Talk:Italian Game, Rousseau Gambit

The entire section "Gambit Accepted: 4.exf5" needs rewriting
The chess analysis in this article and citations are extremely poor. The analysis contains elementary blunders. The bracketed line in this section is a forced loss for White; contrary to the article, nothing is unclear! I will rewrite it when time permits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albin-Counter (talk • contribs) 03:26, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * The section is factually correct and well-written (much better than the 4.d4! section at least). Stockfish evaluates the line as 0.0 so it is certainly not a "forced loss for White". Some references would be nice, though. Dexxor (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks - my mention of a forced loss refers to another variation. More haste, less speed in Talk!
 * But this section of the article in its current state asserts that "White still has a good game after ... 4.exf5".
 * This is wrong.
 * White has at very best an equal position here; if anything, Black has a very slight edge. This does not comprise a "good game".
 * I shall return, and it will be mainly to the 4. d4 line.
 * There are citable games out there, too, which can be added.
 * The 2002 analyses referenced is best for humour and historical value. Albin-Counter (talk) 12:17, 25 March 2022 (UTC)