The Latvian Gambit (Never Lose to it Again!) 

I am considering that.

@@HangingPawns I think it is very interesting to explore unsound openings, and unsound move in common openings, because it is not straightforward how to refute most of them. Also, from a youtuber follower standpoint, it gets more views and lower rated player might enjoy more and learn to punish opponents very easily, which is something many beginners struggle to do. Thank you for your amazing job with your channel. My sincere compliments. PS. Very mice graphics ;) PSS. If you wanna have a game, my lichess nickname is RosenPy. I would enjoy to play against you. Anyone can try me :D

@@HangingPawns yes yes yes man...I requested you regarding that many times...please show how to punish the Fried fox, Englund, Polish, Grob, Borg, Bongcloud etc dubious annoying openings coz most of the time I just lose the game trying to launch a premature attack and in the end my opponent comes out with an extra piece. It's really frustrating to face these kind of nonsense opening moves. I lost around 200 rating points coz of this and my opponent just straightforward bullied me the in the whole game. Always after losing a game against such weird unsound opening moves I sometimes feel like I'd just quit chess. I just can't bear this horrible feeling.

At the same point, I think there is a lot to learn from dubious gambits to improve your chess tactics and attacking ideas. The Stafford gambit being one that comes to mind as it has a lot of attacking ideas I did not see before, along with the real power of fishing pole attacking ideas, and how to complicated positions when you are in the losing position to maximize your chances of getting back to equality or even getting a winning position.

@@alexandereastwood1 Buddy, Stafford is not that bad...you are trying to attack your opponent's king and there is nothing wrong with that. Do you know what is frustrating? Playing against nonsense flank pawn push(h4 g4) or f3 Kf2 (bong cloud) stuff what I hate the most. There is a guy in Lichess (username: SeventeenMinutes) who bullied me an entire night playing some nonsense openings like King's David Sicilian. And he always plays this stuff and gets away with it. After a long day, you want to have some fun playing chess and you face these sorts of stuff that completely makes you frustrated.

Smart.:)

Gross

220 IQ move. But then you'll lose to the Albin counter gambit

hyper gamer What about those London players though

@@periodic98 I can always throw in Nf3 before c4 it I want to ;)

Score against his latvian was 3-1. My flag fell in one game;D

The bird is essentially the dutch with white so i reccomend looking at stjepans dutch series

Dude, seems like you haven't faced the real stuff yet...I got bullied the entire night by this guy (username: SeventeenMinutes) on lichess by some weird f3 Kf2 bong cloud stuff, King's David Sicilian, etc and worse openings I didn't know even existed. And the thing is that he always plays these openings in blitz and always gets away with it. You can't even imagine what I felt after losing

@@g73hc3gsv3i if you lose to them they aren't nonsese.

@@stevenodonoghue6856 I'm not saying the people who played these moves are nonsense... I'm saying f2 Kf3-these are nonsense.

@@samhatts5601 Yes but i play the staunton gambit, that does not work with black and im not too fond of the other variations on the black side.

Precisely xD another 3 years headaches.

Savielly Tartakower once said that bad openings get better the worse their reputation is and the underlying rationale behind your observation leads me to agree. A lot of people don't see value in learning positions in bad openings (by computer standards) because nobody would bother to play them or they believe they refute themselves. They don't. It is this mentality that makes them playable on a human level - even more so when people view the choice of opening as an insult or irritation. You play the opponent in conjunction with the board - something that gets easily forgotten in a computer-dominated age and something not everybody is prepared for. Humans and their preferences are things computers will probably never fully grasp which will always leave a space for psychological play. Which is exactly why I love dubious stuff! (Also because the positions tend to be exciting!)

Hahahahahah rip

3 wins and my flag fell once. So 3-1 against the latvian!

@@HangingPawns not bad, thanks for the video! I will try it when having a chance

Cool was gonna ask. Congrats.

Not sure how practical it is to memorize such long lines, especially given how infrequently one sees the Latvian. What Stjepan shows is simple enough. In any case, stockfish gives 18...Na6 as an improvement for black in your line, continuing to a tablebase draw which looks a bit tricky for black but by no means undefendable: 18...Na6 19.Qxf8 Qxb2 20.Rd1 Kc6 21.Ne7+ Kb5 22.Nxc8 Ka5 23.Nd8 Qc3+ 24.Kf1 Ka4 25.Qf5 Nb4 26.Nxb7 Nc2 27.Rd3 Qe1+ 28.Kg2 Rxc8 29.Qd7+ c6 30.Qxc8 Qe2+ 31.Kg3 Qxd3 32.Qxc6+ Kb4 33.Qxd6+ Kc3 34.Qf4 Nxe3 35.Nc5 Qxd4 36.Qxd4+ Kxd4

@@richardward2519 I'd still wanna see it in this video, as it's a well-known line and is sometimes referred to as a refutation. It's also a very spectacular one! Anyway, imo it's way more practical to memorize just a few tight but crazy lines than a bunch of tame, but more nebulous, soup. Just throw it into your training, it doesn't take much time. Especially since there's this common losing blunder 9...c6 that you can exploit. Then you can be "well-trained" to meet the Latvian instead of going in with just a small handful of motifs or the first couple of moves. Also I don't have 18...Na6 as an improvement; in my training (not that I actually train it this deep, though my rep database is very fleshed out haha) it's listed as *worse* with main line 19. Qxf8 Qxb2□ 20. Rd1 Kc6□ 21. Ne7+ Kb6 (or, transpositionally, Kb5)□ 22. Nxc8+ Ka5□ 23. Nd8 Qc3+□ 24. Kf1 Ka4□ 25. Qf5 Nb4□ 26. Nxb7 Nc2□ 27. Rd3 Qe1+□ 28. Kg2 Rxc8□ 29. Qd7+ c6□ 30. Qxc8 Qe2+□ 31. Kg3 Qxd3□ 32. Qxc6+ Kb4□ 33. Qxd6+ Kc3□ for white stably up three pawns. You think it's holdable? Here □ means it's an only-move for black. I have 23...Qg2 as losing on deep analysis and still subjecting black to only-moves well into the 30's, though my engine is reading it off as holding at lower depths atm. Like I said in the first place an engine can play this and allegedly survive, but if I only need to know a few lines to drag black through this nightmare into such a nigh-unholdable endgame, I don't know how you can say it's not the better method!

@@john11inchlhb40 Yes, it is spectacular. I suppose its practicality depends on whether you are comfortable with having to remember a few very deep lines or not -- white also has only moves to keep the advantage. If you are confident you can remember it all and are a good endgame player, it makes sense. Interestingly, the Lichess database does have one game that follows the line to move 25, so clearly some people are learning this. Re 18...Na6, I think you're right. Stockfish likes it at a low depth (I think I was looking at it at depth 30 or so), and I just went with 34.Qf4 at the end, which stockfish also likes but which leads to a tablebase draw. Better is 34.Qc7+, which looks like it might be a forced win for white. Looking into it a bit more, 20.Qf7 is maybe better than 20.Qe6+: you get basically the same endgame but without the doubled pawns and black has a bishop instead of a knight.

Stjepan at last the Latvian Gambit! The young boy in my book plays this and defeats the school bully.

I think I remember you saying that:D Horrible opening though. Ps. now that the vaccine seems close, start planning a trip to Zagreb!

@@HangingPawns Visit to Zagreb for sure.

Caro-Kann, Semi-Slav

@@HangingPawns thanks for your reply. I now know what series I'll be watching on your chanel Btw you are doing a great job helping a lot of people improve in chess, myself included

I'd recommend watching some of Eric Rosen's videos, it's from blacks perspective, but he highlights mistakes by white that black can take advantage of. If you look at those mistakes and don't make them (easier said then done, i know :p), you should probably be in a decent spot

@@oxey_ But its not showing the line white should play, just mistakes, I saw that films, but its often shows, when white do this(mistake), then you play this and checkmate etc. I hope you understand me

Daniel Naroditsky did a great video on this already

@@paulc7162 I haven't checked the Naroditsky video, but the system I play is really good. I almost never lose (maybe like 1/5 or less) and I'm only 1900, so even at my chaotic rating range it's just really tough to crack. 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Nxc6 dxc6 5. Nc3 Bc5 6. h3 to stop Ng4 Black has two set-ups against this formation, one involving a lot of queen action and the other involving h5 and a piece sac on g4 (neither work); black should always short-castle, because we're gonna long-castle and if they also long-castle then they won't get to pawn-storm us and they'll never get compensation. White's general plan is just to consolidate with d3, Bd2 or Be3 (depending on if they play Bb4 threatening to double our pawns, in which case we'll play Bd2), Qf3, Be2 or g4-Bg2, O-O-O and sometimes a3. Black's trick is to make a battery with Bc5+Qd4 hitting out f2 pawn, so that's why you play Qf3. So they make the battery and you play Qf3 for example, and then they go after your c3 knight. That's when you play Bd2- DON'T let them double your queenside pawns. Your long-term plan is to play for d4, or go on the kingside with either f3-g4 and just be the tortoise, or g4+f4 and attack. Usually you can do either, but my personal suggestion is to storm on the kingside. If black does play O-O-O then d4 is more viable; if they don't, then it can get you in trouble if their attack on your queenside is successful. You'll wish you had a more solid structure to shelter your king, who might have to go on a little walk! You can also go for a hyper-accurate Qe2 instead of Qf3, anticipating g4+Bg2. But some additional complications can arise from this set-up; I don't remember EXACTLY, but I think some Nd1 maneuver is involved, and they can just barrel c5-c4 at you after putting a rook on e-file so it's a bit more dangerous if you don't learn precise move orders. It's slightly, slightly better than Qf3 lines (because you are eventually going to want to play f3 or f4), so I suggest Qf3 as a practical matter. Against the h5 lines, you always go Qf3 anyway, so it's less to learn. Black shouldn't take your knight with their bishop, but if they do then consider playing O-O instead of O-O-O and just milking a pawn-up+bishop pair advantage. Your b-pawn is well-protected at that point. Either way, let them castle first so you know where they're going. You wouldn't want them taking the knight, then you short-castle, and then they long-castle. That could be more aggravation than necessary. The other set-up involves black sacrificing a piece on g4 to deflect your queen away from the defense of f2. That's easy: Just accept the piece, let them give you the check on f2 and play Kd1. You'll be totally fine. It almost never happens, you have to mess up your move order a little bit to allow this, but if they go for it then don't worry. Just accept the piece. A good trick if they play the Bc5+Qd4 battery is that once you play Qf3/e2, if they don't immediately play Bb4 then you can play Be3, hit the queen and snag their bishop. One more pair of pieces down . . . My other 'tips' would be don't drop your a-pawn by accident, and if they play h5-h4 + O-O then don't get stressed about not being able to play g4; just finish your consolidation and then methodically go after the pawn with your queen afterwards, or go Rg1+g3. Don't go for a 'quick' d4 either, because sometimes you'll need shelter for your king from the rooks. Also, your queen belongs in the center or king-side, not defending on your queenside; be willing to walk your king to the center if their attack starts getting too fierce. Your knight shouldn't stray too far from the defense, tho (especially, don't O-O-O, move your knight and allow Qa2). Kb1 is often a waste of time in this opening, especially if their darksquare bishop is gone.

It's more like losing by force.

@@milankotevski1663 Beauty of gambits is that almost nobody knows the forcing lines ;)