Recently I was reading a lot about the Latvian Gambit theory, but I have been convinced recently that there are several new resources for Black in the 'Main Lines'... For instance:
1. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 P-KB4!?
At this point White has a choice of five main moves, but KtxP is preferred.
3. KtxP
And contrary to popular belief, Black has no less than FIVE alternatives here:
3. ...Kt-KB3!
The most solid possibility. To be honest, I might prefer 3. ...Kt-QB3, or something else like 3. ...Q-K2,
but I save some of these types of moves to use as novelties in my games.
4. PxP
White may also play 4. B-B4, but this merely transposes to 3. B-B4 Kt-KB3!?
In this position, which I have studied much, I am convinced that Black has many resources.
It can be discussed later, but it is certainly a 'tactical' line, which makes it 'impractical' for White.
4. ...Q-K2
5. Q-K2
White can play 5. P-Q4!?, as after ...P-Q3?! 6. Q-K2 PxKt 7. PxP Kt-Q4 8. Q-R5 ch.!
White may even be better. However, if Black calmly plays 6. ...BxP! 7. Kt-Q3 Kt-B3 8. P-QB3 O-O-O,
He has the edge.
5. ...P-Q3
Now White has two main options:
The first--
6. Kt-B4
This move deprives the bishop of its best square.
6. ...P-Q4!?
(Black may play 6. ...BxP 7. QxQ ch. BxQ 8. Kt-K3 B-K3! also, which is fine)
7. Kt-K5 BxP
8. P-Q4 Kt-B3!
Reaching equality, with some winning chances:
9. KtxKt KtPxKt
10. P-QB3 K-Q2!
11. B-K3 Kt-KKt5!
And Black won in Svaton - Cirulis, 2007
The second--
6. Kt-B3
Retreating to the original square.
6. ...BxP
7. Kt-Q4 B-Q2!
8. Kt-QB3 P-B4!
Forcing the knight back. From my experience, the solid Black position usually wins.
Originally posted by exigentskyIsn't descriptive easier? It helps me visualise the pieces. Maybe it's better, though... As Greenpawn said, he doesn't like the Latvian discussed. If you aren't willing to read the notation, maybe then it will keep the Greco Countergambit a 'secret weapon'! LOL...
I'd like to read this but the notation is... ahh...
Greco
Originally posted by King GrecoMany people like to cut-and-paste PGNs, lines, variations, etc. into various game viewers for easy viewing. You can't do that with descriptive notation. If the idea is to reduce the number of people viewing your posts, you're off to a good start. And If you really want to keep your "secret weapons" a secret, I guess it would be even better to just not post anything at all. 😉
Isn't descriptive easier? It helps me visualise the pieces. Maybe it's better, though... As Greenpawn said, he doesn't like the Latvian discussed. If you aren't willing to read the notation, maybe then it will keep the Greco Countergambit a 'secret weapon'! LOL...
Greco
I was kidding about 'secret weapons'. First off, chess isn't THAT important to me--I play it for fun! And second, who actually comes to these forums anyways? To be honest, often the best theoretical improvements come from discussions. My bad with the notation... it's a pain for me to convert everything, and Normajeanyates (who's a user on FICGS or something) always liked descriptive so it was influence on me... anyways, I'll post it in Algebraic when I get the time... I gotta' sign up for classes at college now though. Hopefully in the meantime people will read this like it used to be expected--with a chessboard (either on the table or in their head!)
Greco
Originally posted by King GrecoThis is the first of the two lines in translation
Recently I was reading a lot about the Latvian Gambit theory, but I have been convinced recently that there are several new resources for Black in the 'Main Lines'... For instance:
1. P-K4 P-K4
2. Kt-KB3 P-KB4!?
At this point White has a choice of five main moves, but KtxP is preferred.
3. KtxP
And contrary to popular belief, Black has no less than ...[text shortened]... P-B4!
Forcing the knight back. From my experience, the solid Black position usually wins.
Greco if you prefer descriptive that´s fine, but you should copy and paste the modern notation from your database so the rest of us can work out what the game moves are. Although I understand the old descriptive notation it´s non-intuitive as the point of view of rank numbering changes on each half move (P-K4 P-K4 rather than P-e4 P-e5).
Sure... But what if my 'database' is actually files with real paper? I'm actually a human being who uses paper, not a screen ROFL!
Maybe I'm too old school for you guys...
OK Though:
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 f5
3. Nxe5 Nf6
4. exf5 Qe7
5. Qe2 d6
6. Nf3 Bxf5
7. Qxe7 Bxe7
8. Nd4 Bd7!!
This retreat gives Black a great position. (Btw I'm typing this all from memory so it might be a move off but I think it's right...)
Greco