The Chess Mind

I used to play the main line Budapest Gambit from time to time (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 is the Budapest, and the main line continues 3.dxe5 Ng4), but never felt tempted by the Fajarowicz - 3.dxe5 Ne4. At least two books have advocated this variation in the last decade or so, but I'd like to know why. If White plays 4.Nf3 Bb4+ 5.Nbd2 Nc6 6.a3, he enjoys a useful advantage without even a smidgin of risk. Here are a couple of possible variations:

Line 1a: 6...Nxd2 7.Bxd2 Bxd2+ 8.Qxd2 Qe7 9.Qf4 or 9.Qc3 with a slight-to-clear advantage.


Line 1b: 6...Nxd2 7.Nxd2 gives White a slight edge thanks to the bishop pair.

Line 2: 6...Bxd2+ 7.Nxd2 Bxd2+ 8.Bxd2 Nxe5 (8...Qh4 9.Bc3! Qxc4 (Not forced, but then what's the point of 8...Qh4?) 10.e3 Qe6 11.Qh5 with a clear advantage) 9.Bc3 with an edge. One possible continuation: 9...Qe7 10.Qd4 f6 11.e3 b6 12.Be2 Bb7 13.O-O followed by b4, with an edge.

I freely grant that the above isn't a refutation in the strong sense: the concluding positions in these lines are all playable for Black. But the real question is why Black would want to play such positions - there are basically no complications, and the positions are primarily technical. And if one can win such positions with Black against a peer or near-peer, one shouldn't play the Budapest, but technical lines instead!