You give me more credit than I deserve. Just send a challenge and we can begin.
Like Houdini in the Latvian Gambit

You don't think it's possible if white has some idea of how to play chess. What do you mean by that?

Since there's been a lot more activity in this thread today, I thought I'd repost something I wrote in another forum a while back that didn't get much response.
I thought it was really interesting:
I've been looking at the chess.com database of master games and if you're playing to win, the Latvian Gambit on move 2 for black gives the best opportunity to win of the top 6 responses to the King's Knight Opening.
The move of f5 on the second move wins 34.7 percent of the time in master games. The Sicilian Defense of c5 on the second move only wins 32.1 percent of the time.
A major difference, of course, is that in the Latvian Gambit, white also has pretty good chances to win at 51 percent.
The thing is that in the chess.com database of master games, the Latvian Gambit has an extremely low rate of draws at 14.3 percent. In most of the other openings in the master game database, the rate of draws is more than double that.
I know I recently read a quote of some Chess great who said something like below 2000 every opening is playable.
And I think from the conversation here, it's been shown that the Latvian Gambit is extremely playable.

Despite my views on the Latvian Gambit, I play quite a few uncommon openings. Most notebly is with the Grob Opening, although I do like to play the Bongcloud Opening, my version of the Hippo, I have a variation in the French that I stake my claim to which nobody wants to play. I like using the king as another piece.
Instead of moving P-KB4, why not move P-KKt4?
Hey Gambit King, would you like to play a game with the Latvian Gambit? We can each take our respective sides.