How NOT to respond to 1.e4...
Sort:
yep... you're right... that is not a good respone for e4... after f5 it's probably better to play Nxe4 with Qh5+
2...f5 is a controversial opening called the Latvian Gambit. Black can get away with it, I think, but your oponent made major blunders afterward. I think the first mistake was 4...Qf6. Here on Wikipedia: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Opening_theory_in_chess/1._e4/1...e5/2._Nf3/2...f5
they claim black typically plays 4...Qg5, which I guess gives black some counterplay and space to breathe.
Thank you rgrizzard. I just looked at the theory table, and it shows 4...Qg5 as the appropriate response to the Bc4 line I chose...still...it doesn't seem like a sound opening for Black...what do you think?
Castled queenside, there's a small chance black might be able to pull it off. But I've seen too many games where people lose because they prematurely weaken the f2/f7 square to call this sound.
Mar 31, 2008
0
#6
rgrizzard wrote:
2...f5 is a controversial opening called the Latvian Gambit. Black can get away with it, I think, but your oponent made major blunders afterward. I think the first mistake was 4...Qf6. Here on Wikipedia: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Opening_theory_in_chess/1._e4/1...e5/2._Nf3/2...f5
they claim black typically plays 4...Qg5, which I guess gives black some counterplay and space to breathe.
yep, that s it the Latvian Gambit.i have problems with that.
Mar 31, 2008
0
#8
Too many blunders early for her. I really wonder how hard she studied the board....
Either way, you had a clear advantage so early, you must have been looking for some crazy trap as you finished the game off.
Mar 31, 2008
0
#9
Too many blunders early for her. I really wonder how hard she studied the board....
Either way, you had a clear advantage so early, you must have been looking for some crazy trap as you finished the game off.
I wouldn't take the Latvian Gambit to lightly, it can lead to some complicated positions.
Mar 31, 2008
0
#11
This is not well backed up, I've only played it a few times and my research is limited to well under 20 hours
However... it is my opinion that with perfect play, the Latvian probably draws... in my mind this does NOT neccesarily make it sound. It seems to me that white gets a very clear advantage coming out of the opening of the Latvian.
Can someone please post a succesful example of the Latvian? Preferably one where Black played well, not where White blundered away a victory. I'm curious to see what it looks like when done right.
Thanks.
here is a link to a site with black victories
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1000995
Bobby fischer got beat by the latvian so did jose capablanca
Actually the Latvian gambit has a better track record than its reputation. Out of 1500+ master games it has 33% black win and 18% draw record, which is impressive results on the master level. Your opponets mistake was at 4 Nxe5 they should have responded with either 4 ... d5 or 4 ... Qg5 and they went downhill from there.
Bowens wrote:
My Conclusion: There is no such thing as a sound Queen's Gambit Defense...
1) There is no connection whatsoever between this opening and the queen's gambit.
2) The queen's gambit is an opening employed by MANY of the worlds (present and past) leading players, and is considered not only sound, but also one of the most solid defenses to 1.d4 (some would say the problem with it is "too solid")... (There is no queen's gambit or anything similiar after 1.e4).
As for the latvian gambit. It looks unsound, and it may be so, but even with all the GM analysis I've ever found on it (and there is a surprisingly large amount of GM analysis on this opening), the best lines for white give him only a small advantage.
The difference is that if white knows what he's doing, he can pretty much be certain of a certain advantage out of the opening, as opposed to not even be certain of that in other openings. However, no one has ever found more than that for white.
If white does not know what he's doing, he's in trouble. So, trying a new idea in this opening may be worth it. (small risk - you're not risking a total loss, just a difficult position + big gain - opponent has to be accurate and know what he's doing). I wouldn't play it (probably ever)... But I've known strong players who do.
6...Nh6 is a serious error.
Actually, after 6...exd3 ep white's advantage is not clear at all:
White has to maintain his pieces, so the knight has to be defended without moving it (so that the bishop doesn't drop), so
7.Qh5 is forced. 7...g6 8.Qg5 (again forced) Be7 9.Qxf6 Nxf6 10.Bxg6! but even after this 10...Rg8 11.Bxd3 d6 Now g2 falls and the game is perfectly defensible for black. If white tries to hold on to the pawn:
12. Nf7+ Ke8 13.Ng5 h6 followed by Rxg2.
The entire line looks almost completely forced to me (there were 2-3 other choices which would have amounted to the similar results more or less).
Back to the game:
8.Nc3 although I believe white still has a great position (as I've said, ...Nh6 was a horrible move), the simpler 8.Bb3 leaves no doubt in my mind that black is instantly dead (within the next few moves). Black will have to find Bb4+ c3 Rf8 to survive, but he survives in a totally lost position...
Instead of ...b6, black may still be in the game for now after either ...Nc6 or ...Bb4 Force white to make some effort to break his position down. As you correctly stated, ...d6 loses instantly......
9.Bh5? but NOT to that move:) if black doesn't take, white has to bring down black's position again. He still has a great position, but if you do it again and again and again... Sometimes you may find that the opponent stops giving extra opportunities. Luckily, in this game, your opponent obliged and decided to help:)
Instead of 9.Bh5...
9.Bd5! wins immediately!
The reason is tactical: After your 9.Bh5 black has 9...Be6 and on the immediate attempt to break through with 10.Nxe4 black has 10...Qf4 exploiting the unprotected knight. Black may actually be better now (although the position is probably extremely complicated and I'd argue that even after losing a piece the position may be dynamically equal. I've tried to analyze that and I have no conclusions yet).
but aftert 9.Bd5 Nf7 is a real threat and Be6 failes to Nxe4 (the knight is defended now...and just for one turn - that makes all the difference). Not to mention that Bd5 enables Bxb7 if black dares Be6, but I would say that Nxe4 first is even stronger.
Without the Be6 move, black has no defense. if he tries 9...dxe5 (I assume that was the reason you were afraid of this move... You can't win the queen now.
10.dxe5 Qxe5 11.Bxb7+ with an easy win.
No better alternatives to Qxe5 (10...Qb6 11.Bxb7+ Bd7 12.Bxa8 Qxb2 13.Nxe4 Bb4+ 14.Kf1is the most firepower black can throw at white, but he has to resign now).
Good game, you had the advantage from start to finish.
pierre19 wrote:
4 d5 is black best answear
agreed, and it makes things complex. still, After 5.Qh5+, g6 is forced (Ke7 Qf7+ Kd6 Qxd5+ is more than black can take), and after 6.Nxg6 I think black is forced to play 6...Nf6 (After hxg6 Qxh8, I think I'd already expect to win white's position if I play it correctly). 7.Qe5+ Be7 and here I find it very hard to decide between 8.Bb5+ (I really want to force ...c6 and hinder black's development (it'll be worth a tempo to save my bishop, I think), 8.Nxh8, and 8.Nxe7.
To tell the truth, although I have no idea what's going on in any of those positions, I think I'd prefer white.
That's just a different opening: The shcleiman gambit in the Ruy Lopez.
There's hardly a connection between the two (except a couple of very specific lines).
Go to chesslab and download any number of master games that *black* has won after 5. Bf7+ or 5. Nf7 in this line of the grco aka latvian countegambit. [after 2000, early 19th century, 18th century - you name it - i dont recall if there is one in greco's 16th cent. manuscript - those latvian-gambit games are also in that database] 5. Bf7+ and 5. Nf7.
MCO-14 gives this line as unclear. It covers both 5. Bf7+ and 5. Nf7.
This line is somewhat reminiscent of the traxler (aka wilkes-barre) defence branch of the two knights defence.
Here is a game I just played as White, where Black tried to play some sort of Queen's Gambit defense... She resigned in 10...
My Conclusion: There is no such thing as a sound Queen's Gambit Defense...
But what do you think? Analyze my game and feed-back...
As always, thanks!