I tried it once against my friend and got trounced, but I got greedy and played fxe and Nxe too early, or something like that. I think the point behind f5 is as it says- gambit! A very interesting opening indeed, if you are playing against a Ruy Lopez fan.
gambit line against 1.e4
Sort:
If Black knows all the reams of theory involved, then he has a good chance to trounce White. White often times has to memorize theory 40 ply deep to get a tiny positional advantage. Many players are playing the quiet d3 in response to the Schliemann and still getting the same advantage without learning all the theory of Nc3. There are still questions about the Schliemann's soundness, so most GMs play the main line of the Ruy.
Latvian Gambit
yes, the latvian Gambit is also interesting, if you have something to post about it it'd be pretty interesting; however, I like the idea of firstly defending the e pawn before moving f5
Therehas been a few Latvian Theme Tournaments that might be worth checking out once the Opening Explorer is launched
well, I'm mainly interested in the Schlieman-Jaenisch gambit as it looks more solid to me. So I'd like to see some analysis of this opening rather than links to the latvian :)
umm, if there's so much interest in the latvian gambit, maybe someone wants to open a new topic for it
nice links ercicmitten
very informative, like a reverse kings gambit.
I looked at the Latvian, but I think I prefer the Elephant Gambit (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5) instead. But these days, I've stopped playing gambits as black, as I'm trying to work on my fundamentals playing sound, classical openings.
--Fromper
this called the Rousseau Gambit, I don't know how sound it is but I doubt there's much theory on it and I'm sure there are some trap's.
usher wrote:
well, I'm mainly interested in the Schlieman-Jaenisch gambit as it looks more solid to me. So I'd like to see some analysis of this opening rather than links to the latvian :)
umm, if there's so much interest in the latvian gambit, maybe someone wants to open a new topic for it
Does anyone have any good links about the Latvian Gambit?
Okay, there already is a topic dealing with the Latvian Gambit (you find it by the name latvian gambit ;)) Therefore, you may post Latvian stuff on there and concentrate on the Schliemann-Jaenisch Gambit here.
The Rousseau Gambit pvmike showed to us is exactly the variation I thought about after Bc4 but as I already said it doesn't seem very sound to me.
Well therefore, maybe we find some expert for the Schliemann-Jaenisch Gambit?
Right. The Latvian Gambit. That's what I said. This is already a Latvian Gambit forum. If I need to find out about the Schliemann-Jaenisch Gambit, I'll look elsewhere as you suggest.
That was laugh out loud funny for me filmstar. thanks for that.
nineofjoker wrote: That was laugh out loud funny for me filmstar. thanks for that.
Anytime. 
ok, as it turns out I shouldn't expect reading something usefull for me in this topic; I'll start a new topic about the Schliemann-Jaenisch Gambit. Feel free to post if you know something about it.
I think Radjabov has played the Schliemann in a couple of games recently, I'll see if I can dig them up.
Here's a list to wet your appetite!
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1000992
In the movie "Searching For Bobby Fischer", there is a scene where a young Josh Waitzkin uses the "Schliemann Attack" against Vinnie in their Washington Square reuniting game.
It looks like a standard Schliemann, but it goes pretty quick - I haven't been able to follow the moves yet.
Good scene, though!
As I've searched for a gambit line against 1.e4, I read about the Schliemann-Jaenisch Gambit. as the game Topalov vs. Radjabov (lineares 2008) proves that the line is quite playable, I wonder if someone could post some lines, traps etc.
Do you think this variation might be possible if the white bishop plays to B4? (it looks to me as if the white squares become too weak... unfortunately ;)) Does someone know a gambit variation against that too?