11. Be2 "This move happens often"
Really? What is white's reason for playing this move instead of something like 11. d4.
Latvian Gambit Trap
Sort:
At least there is some reason for white to play 5. Nf7 forking the queen and rook trying to win material. This seems like a normal way to "fall for a trap".
Loomis wrote:
11. Be2 "This move happens often"
Really? What is white's reason for playing this move instead of something like 11. d4.
Loomis,
I always appreciate your contributions. 11. Be2 is what I heard, so I typed it into the annotations. 11.d4 is what Fritz says to play.
With your high chess rating, 11.Be2 must look weak and/or wrong to you. In a blitz game where there is little time for calculation, I probably would place another defender near the king, as in the bishop. That's where my understanding of chess thinking is right now without going deeper into the position like I do in turn based games. I would go on the defence when the enemy queen and bishop are close to my king.
Regardless of the quality of this trick/trap, I've never seen the Latvian Gambit before and it looks fun to play as Black. Can you just imagine the difficulties I could present to an under 900 blitz player like myself? No one has played this opening against me, so I would take my under 900 opponents by surprise.
I'm new to traps and gambits, as my focus has been on positional play without an attacking style - always looking for small advantages and then pouncing when a tactic presents itself.
In blitz, I've heard that players tend to be greedy for material, so offering up some free material to checkmate my opponent is very exciting. 
There are not many examples with this line in chess, but this is mine's own:
11.d4 Rd8 12.Be3 Ne5 13.dxe5!? Rxd1+ 14.Kxd1 Ng4 15.Re1 ( 15.Bc5+ Ke8 unclear: 15.Nd2 Qxh2 16.Re1 Nxe3+ 17.fxe3 Bg4+! ) 15..Nxe3 16.fxe3 Qxh2 ( 16..Bg4+!? ) 17. Nc3 Qxe5 unclear, maybe Black a bit better ( Crimp-Melchor, corr., 1997 ).
11.Be2?? is a terrible blunder, and the sequence ..Nd4; ..Nf3+ very known for all LG players in similar positions.
Not usual 5.Bf7+ ( instead of 5.d4 ) 5..Ke7! 6.Bxg8 and now 6..Qxg2? is also a blunder.
Anyway 3. Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 is not problematic as Black; thus 3.Nxe5 is the correct way.
Ok, I understand, putting a piece closer to the king feels like a defensive move. My feeling is that the bishop is already doing its defensive duty guarding f1. If you ask it to do more, you're just going to overload it. Better is to involve your other pieces, give yourself some freedom, if possible, counterattack. That's why 11. d4 jumps at me rather than Be2.
When I first saw 11. Be2 I couldn't tell what the bishop was doing on e2 that it wasn't doing before except possibly getting in the way. The next thing I noticed about Be2 is that the bishop no longer holds f7 so the knight on h8 is now trapped.
Loomis wrote:
Ok, I understand, putting a piece closer to the king feels like a defensive move. My feeling is that the bishop is already doing its defensive duty guarding f1. If you ask it to do more, you're just going to overload it. Better is to involve your other pieces, give yourself some freedom, if possible, counterattack. That's why 11. d4 jumps at me rather than Be2.
When I first saw 11. Be2 I couldn't tell what the bishop was doing on e2 that it wasn't doing before except possibly getting in the way. The next thing I noticed about Be2 is that the bishop no longer holds f7 so the knight on h8 is now trapped.
I wouldn't be able to pull the wool over your eyes. Excellent observations.
Here's a game that has the same move order as the trap line. White plays correctly and wins. 9.d3 makes a huge difference in White's favor.
I found the exact move order in four games up to move 11 in a 4.5 million game database. White plays what Fritz says to play in all four games, 11.d4, instead of playing 11. Be2. So much for 11.Be2 being a common move. Oh well. It still looks like a fun opening for Black.
I have 15 games with this line, f.i. "father" of Latvian gambit, Karlis Bething in 1924 ( vs. Gudju ), game largely analyzed in many sources. Also XIX Enciclopaedia Bilguer give some lines, so all is deeply known ...
SpAMelchor wrote:
I have 15 games with this line, f.i. "father" of Latvian gambit, Karlis Bething in 1924 ( vs. Gudju ), game largely analyzed in many sources. Also XIX Enciclopaedia Bilguer give some lines, so all is deeply known ...
I'll read about Karlis Bething and look at his games. Thanks.
Here's a little Latvian Gambit experiment where Black wins in 14 moves.
good opening nice/XD
If anyone else has any other Latvian Gambit tricks or traps to share, by all means, post them right here. Enjoy!