Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Latvian vs. Bishops opening (Read 6809 times)
urusov
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 147
Location: Kenilworth
Joined: 08/04/05
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #15 - 08/05/05 at 11:13:12
Post Tools
I agree with MNb, the Perreux Variation (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Ng5!?) is inferior to other choices--though I think it is more playable than anyone else supposes it.  I mostly decided to focus on the line because it was featured in the Dimock Theme Tournament of 1924, which I used to center my site on the Urusov Gambit System:
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~goeller/urusov.html
The Perreux had not received much coverage in the literature, it was restricted and so did not take too much time to write about, and the Dimock games actually advanced the theory considerably.  So it made sense to write about it.  I actually had projected a much larger site covering all d4 lines in the Two Knights, but it would have taken too much time and distracted me from other projects...

Personally, I play and recommend the Modern Variation (5.e5!) which is well discussed in various places.  Part of the Perreux site offers a bibliography and links to material online covering all Two Knights lines with White d4:
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~goeller/urusov/perreux/links.html

As for the person who asks, "What about 2...Nf6?"  The Urusov Gambit, of course!  The Bishop's Opening section is only for when Black avoids that.  See the rest of the site (follow links at the top of the page) for other lines.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10486
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #14 - 08/04/05 at 22:21:12
Post Tools
Ah, now I know who urusov is. My single objection against your repertoire is 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nf3 Nc6! 5.Ng5?! which is inferior, if Black plays d5 6.exd5 Qe7+ or Ne5.

To answer a remark made by urusov in the next post: Heyken/Fette in the German Euwe-serie Theorie der Schach-Eröffnungen have spend 4 pages on 5.Ng5?!
« Last Edit: 08/08/05 at 23:46:02 by MNb »  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bravehoptoad
Full Member
***
Offline


Chess nuts boasting in
an open foyer

Posts: 100
Location: Tok
Joined: 06/27/05
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #13 - 08/04/05 at 21:46:54
Post Tools
Urusov, that's a simply amazing web site you've got there.  Yow. 

I'm puzzled that you seem to be missing the main line, with 2...Nf6.  Is that something you haven't gotten around to yet, or is it absent by design?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
urusov
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 147
Location: Kenilworth
Joined: 08/04/05
Re: Calabrese Counter Gambit
Reply #12 - 08/04/05 at 10:56:30
Post Tools
The line 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5 is traditionally called The Calabrese Counter Gambit.  White has a number of ways to meet it, though it takes some real study to guarantee an edge against best play.  I have a page devoted to it here:
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~goeller/urusov/bishops/f5.htm

The most sane option for White might be simply 3.Nc3, with positions like you might get out of the Vienna.  Also strong, but requiring much more study, is 3.Nf3 transposing to the well-analyzed variation of the Latvian Gambit.  I am also intrigued by 3.f4!? though my analysis only suggests equality against best defense--but in theory White should have the edge a tempo up in a symmetrical position.

The traditional lines with 3.d3 seem only about equal to me, and I think it is White who can most easily get the worst of it.

Sorry for the late post to this discussion--I only recently joined this excellent forum.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10486
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #11 - 07/05/05 at 22:06:05
Post Tools
Completely off topic, but what do you play against 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d3 Bc5 4.Nc3 c6 ?
I am very curious.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bckm
Junior Member
**
Offline


Start the day with a smile
and get it over with...

Posts: 69
Location: Los Angeles
Joined: 05/08/03
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #10 - 07/05/05 at 13:00:22
Post Tools
I play the Bishop's Opening exclusively after 1.e4 e5.  I don't always win, of course, but (to me) the main advantage of the Bishop's Opening is that it avoids the Petroff Defense (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6), all the theory of the Ruy Lopez, and White at least has an idea of what to do when playing 2.Bc4.  A LONG time ago, I faced 2...f5 against a master (I'm a B-player); I played 3.d3, followed by f4 a couple of moves later.  I lost the game, but not because of the opening.  I feel that Emms' recommendation is probably best; by delaying Nf3, White is able to attack the e5-pawn with the f-pawn as well as the knight when it does come out to f3.  Sometimes it can even come out to e2, to keep the f-file clear after White castles, which is what I did against the master.  I no longer have the game, but I recall that I had the better of it out of the opening, and the master didn't play 2...f5 after that in any game I could see.

I don't think that "Latvian vs. the Bishop's Opening" is bad, unsound, or any of that; it's just that Black is not developing his/her pieces, and White is.  The Black attack on e4 doesn't promote development, e4 is easily defended, while allowing for White to develop, and White hasn't committed any inaccurate moves that allow an unprepared attack to succeed.  So while it is not "refuted", I believe Black has better than 2...f5.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2034
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #9 - 06/02/05 at 21:34:13
Post Tools
Are you Topher Grace the actor from 'That Seventies Show'?

Top Grin
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Topher
Guest


Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #8 - 06/02/05 at 13:45:04
Post Tools
What are the pros and cons of the bishop’s opening compared to the Spanish variation of the four knights?  Does one give white more of an advantage than the other? What is the best move order to reach the four knights in an attempt to avoid the various black responses to e4 such as the Sicilian, French, caro-kann, etc etc. What problems would I have to face if I tried to reach the four knights via transposition? I’m looking into both of these openings and any help you can provide to help me decide which to play would be appreciated.

Thanks
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
guidedbyvoices
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 91
Location: Ireland
Joined: 12/17/04
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #7 - 04/22/05 at 15:38:35
Post Tools
Lane in his earlier work on the Bishops opening gives a line by Jaenisch 1e4 e5 2Bc4 f5? 3d3 Nf6 4f4 d6 5Nf3 fe 6de Bg4 7fe Bxf3 8Qxf3 de 9Qb3 Qc8 10Bg5 Bc5 11Bf7+/=.
The ? appended by Lane to 2..f5 seems a little harsh. ?! is probably more appropriate. Soltis also recommends an early f4 by white as an antidote to this line saying that after 1e4 e5 2Bc4 f5?! 3d3 Nf6 4f4 d6 5Nf3 the weakening of the b3-g8 diagonal will subsequently hurt Blacks chances.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Topher
Guest


Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #6 - 04/22/05 at 11:31:44
Post Tools
Quote:
Try BxN  followed up with Nc3 with the idea of quick qside castle should lead to favorable veinna type position.  Also, in my opinion, the best way to avoid unconfortable outcome so early is
A) play a forcing line that develops with threats, the bishop opening leaves black a gazillion defense choices




I've seen this phrase "forcing lines" or "forcing openings" in various threads or topics yet these are not defined. Can you explain to me what openings or lines are forcing? Are there openings that can force certain moves on the opponent? 

Thanks for clearing this up for me.
Topher
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Glenn Snow
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1696
Location: Franklin
Joined: 09/27/03
Gender: Male
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #5 - 10/02/03 at 22:17:00
Post Tools
I like the variation Emms gives in his "Attacking with 1.e4 book.  1.e4 d5 2.Bc4 f5 3.d3 Nf6 4.Nf3 (4.f4!?) Nc6 5.0-0 Bc5 6.Nc3 d6 7.Bg5, and if 7...Na5 8.Bxf6 Qxf6 9.Nd5 Qd8 10.b4! Nxc4 11.bxc5 fxe4 12.dxc4 exf3 13.Qxf3, "and White is better", Emms.  Emms notes that it is Black who is playing the King's Gambit Declined with a tempo less.  That sounds confusing to me.  I would say White is playing the King's Gambit Classical Declined with a tempo more!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Garberg
Guest


Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #4 - 09/21/03 at 14:15:29
Post Tools
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5

The position look like a opposite king-gambit.... with one tempi for white.

Though one should not take the pawn here 3. exf5 ..is not that god, because of Nf6 , and then d5 ....winning a tempo.

Ficher used to play with black ... 1. e4 e5 2. f4 d5 .....
In our variation we could try the oposite  1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5 d4  .... with even one tempo more then Bobby ! ...
thougt Nf6- d5(pawn)-breaks is something black should opt for here , and white avoid.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
alumbrado
God Member
*****
Offline


Esse quam videri bonus
malebo

Posts: 1418
Location: London
Joined: 02/17/03
Gender: Male
Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #3 - 09/15/03 at 03:20:40
Post Tools
One option is to play 3.Nf3!? transposing to a critical line of the Latvian Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4!?).  Another try is 3.d4!? exd4 4.e5 (a Falkbeer Reversed - but it is not absolutely clear that Bc4 is a useful extra move there.
  

If sometimes we fly too close to the sun, at least this shows we are spreading our wings.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Nolan Kordsmeier
Guest


Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #2 - 09/13/03 at 22:42:49
Post Tools
Im not sure i see the point of playing 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5
3.Bxg8 as it gives up the very strong bishop for the knight.
Yes, it does prevent black from castling and does prevent Nf6 but it seems like black equalizes fairly easily after ...Rxg8
4.Nc3 Qg5! but its still rather unclear as white can respond
5.Qf3 followed by Nge2, Nd5, h4, d4 which looks promising for white.

What does everybody think?

Nolan
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Aaron Toledo
Guest


Re: Latvian vs. Bishops opening
Reply #1 - 09/13/03 at 03:12:19
Post Tools
Try BxN  followed up with Nc3 with the idea of quick qside castle should lead to favorable veinna type position.  Also, in my opinion, the best way to avoid unconfortable outcome so early is
A) play a forcing line that develops with threats, the bishop opening leaves black a gazillion defense choices

b)learn the Latvian inside and out so you will be happy when you see f5, most ppl think this is horrible move yet are loath to play against it! book up!

lemme know if it works for you,
my handle is JerkFace on ICC


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo