9583 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I was looking up a few new openings the other day when I came across a strange-looking gambit:
I have tried this gambit out in two games so far, and besides the on-going one at the moment, I was thouroughly crushed. Do you think there is any sense to these moves? It looks somewhat dubious to me.
If you're going to play the Latvian play it Live or OTB. Realize you are investing material for Force and will have to invest more as the game progresses. If you hunker down when behind this opening is not for you. Study tactics or you will go badly wrong. It can be fun but also demanding. There are easier gambits to play with. Try
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb4 f5 still messy and tactical but a little sounder.
I don't understand it. I get crushed both sides.
the latvian is played fairly often by corrospondence players. It's to scary to play over the board. there are just to many tactics and imbalances to figure out.
I've played it a couple of times and you are losing until you win.
It is like any gambit - if you don't understand the ideas behind the gamit, or what you are aiming for, your sacraficed material is wasted. In this gambit, because you open up lines to your king, if you dont know how to play it, you get slaughtered.
Have any of you played it? What kind of lines are the most important?
Oh yeah, I've played it. But somehow I don't think you can call what I played lines, per se.
Hahaha! Sure, they were probably pretty crazy games; considering the type of gambit involved.
FM Andrew Karklins has played this for years with success.
I disagree with the notion that because white has played the "extra" Nf3 against a King's Gambit that he therefore is better. Since generally black does not play Nf6 against the King's Gambit, this reasoning is too simple.
The argument would make more sense if black tried f5 against the bishop's opening.
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5
The disadvantage of the extra move Nf3 is that exf5 is answered by e4.
The disadvantage of Bc4 is that exf5 is answered by d5. If black played 1.e4 e5 2.Bc5 f5, white should probably go for a reversed King's Gambit declined (which I'm sure is fine with white)
I think that the Latvian is better not to be compared with the King's Gambit - it is it's own opening. The common maneuver Nf3-Nxe5-Nc4 just doesn't occur in the KG. For this reason, it is best to not try to compare the opening with others - just look at this one, learn its intricacies, themes, and common positions.
Here is a game I won playing board 2 in a scholastic championship. It was the last round. The girl knew the opening but took about it the wrong way.
I added a 13,000 pgn database for this opening in the download area.
How come chinese people dont dominate in chess?
by Likhit1 a few minutes ago
by Likhit1 2 minutes ago
by stalematingintellect 3 minutes ago
Were my defences correct?
by Kingfisher 3 minutes ago
Post your best miniatures here
by ViktorHNielsen 4 minutes ago
5/19/2013 - Mate in 2
by Rameish 4 minutes ago
Study Partner for "My System" by Nimzowitsch
by chessmanster 5 minutes ago
Fischer 70th Birthday video party
by ItsEoin 7 minutes ago
Solve this Riddle if you can
by LoekBergman 8 minutes ago
by Grumblesmurf 12 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com