Originally posted by KorchForgot - I have 4th loss from Gremlings - Game 4692070 which can be considered as accident - I wanted to play 10...Bxg4 with 11...e3 which would give large advantage for Black, but hurried and played 10...e3?? instead.
Talking about statistics - I have only 3 loses in RHP with this opening- to Northern Lad, SeinfeldFan91 and Jimster (banned cheat) and wins even against strong opponents (cludi, English Tal, maris61) and also draws against strong opposition (David Tebb, SlyArmenian).
To say nothing about almost 100% results against weaker (below 2100) opposition.
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It is, of course, impossible to present all the relevant theory of the Latvian Gambit here, so I'm just going to put down what I think are the most important and critical lines, though I'll be open to other ideas that people may have. So, after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 5.Nxe5:
1) 3...Nc6 4.d4 Qh4 5.Nf3 Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1
2) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 Ne7 7.0-0 d5 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.c3 Qd6 10.Qb3
3) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 (6...c6 7.d5!) 7.d5 (7.Bb5) 7...Ne5 8.Nc3 Qg6 9.Nb5 Qf7 10.Qd2
4) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nc6 9.Nb5 Bg4 10.Qc3!
5) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 d6 6.d3 exd3 7.Bxd3 Qf7 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Re1+ Kd8 10.Ne3 Be6 11.Ne4 h6 12.f4
6) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 c6 7.d3 exd3 8.Bxd3 d5 9.0-0 Bc5 10.Na4 Bd6 11.c4 Ne7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.cxd5 cxd5 14.Ncxd5 Nxd5 15.Nxd5 Nc6 16.Nc3
7) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 c6 7.Nxe4 d5 8.Ng5 (8.Ng3 h5 9.d4 h4 10.Ne2 Bd6 11.Ng1) 8...Qf6 9.Nf3 Bd6 (9...d4 10.Nc4 b5 11.Qe2+) 10.d4 Ne7 11.c4 0-0 12.Qb3 Nd7 13.Bd2!
8) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Nf6 (6...Bb4 7.Ne5) 7.Bg5 Bb4 8.Ne5 Qe6 9.Bc4 Qf5 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Ng4 Qg6 12.Ne3 c6 13.d5
In all of these lines, white has, in my opinion, a clear advantage, either material or postional. The common thread running through these lines is that where black plays it as a real gambit, he doesn't get anything like adequate compensation, and where he maintains material equality, white has a clear positional advantage based on a lead in development, better placed pieces, and in some cases a safer king. You will also see that the depressing reality from black's perspective is that he is in trouble in several different lines, so that even if he can somehow patch up one, there'll be many others still to repair.
I have for some time believed that 4.Nc4 is probably (even) stronger than 4.d4 if played accurately, but now I'm not so sure. Some of the lines I give after 4.d4 look pretty uncomfortable for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
Originally posted by Northern LadThanks a bunch, Mr.
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It table for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
I do hope that not too many of my opponents read the forums
I broadly agree with you & then you go & put all the busts in one post!
🙁
Originally posted by SquelchbelchWe are OK Squelch. Cheer up.
Thanks a bunch, Mr.
I do hope that not too many of my opponents read the forums
I broadly agree with you & then you go & put all the busts in one post!
🙁
All these lines are in every book on the Latvian I've seen.
The key sentance from Northern Lad is.
"In all of these lines, white has, in my opinion, a clear advantage, either material or postional. "
"In my opinion..." Now there is the rub.
Northern Lad is a very good OTB player. His opion and judgement
carries a lot more weight than the lads we beat.
I agree with his assesments.
But I am stubborn enough to accept these positions knowing that
one slip - one error and I'm back in with a vengance.
I've faced these positions OTB and played my way into a win
(or to more exact my opponent blundered into an inferior position).
It's a risky opening, a plus can demonstrated in all lines.
But converting that plus is beyond some players. Especially those
who play it as White once, twice a year against a guy who plays
it week in week out.
Originally posted by SquelchbelchSorry about that, but Korch provoked me into it. Don't worry, the vast majority of the RHP community never come near this forum!
Thanks a bunch, Mr.
I do hope that not too many of my opponents read the forums
I broadly agree with you & then you go & put all the busts in one post!
🙁
Originally posted by greenpawn34By no means all these lines will appear in every book on the Latvian I can assure you; there are also some original ideas in there. But as I said before, the opening is probably quite playable below about 2000, so I certainly don't want to stop the fun!
We are OK Squelch. Cheer up.
All these lines are in every book on the Latvian I've seen.
The key sentance from Northern Lad is.
"In all of these lines, white has, in my opinion, a clear advantage, either material or postional. "
"In my opinion..." Now there is the rub.
Northern Lad is a very good OTB player. His opion and judgement ...[text shortened]... e
who play it as White once, twice a year against a guy who plays
it week in week out.
Originally posted by Northern LadYou are right there - it seems to be the same people time and
Sorry about that, but Korch provoked me into it. Don't worry, the vast majority of the RHP community never come near this forum!
time again. It must be about 1% the membership come on
the chess forum.
Did you know that the majority of the cheats caught on this site
never post and never write a profile.
(so by my reckoning - 99% of the membership use a box) 😕
Originally posted by Northern Lad1) 3...Nc6 4.d4 Qh4 5.Nf3 Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1
Korch still hasn't shown any real examples of how current theory is mistaken and how black can get a playable game. He says statistics are meaningless. I agree they are not conclusive in themselves, but they can be a powerful indicator. A near 95% score for white, when the rating difference would suggest something nearer 65%, is such an indicator.
It table for black, so it's still an open question, but in any case not much fun for black.
I`ve never advocated inferior 3...Nc6 line - I prefer 3...Qf6
5) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 d6 6.d3 exd3 7.Bxd3 Qf7 8.0-0 Nc6 9.Re1+ Kd8 10.Ne3 Be6 11.Ne4 h6 12.f4
I tend to agree that White has better position and now I would prefer 5...Qf7
8) 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Nf6 (6...Bb4 7.Ne5) 7.Bg5 Bb4 8.Ne5 Qe6 9.Bc4 Qf5 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Ng4 Qg6 12.Ne3 c6 13.d5
9...Qf5? is inferior move which is considered as only chance in many old books. The best is 9...d5! with interesting play.
Here is example from my OTB practice in 3...Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.d4 Nf6 (6...Bb4 7.Ne5) 7.Bg5 Bb4 8.Ne5 Qe6 9.Bc4 d5! line. My opponent have met Latvian gambit in our previous game (which finished draw) when he did not know "official" theory. After that first game he did claim that Latvian gambit is incorrect and promised me to refute in in our next game. Here is the result 😀:
About other "refutations" I`ll give my comments later as at the moment I` have real hangover 😉
Originally posted by robbie carrobiesend im Talisker allright and then enjoy him analysing which way Big Bobby would have that Geller totally smoked in that Fischer-Geller 0-1, Skopje 1967, if instead of 20.a3 the Chessplayer had his Queen landed on f4
get green pawn to send you a bottle of barrs iron bru, best thing ever for hangovers!
😵