I play the Philidor Counter-Gambit a lot, and have never seen 4...Qe7 played. James West suggests instead, 4...e4. Now, 5 Ng5 Nf6 with the following deviations:

  A1.1  6 Ne6

  A1.2  6 Nc3 d5 7 f3 h6  8 Ne6;
                                     8 Nge4


  A2 5...Bxf5

   6 Nc3 d5
   6 Nc3 Nf6
   6  f3

   and Black has 3 responses:

   6...d5; 6...Qe7 ; 6...e3

Source: The Dynamic Philidor Counter-Gambit 2nd edition, by NM James R. West

Also, let me mention here that my joint analyses with West and his chess engine Fritz have found new improvements in the Newark Gambit. In fact, the improvements put to rest the  so called refutations.

At this moment I am playing a correspondence game with the Newark Gambit. It involves the line you mentioned, Alejandro, "the ruinous position". Once it is finished, I will post it here.

When your Latvian Gambit correspondence tournament starts, I will be only too happy to play you. Maybe then we can transpose, via 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 d4 d6 4 Bc4 b5
order, into my line.

So how long until the LG tournament starts?

3...f5?!
4....Qe7?

Tad harsh. But certainly helpful.

breizatao wrote on 02/24/12 at 19:48:37:


I don't criticise you for pointing out some specifics to tne OP, nor  do I say that denegration is a substitute for analysis.

But to observe frankly that one side's game is crap is a useful antidote to wasting time on analysis. If you want to put a page of variations up here analyzing 4...Qe7, by all means do so. I think though that the tail is wagging the dog if we need analysis to reach that conclusion.

Further if somebody seriously thinks Black's game might be okay after 4...Qe7, theoretical investigations are unlikely to be the very best use of the time they have for chess.

What is to answer, really? After 4...Qe7, White has made four good moves, Black one.

Who is promoting 3...f5 that this bad move keeps attracting attention here?

What about
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 f5 4. exf5 Qe7 5. dxe5 6. Bc4 dxe5 7. Nc3 Nc6 7. 0-0 Qd7
with only a small edge for white.

breizatao wrote on 02/24/12 at 07:56:12:

I was looking at the line
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 f5 4.exf5 Qe7
and couldn't find a way to get a clear dominating position for white. Is the move 4.. Qe7 a known theoretical move in the philidor countergambit?

I've read in a number of places that 4.exf5 is suppose to be the crushing move against the philidor countergambit, but I'm not so sure of it after 4.. Qe7.