The sources of classical Main line in the Latvian is 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 ( by far, this variation it has been the most played, at least in CC ) 6.Ne3 c6?! 7.d3 exd3 8.Bxd3 d5 9.0-0 reaching to the critical position. Black has proved most of the legal movements - up to 9 ! - but finally all has been refuted.
So, if 5..Qf7 is discredited ( but we must remember 6..d5!? ), we have to turn over the suggestion 5..Qg6, classical and old line usual in the books. With 5..Qg6 Black Queen is a bit exposed and White often proceed with its relentless with d3 and after the exchange of pawns recapturing with the Bishop. Recently amateur David Zimbeck in his webhttp://www.zimbeckchess.com/chess_site_006.htm may have recovered somewhat its value. Zimbeck maintains after well-known and natural White moves 6.d3 Bb4 7.Bd2, Black must now play directly 7..Nf6!? ( instead of 7..Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Nf6 so it permits 9.Bxf6! gxf6 10.Ne3!? or 10.dxe4 Qxe4+ 11.Ne3 where White returns the Bishop pair for a more stable advantage in pawn structure ) so even losing a whole pawn, allows second player remain in the game. Move 7..Nf6!? is known from a game of 1971, but last years I saw their benefits and I myself have tested in some games with both colours !?. You give few games, but my Base contains 41 games !!. To sum up, these are the key questions:
- 8.Nb5 Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 Na6 10.dxe4 Qxe4+ 11.Ne3 0-0 12.Bc4+ Kh8 13.0-0 d6 14.Rae1 ( or 14.Nc3 Qf4 - 14..Qh4!? - 15.f3 Nc5 16.g3 Qh6 17.b4 Ne6 18.f4 Ad7 = Slavchev-Garcia E., cr.LADAC thema prel., e-mail, 2006/07 ) 14..Bd7 15.Nd4 Qf4 16.g3 Qh6 17.f3 Rae8 18.Bxa6 bxa6 19.Qc3 Bh3 20.Rf2 Qg5 21.f4 Qg5 = give an easy equality Elburg-Melchor, cr. e-mail, VI LG World Ch., Final, 2010, 0-1, 38
- 8.dxe4 0-0?! 9.f3 d5 10.Nxd5 Nxd5 11.exd5 Bc5 first played in Melchor-Valverde, cr. e-mail, LADAC thema prel., 2006/07, ( 1/2-1/2, 47 ) led to a difficult ending where White never seemed with possibility of win; my position was always better, but the Black position was sound. Only recently this idea was refuted by myself !: 12.Be3 Bxe3 13.Nxe3 Qb6 14.Qd2 Qxb2 15.Rd1 Qxa2? 16.Bc4 Qa3 17.d6+ Kh8 18.dxc7 Nd7 19.Kf2 Nf6 and now new improvement 20.Qd8! Ne4+ 21.Kf1 h6 22.Qd4 Nf6 23.Qd6 +-with a technical winning position, Melchor-Pecis, cr. e-mail, VI LG World Ch., Final, 2010
- 8.dxe4 Bxc3 9.Bxc3 Nxe4 10.Bd3 0-0 11.0-0 Nxc3 12.bxc3 is known, by traspostion on 7..Bxc3 8.Bxc3 Nf6 9.dxe4 Nxe4 - but avoiding 9.Bxf6! etc. -, from first thematic tournaments of 1970's ( also Hagen Tiemann in the second 1989 edition of his book of Latvian, page 22 ). I have 26 games; from this position it has been tested 12..Qg5;12..Qh6; and 12..Qf6. I believe this last move, 12..Qf6 ( 12 games ), is pehaps best one. I cannot deny after 13.Qh5 g6 14.Qa5 Qd8!? (N) - I don't like risky 14..Nc6 of Tiemann, or 14..c6?! played in several games, buy maybe 14..Na6 is possible so White had a only s small pull after 15.Ne3 c6 16.Bxa6 bxa6 17.Qc5 in Zaniratti-Neumann, cr. e-mail IV LG World Ch. prel., 2001/02 ) and with the help of ... engines, the position, although "nasty" and poorly developed for Black, is perfectly playable, … at least in postal chess ( I myself have tested in dotzens of lines ). For instance: 15.Qd5+ Kh8 16.f4 ( 16.Rae1 Nc6 17.Ne5 Qf6 18.f4 Ne7 ) 16..d6 17.Na5 Qf6 18.Nxb7 c6 19.Qb3 Nd7 20.Na5 Nc5 21.Qa3 Bd7 22.Rae1 Kg8 with a comfortable play. Truly it's a sad Black recourse on these lines, but what else? if we have so tight margin !. At first glance, 6..Qd8!? seems paradoxically retrogade, but is in fact the strongest possibility; since it also posts the Queen on a relatively safe square and clears the way for the development
- 8.Nxe4 Bxd2+ 9.Qxd2 ( American player also gives 9.Nexd2 0-0 10.Ne1 d5 and both 11.d4 or 11.Nf3, then 11..Ng4! ) 9..d5!? ( 9..0-0 of several games, is also possible, but not so good: 10.0-0-0 d5 11.Ne5 Qf5 12.Nxf6+ Qxf6 of Rozzoni-Gaard, cr. e-mail, III LG World Ch., Final, 2002/03 and now maybe 13.d4 ). The resulting position was known, for instance, from a game Ginzburg-Perez Pietronave, Argentina, 1995 which it followed according to the recommendation of the "engines" 10.Nxf6+ Qxf6 11.Qe3+ Be6 12.Ne5 0-0 13.Be2 ( 13. d4 Nc6 Zimbeck, and now could be continue 14.Bd3 Bf5 15.0-0 Bxd3 16.cxd3 Qd6 without problems Kai-Domingo, FICGS e-mail, 2009; or 13..Bf5 14.0-0-0 Nc6 15.Qc3 Rae8 16.Nxc6 bxc6 17.Kb1 Re6 of Cañizares-Melchor, cr-email, LADAC thema Final, 2010/11 )13..Nd7 14.d4 and now diverting from the game, Black should play 14..Nxe5 15.dxe5 Qg6 ( or even 14..Qf4 ) which it takes to a comfortable position, and also recovering the pawn. It is already noteworthy Zimbeck show next beautiful line: 10.Ne5 Nxe4! 11.Nxg6 Nxd2 12.Nxh8 Nxf1 13. Rxf1 Nc6 etc. and although engines spend a few time in viewing, just give reason Black side Cañizares-Domingo, cr-email, LADAC thema Final, 2010/11
Please note that all the info. in this post are taken from outside sources, they will be mentionned in the last section (special thanks and others sources section)..AND DON'T FORGET TO ALWAYS LOOK FOR COMMENTS UNDER EACH DIAGRAMS!!!
The Latvian gambit
Before we start the discussion about the Latvian Gambit (1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5), I have a confession to make. I never really trusted in this opening. It is one thing to play a risky King's Gambit and it is a totally different thing to play the same King's Gambit being a tempo down (I am sure most of the readers noted that if we look at the position after 1.e4 e5 2. f4 Nf6 and ask Black to play a second move in a row, then it will be exactly the Latvian Gambit with reversed colors). Yet, the Latvian Gambit has many devoted followers, so I thought it would be unfair to ignore this sharp opening.
It is easy to discuss this opening from the White point of view since you can find many reliable ways for White to get an advantage. For instance, you can follow in the footsteps of young Vassily Smyslov who decided that it is better to avoid the complications and just underline the positional deficiencies of this opening.
Of course this is not the only strategy. White can accept the complications since in most cases they are favorable for him as the next short game shows.
So, what should Black hope for when he plays the Latvian Gambit? Since the motto of the opening is "Complications for the sake of complications," if White doesn't play energetically enough he can easily end up in a very bad position as the next game shows. Please notice that unlike Smyslov in the first game, White didn't play d3, preferring d4 instead and therefore leaving the dangerous e4 pawn alive.
Of course White played very passively in the previous game and was punished for that. But the next game is a true delight for any Latvian Gambit connoisseur. White attacked practically the whole game and it looked like the Black King was going to get checkmated very soon... yet it was the White King that got in trouble!
The conclusion is pretty simple. Even though the Latvian Gambit isn't a completely sound opening it still requires your opponent to know some theory and be alert since one tactical mistake can completely turn the tables. This is an ideal opening for the daredevils who care more about the excitement of the game than the final result.
Quebecor's games section:
I just wanna said a BIG SPECIAL THANKS at
Borgqueen, thanks my friend for give me some good ideas for the structure of this post..
AND ALSO, a BIG THANKS at:
thamizhan, Gserper, Arunabi, FM_Eric_Schiller, Georgekadro, mircea_1956, ChessRenewal, Pogape and Oldbill !! Thank you all for make this topic possible!!! IMP!!!!! NOTE...The thamizhan, Gserper, Arunabi, FM_Eric_Schiller content's was a GREAT HELP!!! THANKS..
Others references:
-ChessMaster 10
-Fritz 10
-Chess books - No Chess book here
- Website of FQE
- youtube