SWJediknight wrote on 01/11/10 at 13:18:40:


Considerating by some sources 6.Be2 is one of the best White replies, I would suggest the following "Main line" ( also according some authors ): 6..Qd8 (Black has many problems with 6..Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.0-0 Nxc4 9.Bxc4 and threat Bb5+ has been terrible for Black, and personally I don't like previous mail reccomendation by Korch 6..Qf7 ) 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Bg5 Be7 9.f3 exf3 10.Bxf3 0-0 11.Nc3 ( 7..Nf6 8.f3 exf3 9.Bxf3 Be7 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Bg5 or 7..Be7 8.f3 exf3 9.Bxf3 Nf6 10.Nc3 0-0 11.Bg5 are both only traspositions ) and now instead known but "dubtious" 11..h6; 11..Nbd7 or 11..c6 I suggest new 11..Nc6 f.i.: 12.Qd3 Nd7!? 13.Bxe7 Nxe7 14.Rae1 Nf6 ( even 14..Kh8 ) and Black has adequate defensive resources, White has more space, but Black position is very solid and pawn structure identical

AMM wrote on 01/12/10 at 23:01:32:


I think that 11.Bc4 may be best.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 d5 7.Nexd5 c6 8.Ne3 Nf6 9.f3 exf3 10.Qxf3 Bc5 11.Bc4 Be6 12.Ne4 Bxc4 (12...Nxe4 13.Qxe4 loses a piece) 13.Nxc5 Qe7 14.Nxb7 0-0 15.Nd6 Be6 16.Ne4 looks pretty good for white two pawns up.

SWJediknight wrote on 01/22/10 at 14:31:02:


I think it's very doubtious to believe there are some compensation after 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 Nc6 6.d5 Ne5 7.Nc3 or 6.Nc3!? Qxd4 7.Bd3 and Be3; few games are known, but i don't like Black positions.

On the other hand, it has also suggested several times 6.Be2 as another difficult way for the Black game; perhaps the most appropriate is 6..Qd8 and I don't see a direct line where White can get advantage, but of course its advantage of space seem obvious.

Play directly 4..Nc6 after 4.Nc4 can allow 5.Nc3 fxe4 6.Nd5 etc.

As it has been said, if you want clearly refute any line this must be 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 d5 ( see previous quotes ); and if you prefer 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2, analysis must begin with 6..Qd8. SWJedinight suggested 6..h5, perhaps White should not be tempted 7.Bxh5+ g6 and play so most natural 7.Nc3 Qg6 8.0-0 Nf6 9.f3

You guys are so focused on the line 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Qf6 4 Nc4 fxe4 etc., that you do not look for alternatives.

What about the related 1 e5 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Qf6 4 d4 d6 5 Nc4 Nc6!?, the Cedar Knolls Gambit? My results in blitz and over-the-board have been encouraging. It certainly avoids the over-analyzed 4...fxe4 and steers the game into less-known waters.

By the way, Cedar Knolls is a small city in New Jersey. I grew up there, and my family still lives there.

ArKheiN wrote on 01/20/10 at 21:35:07:


This first try on refuting Black play was already quoted by Jeremy Silman in his web http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_opng_anlys/040223_more_splat_the_lat.html and I myself wrote also here in a previous thread at http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1194567910/15, but there I already told ( in red colour ) the position after 14.Bd2 0-0 15.Bxb4 Nbc6 16.16.Bxe7 Nxe7 17.Nc7 Rb8 18.Qe2 Nc6 19.Nxd5 Bf5 20.Bc4 Kh8 21.Ne3 Be6 22.Rad1 Rbe8 is still far to be clear ( Melchor-Elburg, cr.email, 2008/10 and also according my Hiarcs11 ) and resembles another ones as "ancient" Main line 9..Bc5 10.Na4 Bd6 11.c4 Ne7 12.Nc3 0-0 13.cxd5 cxd5 etc. where White has a pawn up after capturing "d5", but Black maintain drawish possibilities in the resulting 3 vs. 2 on the kingside situation ( it was assumed even by own Silman ). In the ending of my game vs. Elburg, still in progress, I have not many possibilities of winning even with a pawn up. 

Thus 14.Rb1! ( Russian I.Terenin, nick "g2-g4" ) was suggested at http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1194567910/30 as strongest than 14.Bd2 and personally I'm allright with him.

Last word by Silman ( October 2009 ) at http://www.chess.com/article/view/splat-the-lat-not-quite, this is the summary: "14.Rb1! (Much stronger than 14.Nc7+ Kd8 15.Nxa8 Bxe1 16.Qxe1 Nbc6 when Black’s King will always be a source of discomfort, but White’s Knight is trapped and in many lines won’t get out alive. White’s chances are probably better, but it’s by no means clear how big that advantage will turn out to be ). 14…0-0 15.Rxb4 Qxf2+ 16.Kh1 Nbc6 17.Be3 Qf6 18.Rf4 and black is in a very bad way".

I think Latvian is finally ruined .... Black MUST FIND new ways ( see my last three quotes ), and so "Conquistador" will continue trying to destroy it !! 

Hello AMM,

I am just curious, in page 5 you say "3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6.Ne3 c6 7.d3 exd3 8.Bxd3 d5 9.0-0 Bc5 10.b4! Bd6 11.Nexd5 cxd5 12.Re1+ Ne7 13.Nb5 Bxb4  
14.Rb1!"

While it might be true, I have never seen analysis of that move, I have seen your previous 14.Bd2. But is 14.Rb1 really superior to 14.Bd2? What is your latest toughts about 14.Bd2?

Thank you for sharing your nice ideas!

Conquistador wrote on 12/29/09 at 21:28:11:


Now I see this line was analyzed by Italian Matteo Viola in 1991 and also played:

6.Nd5 Na6 (Bucker also pointed 6..Kd8) 7.d4 Qf7 8.Nce3 c6 9.Bxa6 cxd5 10.Be2 with slight advantage (ops Black's center!)---Borrmann-Svendsen, corr., 1992/94 and Morato-Di Tora, corr.email, 2006/07