Like Korch I'm glad we've now moved onto concrete lines we can investigate and evaluate. For simplicity's sake, I'll stick to the numbering of the variations I used in my previous post, though I made it clear it could hardly represent an exhaustive study of 3.Nxe5 against the Latvian Gambit. Variations 1 and 5 are not in contention, so let's have a look at the others in view of the analysis and ideas Korch has contributed (for which I am grateful):
2) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 Ne7 7.0-0 d5 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.c3 Bd7 10.f3 exf3 11.Bxf3 Qd6 12.Na3 still looks pretty strong for white.
I find it very strange that Korch can describe white's advantage after 6...Qd8 (a move he seemed to be implying was inferior in earlier posts) as merely 'symbolic'. How far ahead in development must white be before he has a serious advantage? After 7.d5 Nf6 8.Nc3 Be7 white can probably allow himself the luxury of a loss of tempo with 9.Bh5+ g6 10.Be2 to force a significant weakness in the black kingside. It also prevents black from defending his weak e-pawn with Bf5 and Bg6. I would much prefer to play the white side here, and I suspect most other people would too.
As for the piece sac line he suggests, it looks extremely dubious after 6...d5 7.Ne3 c6 8.0-0 Bd6 9.f3 Qh4 10.g3 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Qxg3+ 12. Ng2 Bh3 13.Rf2 Nf6 14.Bf4 Qg6 15.fxe4 dxe4 16.Qd2.
3) (i) Korch says: "I dont see problems for black after 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 c6 7.d5 Qg6 (with Nf6, Be7 and 0-0 to follow)." I do. 8.h4! h5 9.Nc3 Nf6 10.Ne2 gives white a clear positional advantage.
(ii) Korch says: "After 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.Nc3 Qg6 9.Nb5 Qf7 10.Qd2 Nf6 I don`t see too serious problems for Black to solve." Well, how about simply 11.Qa5 b6 12.Qa4? Black's position is fairly horrible.
(iii) Korch says: "After 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Ne3 Nc6 7.Bb5 a6 8.Bxc6+ bxc6 9.0-0 Qh4 black should be OK." I think white is better after 10.f3; also 8.Ba4 (instead of 8.Bxc6+) 8...b5 9.Nd5 Qd8 10.Bb3 Na5 11.0-0 looks very pleasant for white.
4) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 Nf6 8.fxe4 Be7 9.e5 Ng4 is very easily refuted by 10.Bd3 Qh5 11.Nd5 Bd8 12.Qf3. Black is getting stuffed good and proper.
3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nf6 9.Bd3 Qf7 10.0-0 Be7 11.Ne3 has been played before and is known to be very strong for white.
Originally posted by Northern Lad3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 Nf6 8.fxe4 Be7 9.e5 Ng4 is very easily refuted by 10.Bd3 Qh5 11.Nd5 Bd8 12.Qf3. Black is getting stuffed good and proper.
4) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 Nf6 8.fxe4 Be7 9.e5 Ng4 is very easily refuted by 10.Bd3 Qh5 11.Nd5 Bd8 12.Qf3. Black is getting stuffed good and proper.
[fen]rnbbk2r/ppp3pp/3p4/3NP2q/2NP2n1/3B1Q2/PPP3PP/R1B1K2R b [/fen]
3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nf6 9.Bd3 Qf7 10.0-0 Be7 11.Ne3 has been played before and is known to be very strong for white.
11...Bd8 is obviously too passive - Black has no other choice as to continue gambit play with 11...Bh4+ 12.g3 0-0.
3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nf6 9.Bd3 Qf7 10.0-0 Be7 11.Ne3 has been played before and is known to be very strong for white.
9...Qf7 is obviously too passive. Better is 9...Qg4.
6) The game against Dave Tebb that Korch drew is one of those endgames that sometimes white will win and sometimes will be a draw, so hardly that inspiring for black. But, as he says, it's rather academic because of Silman's strong move 10.b4. However, his alternative 9...Be6 10.Re1 Be7 11.Ne2! with Nd4 or Nf4 to follow looks extremely strong for white.
7) In Korch's game against Fnugblatter (see earlier post by Korch), white should probably not have castled short. 16.Bg5 Qg6 17.0-0-0 looks a lot better. Both sides have play, but white is still a solid pawn up so must have the advantage unless there's something concrete for black. I've been unable to locate Korch's game against Cludi, though I accept 8.Ng3 may not be the most incisive way of playing it for white.
8) Here I have to agree 9...d5! is an improvement and leads to a messy and unclear position (exactly what black wants). Maybe white has to content himself with a small but definite plus with 7.Bf4 d5 8.Ne5 Qe6 9.f3 though I agree it's hardly earth-shattering.
In conclusion, I accept that Korch has, at least in part, rehabilitated Variation 8. However, the others are still looking pretty dodgy for black, at least from where I'm sitting!
Originally posted by Northern Lad2) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 Ne7 7.0-0 d5 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.c3 Bd7 10.f3 exf3 11.Bxf3 Qd6 12.Na3 still looks pretty strong for white.
Like Korch I'm glad we've now moved onto concrete lines we can investigate and evaluate. For simplicity's sake, I'll stick to the numbering of the variations I used in my previous post, though I made it clear it could hardly represent an exhaustive study of 3.Nxe5 against the Latvian Gambit. Variations 1 and 5 are not in contention, so let's have a look ...[text shortened]... Qg6 15.fxe4 dxe4 16.Qd2.
[fen]rn2k2r/pp4pp/2p2nq1/8/3PpB2/7b/PPPQBRN1/RN4K1 b[/fen]
What about 12...Be6 ?
I find it very strange that Korch can describe white's advantage after 6...Qd8 (a move he seemed to be implying was inferior in earlier posts) as merely 'symbolic'. How far ahead in development must white be before he has a serious advantage? After 7.d5 Nf6 8.Nc3 Be7 white can probably allow himself the luxury of a loss of tempo with 9.Bh5+ g6 10.Be2 to force a significant weakness in the black kingside. It also prevents black from defending his weak e-pawn with Bf5 and Bg6. I would much prefer to play the white side here, and I suspect most other people would too.
Position after 6...Qd8 7.d5 Nf6 8.Nc3 Be7 9.Bh5+! (in my opinion the best option for white against 6...Qd8 system) g6 10.Be2 0-0 11.0-0 Re8 (with possible Bf8-g7 and Nbd7) seems to me slightly worse for Black but definitely playable. But I presume that this position may not be in taste of most gambit players.
As for the piece sac line he suggests, it looks extremely dubious after 6...d5 7.Ne3 c6 8.0-0 Bd6 9.f3 Qh4 10.g3 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Qxg3+ 12. Ng2 Bh3 13.Rf2 Nf6 14.Bf4 Qg6 15.fxe4 dxe4 16.Qd2.
Maybe its not for 100% correct but 2 pawns + unsafe position of White king seems to be quite decent long term compensation for piece. For example 16... Nbd7 with possible intention to castle queen side.
Originally posted by Korch11...Bd8 is obviously too passive - Black has no other choice as to continue gambit play with 11...Bh4+ 12.g3 0-0.
[b]3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 Nf6 8.fxe4 Be7 9.e5 Ng4 is very easily refuted by 10.Bd3 Qh5 11.Nd5 Bd8 12.Qf3. Black is getting stuffed good and proper.
11...Bd8 is obviously too passive - Black has no other choice as to continue gambit play with 11...Bh4+ 12.g3 0-0.
3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.f3 exf3 8.Qxf3 Nf6 9.Bd3 Qf ...[text shortened]... s known to be very strong for white.
9...Qf7 is obviously too passive. Better is 9...Qg4.[/b]
I don't see any continuation for black after 13.Be4. Surely he's just losing.
9...Qf7 is obviously too passive. Better is 9...Qg4.
Then 10.Qe3+ Be7 12.0-0 is clearly better for white because of his lead in development (Matsukovitch).
Originally posted by Northern LadHere is the game vs cludi.
7) In Korch's game against Fnugblatter (see earlier post by Korch), white should probably not have castled short. 16.Bg5 Qg6 17.0-0-0 looks a lot better. Both sides have play, but white is still a solid pawn up so must have the advantage unless there's something concrete for black. I've been unable to locate Korch's game against Cludi, though I accept 8.Ng3 may not be the most incisive way of playing it for white.
In Korch's game against Fnugblatter (see earlier post by Korch), white should probably not have castled short. 16.Bg5 Qg6 17.0-0-0 looks a lot better. Both sides have play, but white is still a solid pawn up so must have the advantage unless there's something concrete for black.
I would say that in that position Black pieces seems to be placed much more coordinate. And White king seems to be quite unsafe. For example 17...Nd7 and if 18.Bd3 then 18...c5 with interesting complications which should be not bad for Black.
Originally posted by Northern LadI don't see any continuation for black after 13.Be4. Surely he's just losing.
11...Bd8 is obviously too passive - Black has no other choice as to continue gambit play with 11...Bh4+ 12.g3 0-0.
I don't see any continuation for black after 13.Be4. Surely he's just losing.
9...Qf7 is obviously too passive. Better is 9...Qg4.
Then 10.Qe3+ Be7 12.0-0 is clearly better for white because of his lead in development (Matsukovitch)
Nor do I 😀 And can say that even John Elburg (CC player - one of the Latvian gambit experts) could not find it in game against me 😉 That`s the reason why I told that I`m not sure about correctness of that line.
10.Qe3+ Be7 12.0-0
I would not mind to play after 12...Nc6 when in my opinion White have only slight advantage.
P.S. I will continue discussion about other lines later.
As for the piece sac line he suggests, it looks extremely dubious after 6...d5 7.Ne3 c6 8.0-0 Bd6 9.f3 Qh4 10.g3 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Qxg3+ 12. Ng2 Bh3 13.Rf2 Nf6 14.Bf4 Qg6 15.fxe4 dxe4 16.Qd2.
Maybe its not for 100% correct but 2 pawns + unsafe position of White king seems to be quite decent long term compensation for piece. For example 16... Nbd7 with possible intention to castle queen side.
We'll have to agree to diasgree on this one and let others decide. Although black may have one or two practical chances OTB (especially at lower levels), objectively he's dead lost. After 17.Nc3 (or maybe 17.Qe3 first to discourage queenside castling) white completes his development. His king is not especially unsafe. Unless he plays pretty inaccurately, his material advantage will surely prevail.
Originally posted by Northern LadMaybe. As I have said I dont have 100% confidence about this line.
As for the piece sac line he suggests, it looks extremely dubious after 6...d5 7.Ne3 c6 8.0-0 Bd6 9.f3 Qh4 10.g3 Bxg3 11.hxg3 Qxg3+ 12. Ng2 Bh3 13.Rf2 Nf6 14.Bf4 Qg6 15.fxe4 dxe4 16.Qd2.
Maybe its not for 100% correct but 2 pawns + unsafe position of White king seems to be quite decent long term compensation for piece. For example 16... Nbd7 with ially unsafe. Unless he plays pretty inaccurately, his material advantage will surely prevail.
Btw. Other possibility in 6...d5 line is 6...d5 7.Ne3 Be6 with idea of 8...Nc6 after 8.0-0.
Originally posted by Northern Lad3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 Ne7 7.0-0 d5 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.c3 Bd7 10.f3 exf3 11.Bxf3 Qd6 12.Na3 Be6 13. b4 Qd7 anf if 14.b5 then 14...Nd8 with possible Nf7.
2) 3...Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2 Ne7 7.0-0 d5 8.Ne3 Nbc6 9.c3 Bd7 10.f3 exf3 11.Bxf3 Qd6 12.Na3 still looks pretty strong for white.
[b]What about 12...Be6 ?
Simply 13.b4 with Qa4 and/or b5 to follow. As far as I'm concerned white's well on top here.[/b]