]} 20. Bg4+
{[%clk 0:18:54.3]} 20... Kb8 {[%clk 0:19:50.7]} 21. Ne3 {[%clk 0:18:12]} 21...
Nxf2 {[%clk 0:18:36.7]} 22. Kxf2 {[%clk 0:17:59.9]} 22... Bc5 {[%clk 0:18:29.9]}
23. Re1 {[%clk 0:17:39.9]} 23... Rhf8+ {[%clk 0:18:09.7]} 24. Kg2 {[%clk
0:16:29.5]} 24... Qe4+ {[%clk 0:17:59.1]} 25. Kh2 {[%clk 0:15:58.8]} 25... Rf2+
{[%clk 0:17:51.8]} 26. Kg1 {[%clk 0:15:26.3]} 26... Rg2+ {[%clk 0:16:50.2]} 27.
Kf1 {[%clk 0:15:09]} 27... Rxg3 $6 {[%clk 0:16:00.9][%c_effect
g3;square;g3;type;Inaccuracy;persistent;true][%c_arrow
e8f8;keyPressed;none;from;e8;opacity;0.8;to;f8;persistent;false][%c_highlight
f8;keyPressed;none;opacity;0.8;square;f8;persistent;false] A slight inaccuracy -
it's still mate but there was a faster mate} ({The quicker mate line} 27... Rf8+
28. Nf5 Rg1#) 28. Re2 {[%clk 0:14:09.4]} 28... Qh1+ {[%clk 0:15:24.1]} 29. Kf2
{[%clk 0:13:48.2]} 29... Qg1# {[%clk 0:15:22.4][%c_effect
b8;square;b8;type;Winner,f2;square;f2;type;CheckmateWhite] GG $1} 0-1