Me. It's me that said the latvian was bad. And it is.
Peace!
Latvian Gambit - Sac, Sac aaaaand...MATE!
Sort:
i still say latvian is bad
Good game, you had the initiative just about the whole game.
"who said the latvian is bad??"
Don't worry about any of that, at our level very few openings are "bad" and even fewer players at sub-master level can refute risky gambits OTB/Live. The opening very well may be "bad" in some absolute sense, but that need not affect us.
I play all sorts of risky/"bad" openings because I enjoy the tactical melees that arise and would probably give up playing if I was condemned to play positional struggles every game. Play what you like and enjoy your games.
I think there is something to be said for 18.Qd3+ as well.
wow seeing fro the first time. I'd luv 2try out latvian
kingslayerthe1st wrote:
move 18 white shoulda played qxc5 white had a won game he just made very poor decisions blacks queenside is undeveloped and blacks rook is not defende which mkaes it vulnerable for a queen fork but congratulations on winning a lost game
maybe first analyzing...Qxc5? f4! And the white queen cant defend the king anymore!
I think there is something to be said for 18.Qd3+ as well.
Qd3+ Bd7! and now what? Remember that the b7 pawn is still poison!
lativan is bad
LatvianGambit wrote:
Long live the Latvian!!! Very exciting opening!
Haha! YES, that is sooo true!
RainbowRising wrote:
You're going to kick a lot of arse with the latvian, but when you play Vs someone who knows how to play against it, you will lose. It works because it's a rare one!
haha...well, not loose, but yes having a hard time! gg
master_in_panama wrote:
kingslayerthe1st wrote:
move 18 white shoulda played qxc5 white had a won game he just made very poor decisions blacks queenside is undeveloped and blacks rook is not defende which mkaes it vulnerable for a queen fork but congratulations on winning a lost game
maybe first analyzing...Qxc5? f4! And the white queen cant defend the king anymore!
I believe the followup is Nd5, locking in your knight, pressuring the f-pawn and poking at c7. That leaves the knight a bit loose and hinders the queen somewhat though, so Ne4 may be safer, getting the knight to help the kingside. Plus that threatens a Ng5-Nd6 royal fork if the bishop moves. Even more passive is Ne2, but that has the benefit of poking f4 as well.
And after that d3 can release the dark-square bishop...I think Black cannot force mate at that point.
Incidentally, I think your "white is already positionally lost" is rather premature. What's wrong with 7.exf5?
I've played several games in the Latvian against an International Correspondence Master. Since he is one of the leading proponents of the Latvian Gambit, our games have some theoretical value. For example, I appear to have improved on the game Fischer-Pupols won by Black. Here is the score of our game: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Ne3 Nf6 8.Be2! (N?). Fischer tried 8.Bc4 and lost. 8...c6 9.O-O Be7 10.f3! d5 11.fxe4 dxe4 & the ICM thought that White was better. I lost simply because I am a much weaker player, but won the opening duel. The biggest danger facing White is how to untrack his Queenside. Probably something like 12.Qe1 O-O 13.Bc4ch Kh8 14.a4 would be a good idea alleviating the Queenside grid lock and clamping down on the position.
Even at blitz, I would play 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Bc5 4.d4 without thinking. White is much better and should be able to figure things out at anything slower than game in 30. Game in 5 or 10 is not chess in this position, it is just shuffling wood to see who makes the next to last blunder (the winner).
Here is a game I just played in the Latvian Gambit! Enjoy! (p.s: it has a rook sac and numerous pawn sacs!)(p.s.s: just click on solution!)