Home > Publishing Schedule > GM11 – Chapter List

GM11 – Chapter List

Desperately busy with a quick non-QC project. Excerpts up in a few days; new PS as well. For now, this:

Chapter List

Part 1 – 1.d4 d5 lines

Chapter 1 – Miscellaneous (2.a3, 2.e3)
Chapter 2 – Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
Chapter 3 – 2.Bg5
Chapter 4 – Veresov
Chapter 5 – London 1.d4 d5 2.Bf4
Chapter 6 – 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c3 (and rare moves)
Chapter 7 – 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5

Part 2 – 1.d4 Nf6

Chapter 8 – 2.g3 and others
Chapter 9 – Trompowsky – Intro and 3.h4
Chapter 10 – Trompowsky – 3.Bh4
Chapter 11 – Trompowsky – 3.Bf4

Part 3 – 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6

Chapter 12 – side lines 3.Nc3, 3.Nbd2
Chapter 13 – 3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 b5
Chapter 14 – 3.Bg5 Torre Attack
Chapter 15 – London 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 d5
Chapter 16 – Colle
Chapter 17 – Colle-Zukertort (with c2-c4)
Chapter 18 – Colle-Zukertort (without c2-c4)

Part 4 – 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6

Chapter 19 – Other third moves
Chapter 20 – Barry 3.Nc3
Chapter 21 – 3.e3
Chapter 22 – London 3.Bf4
Chapter 23 – Torre 3.Bg5
Chapter 24 – 3.g3 (without c2-c4)

Categories: Publishing Schedule Tags:
  1. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 9th, 2012 at 11:40 | #1

    Maybe if I start using this repertoire those players will stop playing the Torre and Colle against me :D.

    Excellent, though–24 chapters.

  2. Jacob Aagaard
    October 9th, 2012 at 14:02 | #2

    504 pages

  3. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 9th, 2012 at 15:06 | #3

    My experience over past few years have yielded me an estimate: if GM11 is already at the printer, then I think (or tried to estimate0 that publication and distribution to chess shops could be Friday 26th October, with posting of websales commencing on Monday 29th October. Does this sound correct?

  4. Patrick
    October 9th, 2012 at 15:59 | #4

    Gilchrist is a Legend :Maybe if I start using this repertoire those players will stop playing the Torre and Colle against me .
    Excellent, though–24 chapters.

    And maybe they won’t! 😀

    I know it won’t scare me out of my Veresov or Torre to go along with my 1.g3 and more mainstream 1.d4/2.c4 that I play as White!

    Gilchrist – Read the book, and then come to the United States, and take on me. I’ll take White, and throw a Torre or Veresov at you! Yes, this is a dare! 😀

  5. Jacob Aagaard
    October 9th, 2012 at 16:07 | #5

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Usually it would be, but we are fighting Finish christmas catalogues and will be out two weeks after that, I think.

  6. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 9th, 2012 at 20:35 | #6

    I used to play the Trompowsky very occasionally and never lost with it, I think it is one of the best openings to play if one will not play 2. c4 as well as not being very annoying when playing against it for Black. Creative positions for both sides often.

    504 pages of Avrukh analysis is never a bad thing 🙂

    Also I remember a mention of a book at some point in the future considering all moves not 1. d4 nor 1. e4? I think that will be interesting as well. I used to play in online blitz/1-minute the system 1. b3/2. Bb2/3. Na3/4. c3/5. Qc2/6. 0-0-0/7. f3/8. g4/ 9. h4/10. h5 for fun. I wonder if it is possible that it could be in the book 😀

  7. Michael
    October 9th, 2012 at 21:55 | #7

    What about a book with a black rep against the English and all the off-beat openings, is this still going to happen, or was it ever a project you were thinking about doing. I thought a while back that is some thread there was a mention of it but I don’t see any future planes for it. It would be great as to complete a lot of our reps, and the English is no joke, and I still have not settled on a proper defense to it, not to mention 1.Nf3 and 1.g3.

    GM11 looks impressive, another must have from QC, Congrats!

    When will Positional Play be out, really looking forward to that one!

    Cheers!

  8. Jacob Aagaard
    October 9th, 2012 at 22:40 | #8

    @Michael
    I guess if no one buys GM11, there will be limited incentive for Boris to do a sequel. So it all depends on sales, to be honest.

  9. John Johnson
    October 10th, 2012 at 01:50 | #9

    I am pretty sure Avrukh is one of those authors whose name on the cover generates some automatic sales by now.

  10. Michael
    October 10th, 2012 at 02:41 | #10

    @Jacob Aagaard
    Well I know I have to have it, so I hope it sells well, besides I notice most players I play against choose 1.d4 sidelines or 1.b3 1.Nf3 and all sort of other stuff. I see this way more often than main lines which is really a shame becasue the lines I have learned from your opening books are so dynamic, exciting and just damn plain make the game of chess more beautifuol and fun to experience. But all these sidelines I spoke about can be found in other sources, but the English, now that’s a serious weapon and when you play a player who knows it well and swithches it up on you evertime you try something new, now taht really can be a problem, it’s to bad you guys couldn’t slip in a black rep for the English in a past or upcoming book. For that is the real opening that you need a good anwser to! But it would be great to have all my opening rep from QC, I think you guys are putting out the best material right now, so a book on these sidelines Im hoping happens, to scare these boring players into having to learn at least some normal lines. Chess openings sure have changed from way back when, now it is simple and fast and can I learn it in an hour…Sad…

    I also agree with John Johnson that Avrukh’s name on a book is enough to generate some automatic sales, Yep, he is that good. Play 1.d4 and play the Playing 1.d4 rep. but I own both Boris’ GM1&2 just because they are that good and I notice as chess player that your always going through changes and you never know when you may want to chage up your style, or have really good back up lines!

    I am really want Positional Play, I think this book for me personal is going to be Gold! That and Boris’ book are my next 2 purchases

    And I am really curious about GM6a and GM6b. GM6a because like I said above everybody tries to get out of the mainlines, and GM6b because while playing the Najdorf with an e6 set up which is the way I prefer to play it I have had lots of plroblems with the English attack and I need to remedy this, I have even added the Taimanov a another Sicilian in my rep. and have had good results using it, exept again against the english attack, so it would seem to be if you want to beat me with white just play the English Attack. I have to find a proper way to fix this big hole in my play, 6.Bg5 I can beat playes 200 or 300 points higher than me often, but that Damn English, I don’t know what to do about it. I hope to find the right way that suits my style, have been thinking about Ng4 just out of frustration. We shall see.

    Well thanks again Jacob for all you hard work and still taking the time to talk to us on this blog!

    Cheers!

  11. The Lurker
    October 10th, 2012 at 18:46 | #11

    @Michael
    I was under the impression that the Kan is more or less proof against the English attack. Is this mistaken?

  12. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 10th, 2012 at 21:06 | #12

    @The Lurker

    I think he was referring to the English Attack within the Najdorf.

    I have problems in an opposite manner; I am comfortable playing against both 6. Bg5 and the English Attack, but not against the Closed Sicilian or Moscow Variation. That is why, as he said above, GM6a would be very important. The specific importance given to non-main line systems in these repertoire books is very useful, especially GM11.

  13. Michael
    October 10th, 2012 at 23:31 | #13

    @The Lurker
    Your right about the Kan, and I have considered it, but then you do have to face the Maorczy bind a lot, which is what put me off my first Sicilian the Accerated Dragon. Of course the Bind is less effective against the Kan, but you do have to know how to play hedgehog positions which can be frustrating because your counter attack comes much later in the game after somtimes 20 or more moves with no exchanges!

    And really there is not a good nww book on the Kan, The last good one is Play the Kan 2008 which I have but have not yet investigated. But like Gilchrist is Lengend mentioned is I play the Najdor/Scheveningen and the Taimanov, and my best results is the past against much stronger players have been in my Najdorf games…But the English attack can be played by same strength or even weaker players sometimes and I feel like ther side is very easy to play and I have to not make one misteke of my king is history! I have problems when my king ends up on f7 after a kingside pawn storm, and really there would be where I need assistance or knowledge on how to play the positions.

    The Taimanov is has a lot in common with the Kan, and the Bind is less effective against it. But the English is still a problem, You have he Brazilian with Be7/Nh5 or Be7 with h5 or the original move Bb4, which I am not sure of the status of this move I hear different opinions on Chesspub, so not really sure this is the way to go, even though many players still play this way.

    I guess the reason I added the Taimanov is if I knew berore hand my opp. would play the English I would play the Taimanov, but that did not really fix my problem. So of course there is the Kan, and trying to find a way within the Najdorf to fight against the English, seeing as I play most other lines well in that opening. e5 I don’t really like because I feel like I get saddled with a bad dark squared bishop, which may or may not be true, and in the e6 variation I have pblems like I said when my king ends up on f7 without much cover, I know there is a better way to play the position that the way I have been. So really looking forward to these 2 books!

    Thanks for the reminder about the Kan maybe I can add a third Siclian to my rep!

  14. Michael
    October 10th, 2012 at 23:44 | #14

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    I have had some problems against the closed also, and the Grand prix attack, except when I play the Taimanov, I just play a fast d5 in most positions and get a tottaly playable position that is easy to navigate, but then there are other problems that I face with the Taimanov that are not easy or pleasent, so there is always a trade off! Against lower raeted players who play the closed and offbeat stuff 2…e6 works very well, but then say your playing a GM and he rolls out the mainline or the Queen exchange line, and you do not have much experience because it is not played against you that often, and I notice even talking to some descent strength players that the get confused which is the Taimanov and which is the Kan.

    I used to do well with the Kasparov style of playing against the English with the knights jumping all around, to d7, b6 and e5 and a4 and just bust open the queenside with an eventually sac and then checkmate! but as I got srtonger and my opp. got stronger this plan was not as easy and I found myself not getting there fast enough bfoe my king was under serious pressure!

    We shall see, I love the e6 set-ups, but it seems you need to know more, but you have to play the kinds of positions that you like otherwise I might as well just go home and watch a movie instead.

    I think now a days books like GM6a and GM11 are the ones that we will find our selves studying more than the main lines only because most players I met or play prefer sidelines…Pretty sad.

  15. Michael
    October 10th, 2012 at 23:52 | #15

    By the way just looking at chessgames.com the Bind does not do so well against the Kan, and I notice some very strong players use it at the top. Fabiano Caruana has some really nice wins, one a little while back against Topalov. Very Dynamic!

  16. BabySnake
    October 11th, 2012 at 11:20 | #16
  17. Blue Knight
    October 11th, 2012 at 15:19 | #17

    @BabySnake

    No problem here…

  18. BabySnake
    October 11th, 2012 at 16:08 | #18

    It was fixed within minutes of my earlier post 🙂

  19. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 11th, 2012 at 16:35 | #19

    I see the excerpt, and that the book will be 504 pages. I will pre-order this in hardback edition immediately, as this will probably be the most useful book for me presently 🙂

    Typical detail and completion in the style of Avrukh especially when accounting for the line 1. d4 d5 2. a3 which surprised me; as my favourite author, the details of the analyses remind me of the detail and process thinking of an engineering textbook, which makes me want to own the book even more. If many of these lines are covered, then I am sure we Grünfeld, King’s Indian, Slav, QGD, etc. players will be very prepared.

    So another excellent Avrukh book, with Avrukh writing 5 out of the 11 (45%!) of the total number of GM Repertoire books so far 😀

  20. The Lurker
    October 11th, 2012 at 17:28 | #20

    @Michael
    I’m still slowly piecing together a repertoire, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I would think there are times when you could transpose from the Kan to the Taimanov, so it might not be quite so much work as learning yet a third full Sicilian.

  21. The Lurker
    October 11th, 2012 at 17:34 | #21

    Gilchrist is a Legend :@The Lurker
    I think he was referring to the English Attack within the Najdorf.

    He seemed to be saying that he had trouble against the English Attack, period, from the Najdorf or the Taimanov. At least that was my interpretation. Anyhoo….

    I also play a lot against somebody who simply will not go for an Open when I play d6, always the Moscow. That’s another reason I considered the Kan for myself, since if monkey no see check, monkey no do check. Of course, then I have to deal with possibility of the KIA, but nothing’s perfect.

  22. Michael
    October 11th, 2012 at 23:37 | #22

    @The Lurker
    Very true the Taimonov and the Kan are in the same family and many lines transpose to the other, so yes it woud not be like adding a brand new sicilian I know nothing about as the two share many traits and traspose into eachother often not to mention having also played the Najdorf Scheveningen style many of the positions have a lot in common. I actually think it is a good idea to know both, and when to transpose to favorable lines form the Taimanov to the Kan and the Kan back to the Taimanov when and if possible.

    Speaking about the English Attack I just played 2 blitz games last night against a much stronger player and I know he plays the English so I tried the Kan, not really knowing the lines yet he played the aggressive Maroczy bind variation against me with Qg4 g6 Qe2 followed by c4, of course I had no idea what I was doing and was lost fast, then I tried the Taimanov against him in the next game and got a very nice position with a line I have never played before

    1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be3 a6 7. Qd2 Nf6 8. O-O-O Bb4 9. f3 O-O (instead of the main line 9.b5)10. g4 b5 11. g5 Ne8 12. h4 Bb7

    All I could remember was to retreat my knight to e8 and then I did not know any theory, but I loved my position and then fell for a simple checkmate!

    Oh well, but I think I will try it again against this opp. next time we play!

    Best of luck to you on constructing your rep, I am still working on mine…

    Cheers!

  23. Michael
    October 11th, 2012 at 23:46 | #23

    504 pages wow!!!

    This looks very indepth, and Ng4 against the Tromp, you have my attention, for years I have been letting white double my pawns with c5, and have not always been so excited about my position. Very cool, looking forward to digging in!

  24. Michael
    October 11th, 2012 at 23:52 | #24

    @Michael

    Actaully I gave the wrong variation

    1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Be3 a6 7. Qd2 Nf6 8. O-O-O Bb4 9. f3 O-O (Again instead of 9.b5) 10. g4 b5 11. g5 Ne8 12. a3 Be7 13. h4 b4 14. axb4 Bxb4 15. h5

    I forgot that white threw in a3, but I still was happy with my position.

  25. Michael
    October 12th, 2012 at 00:00 | #25

    excuse me one last time 9.Ne5 not 9.b5 is the mainline in the Taimanov English Attack with 8…Bb4! as I mentioed above twice!!! 🙂

  26. Blue Knight
    October 12th, 2012 at 13:26 | #26

    @Michael

    I also wait impatiently GM11 but about the Tromp, I guess I would have preferred the 2. …e6 line…

  27. Hesam
    October 12th, 2012 at 21:31 | #27

    @Jacob: For chapters 5 & 15 why do you start from move 1 in the chapter title?

  28. Michael
    October 12th, 2012 at 23:02 | #28

    @Blue Knight
    I guess it depends on what your defense is to the Queens gambit, I play the Grunfeld and do not like 2…e6 simple becasue I would like to fianchetto my bishop if possible and am not usedt to set-ups involving …e6, but if I were a Nimzo player than 2…e6 would be the move I would probably want to make. Although I do not like to give up the center with 2…e6 even though there is absolutly nothing wrong with this plan. Still all in all I am sure the majority of lines chosen I will like. 🙂

  29. Michael
    October 13th, 2012 at 09:24 | #29

    @Jacob Aagaard

    Yes!!!!!!!!! Positional Play looks awesome!!!!!! And a foward by Artur Yusupov, It is a great feeling to be working through his books and see him writing a forward for your books!!! This is the book I have been waiting for, the forward is awesome your intro is great and the first puzzles look like I will actually be able to understand and absorb the information. Finally it is here!!! So I just pre-ordered mine can you give an estimate shipping time?

    Thank you Jacob!!!

    This and Playing 1.d4 Indian Defenses have been the 2 absolutely must have books this year, next will be Beating 1.d4 sidelines but I had to get yours first, and it will be my first Hardcover, really looking forward to getting this one!!!

    Oh Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:):):)!!!

  30. Michael
    October 13th, 2012 at 09:24 | #30

    🙂

  31. Andre
    October 13th, 2012 at 12:03 | #31

    Yes, the Positional Play excerpt looks great.

  32. Jacob Aagaard
    October 13th, 2012 at 18:10 | #32

    @Michael
    Thank you. Actually we thought that the Gelfand foreword for the previous book in the series was as good a foreword as we could possibly get; but I think Artur topped it! I am very happy with the book, concept, exercises and so on. Obviously it could always be better, but I tried hard to get it exactly right. So, I hope people will like it.
    For strategic play I have a nice guy lined up for a longer foreword. Hopefully this will not fall through. For Endgame Play the guy I wanted to ask, volunteered himself! Very happy about that. For Thinking Inside the Box it will have to be Sabino. He is the person I have worked most together with in Chess and maybe in life, with John being the only competition, but he is my chief editor, so he should not write it! Both I consider family, so I expect a favourable foreword there too!

    Finally, just a random question. I was thinking of extending the series with GRANDMASTER PREPARATION – ATTACKING PLAY. Is this a good idea?

  33. LE BRUIT QUI COURT
    October 13th, 2012 at 21:04 | #33

    @Jacob Aagaard
    Of course it’s good idea Jacob 🙂

    And then you could extend it with GRANDMASTER PREPARATION – DEFENSIVE PLAY!

    But you’re deliberately ignoring my previous suggestion for us in range Elo 2000-2300, and this is:

    1. WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS – Tactical Play
    2. WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS – Attacking Play
    3. WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS – Strategic Play
    4. WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS – Calculation
    5. WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS – Positional Play
    6. WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS – Endgame Play

    STRUCTURE of WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS series:

    – short introduction with study methods and guidelines
    – 700 test positions

    This would be my call, and my suggestion was already praised by other bloggers.

    Besides, our hurdle is much bigger than targeted audience for GRANDMASTER PREPARATION!

    Note also that we are buying GRANDMASTER PREPARATION already, but let’s honestly face it: we aren’t up to for it. But with WORKBOOK FOR MASTERS we will be definitely ready.

    Many times you emphasized that you are listening my voice and the voices of others. I know that I’m very creative, but are you really on my level 🙂

  34. Jacob Aagaard
    October 13th, 2012 at 21:14 | #34

    @LE BRUIT QUI COURT
    Why not 7000 test positions?
    The point is that this series more or less already exists; it is Yusupov’s series. I know he says it goes to 2100 in his German titles, but this is pure nonsense. Of course it goes all the way till 2300 and beyond.

  35. LE BRUIT QUI COURT
    October 13th, 2012 at 21:17 | #35

    @Jacob Aagaard
    But with pushing Yussupow’s titles you aren’t willing to answer or comment on my suggestions.

    PS I have to finish only last 12 chapters from Tigersprung auf DWZ 2100 Band 3 🙂 I wanted to be ahead of English translation and to absorb knowledge faster than English speaking audience! Cheers for polyglots 🙂

  36. Andre
    October 13th, 2012 at 21:23 | #36

    “I was thinking of extending the series with GRANDMASTER PREPARATION – ATTACKING PLAY. Is this a good idea?”

    Yes, it’s a good idea if you want to make the series a one stop training resource for 2200+ players.

    No, it’s a marketing risk. You have communicated about softcover versions, 5 title box sets, etc. Don’t change the rules if the game is already on the way. 😉

  37. Michael
    October 13th, 2012 at 22:01 | #37

    @Jacob Aagaard

    Ummm….excuse my french but hell yes!!! I was just thinking last night with some info about that in Yusupov’s books(Attacking Play)tactics fom scratch, and the quality chess puzzle book, not to mention Yusupov’s books again for my tactics training. Positional Play takes care of that part of the game, but what about attacking I still need to really learn how to do that, one of my complaints above was that I had problems playing against the English Attack as black in the Najdorf/Scheveningen, one of the main reasons is I get all my pieces to the right squares and it is now time to open up the king to Attack!!! And I find myself going about it in the wrong way, then my opp. gains time on his Attack which seems much easier and straight forward and I find my self in a bad position. But I know I had good prospects of an attack if only I had chosen the right path. So do I think you should add a book on Attacking, oh yeah!!!

    Congrats by the way this is really shaping up to be your most outstanding work ever!
    🙂

  38. Blue Knight
    October 14th, 2012 at 00:29 | #38

    @Michael
    Yes, I agree but also the 2. …Ne4 line is complicated, big, sharp, double-edge, allows White various f3/e4 ideas or finds Black obliged to venture the likes of 3. Bh4 c5 4. f3 g5… Also, there are many things to learn when the 2. …e6 line is more solid, simple, natural (even if maybe more for Nimzo/Queen’s Indian types) more practical… as a weapon against an opening as the Tromp.

    But it’s just my view of course… 🙂

  39. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 04:09 | #39

    @Blue Knight
    You make a good point, personal views I guess win out in the end, I like complicated sharp positions, that may not always be the right way to go, and safe and solid may be more practical for some players. But I personally like sharp lines so that part of the rep Im sure I will enjoy, at the same time as you say it is more complicated, but seeing as I find these lines very boring, playing a double-edged sharp response is just the kind of thing they may get me better results simple becasue the game is more interseting. But to each his own and I guess as a chess player we all have to play what make us happy, otherwise I would be even more bored than I already am with these 1.d4 sidelines, so I am all for sharp responses. But I understand the idea of simple and moe solid play and really we sould probably have at lwast 2 responses to most openings depending on our mood, and strength of your opp. and amny other factors.

    I like complicated…just my view though also.

    Cheers!
    🙂

  40. Blue Knight
    October 14th, 2012 at 06:29 | #40

    @Michael

    Agree but also we must not forget that the Tromp is not a main opening. I mean it’s not a main line as 2. c4 may be, we see it less, even if a few players play it, and usually the Tromp players precisely like sharp, double edge, unclear, play. This is what they want. I guess the 2. …Ne4 is exactly what they want and like, they should be more like a fish in water, when they can be less in their ease after 2. …e6. All of this is why I said also: “practical”… 😉

    As said John Cox in “dealing with d4 deviations”, a very good book (2005):

    “I’ve already set out my general approach to dealing with these offbeat lines – stay out of his garden. Ask yourself what your opponent wants, and do the opposite. Well, in my experience Trompers want one of two things. Either they want to rip your head off in a sharp game, or at least they want a unusual type of game, perhaps with an irregular pawn structure such as arises after doubling the pawns with Bxf6. And they, or some of them at any rate, know enough theory in the sharp lines as to make those a rather foolish choice for those of us who can’t necessary revise our repertoire before each game. (note by me: specially for just an offbeat line) Fortunately, there is a solution to the Tromp that gives Black excellent play, is not terribly theoretical, and denies to White what he wants, and sure enough it is this Tromp’s balloon after a recent upsurge in its popularity”

    Exactly what I mean. 🙂

    But yes, two responses could be useful, but even against the Tromp…? Maybe it could be preferable and useful to keep his/her time for our main defense after 1. d4 and 2. c4 rather about an offbeat opening, right?

    Personally, I think I will be quite happy with GM11 except maybe for the repertoire against the Tromp. But maybe it’s just me.

    By the way, I’m sure the chapters in the book on the Tromp, as the others, will be great, as usual. 🙂

  41. Blue Knight
    October 14th, 2012 at 06:40 | #41

    Sorry, there is a mistake at the end of my quote. For the last sentence, you must read:

    “Fortunately, there is a solution to the Tromp that gives Black excellent play, is not terribly theoretical, and denies to White what he wants, and sure enough it is this which has begun rather to puncture the Tromp’s balloon after a recent upsurge in its popularity”

    My apologies for this stupid mistake…

  42. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 07:45 | #42

    Yes I also have Cox’s book and it is a very good book, but I have a feeling I will like the lines in GM11 much better, as for the Tromp, I totally get the idea of staying out of their garden, the problem is they want a sharp game and so do I, just my personal taste. Like for instance when I play the Sicilian I play the main sharp lines, again this is what white wants a sharp tactical open game where they try and rip your head off, well that is exacly what I am trying to do to them in these main lines, it’s a race to see who gets there first. As for it being a sideline, there is no doubt about that, only that these so called sidelines that opening books say we will see some of the time, are now turning into more often then the mainlines! I made a comment above that I think we could find that we have to study books like GM11 or GM6a (Anti-Siclians) simply because like I said above most people I meet and play choose sidelines these day…Which I find to be totally sad!!! And ruins this beautiful game of ours!!! People have the same theory against our mainlines, I will play a side line to their Sicilian because a mainline is what they want, the funny thing is some of these sidelines offer nothing, and are pretty easy to deal with albiet boring, But you give me an opp. who plays the main line 6.Be6 or 6.Bg5 and if they have prepared a line you can get slaughtered!!! Playing a main line against me is much more challenging than these silly sidleines, except in blitz maybe?

    I think John Cox gives one of the best coverage on the pros of playing mainlines vs. sidelines in his great book starting out 1.d4, the intro in this book changed the way I look at chess in general.

    I think now a days these sidelines are becoming ust as popular as the mainlines and sometimes more, I see sidelines way more often than mainlines, I guees people are just lazy or they have this theory that I will not give my opp. what they want!

    Believe me I spend much more time studying mainlines, and still I get more sidlelines in my games! Yes I would love to spend most of my time studying the mainlines, they are rich and dynamic and they make the game beautiful, and there is something about playing the same openings as your favorite players. But I see sidline after sideline and it makes me sad…

    Another example is my local chess club, I stopped going!!! Every person played the london or the Colle as white, and against my 1…c5 it was Nf3 and Bc4, I played a KID set-up as black and a closed boring Sicialin over and over. As white I got stuff againt my 1.d4 and 1.e4 that also was so boring and most times I don’t even think the opening had a name! I was bored to tears!!! So I stopped going.

    So like you said we all have our own tastes, and I am ready to play some aggressive chess against these sidelines that I see way to often. So I am hoping for aggressive lines against all the sidlines!!!

    But that is just me, part of it is I want to fight back, part of it is I am bored, and part of it is wanting to play complicated dynamic beautiful games that if played right look like works of art!!!

    So I am sure this book will work for all of us, and if one or two lines dos not fit your taste, I think that is beyond exceptable and to be expected, most of my rep. books have at least one or two lines I don’t like.

    But all in all, it’s Boris! I think just looking at his previous work that GM11 will be full of good lines and interesting insights by the Author, and maybe he will explain as Cox did on why he chose the lines he did. Knowing his previous work he seems to choose his lines for very good resons.

    Anyway…I think it will be a great book and motivate me to study these lines!!!

    But first I had to purchase Positional Play, this is going to be an awesome masterpiece, and the foundation for much of my play!

    Good debate, and thanks to QC for putting out such high quality work!!!

    Good hunting!

    🙂

  43. LE BRUIT QUI COURT
    October 14th, 2012 at 12:14 | #43

    I dare you Jacob! I have thrown my glove in your face 🙂

    In every main field of chess we have the book classics:

    1. OPENINGS: Grandmaster Repertoire series

    2. TACTICS WORKBOOK: Anthology of Chess Combinations, 3rd edition by Chess Informant

    3. ATTACKING PLAY: Attacking Manual 1&2 by Jacob Aagaard

    4. ENDGAME: Endgame Manual by Mark Dvoretsky

    …. and now Jacob it’s your turn for….

    5. STRATEGY & POSITIONAL PLAY: The Manual 🙂

    If I aint right, then tell me which is the book that I have missed? But of course, I’m right 🙂

    This could be your next big project: The Manual of Strategy and Positional Play 🙂

  44. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 14th, 2012 at 15:16 | #44

    @Michael

    I also think it is sad that most people seem to play sidelines, especially at levels above 2250, which for some reason I thought would decrease and more mainlines played against me, but it seems that even 2300-2400s play sidelines against me, for reasons I find inexplicable. GM11 will be extremely helpful in this respect, since most opening books are for main lines and few are for sidelines. I think all of the past GM Repertoire books were based on main lines, so GM11 sounds like it will be the first in the series insofar to focus specifically on sidelines (of 1. d4).

    But then if those players get “boring” positions, the question would be is that to their favour? Years ago I knew someone who advanced in rating almost identically to me, and even when he was approaching 2300 FIDE, he seemed to play openings to achieve very stale positions, such as rook endgames with pawns on the board but little counterplay for either side, but won most of them and enjoyed those positions. So not all who play sidelines will want very tactical positions. It can sometimes be difficult to guess.

    I also was acquainted with a player who played the Grand Prix Attack against the Sicilian and Fantasy Variation against the Caro-Kann, but was a positional player, which I never understood. 😀

  45. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 20:09 | #45

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    The thing is like you said I don’t think the players that play these sielines think there are boring, and that is sad! I know stongest player in the town I live in and asked hime what he thought of me learning the Bayonet Attack againat the KID, he play the KID as hi main weapon…He told me something very sad, that in his touraments he has only seen it once, all the other times black chose a 1 .d4 sidleline, and these were IM’s and GM’s!!!

    I don’t, understand 1.e4 players who avoid th open sicilian, and play a anti usaully leading to a semiclosed game, why not play 1.d4, that is what happen to me, I started with 1.e4 and played the Granx prix, and the ruy with Qe2 and then decided if I am going to play semi-closed positions why not switch to 1.d4, I did and was much happier, I went against my first teacher and had to find my own style, but before I switched I threw out the Grand prix and played the open sicilian as white, now that is some intersting chess. I only thing I miss about 1.e4 is the open sicilain, I would think 1.e4 players would love these types of positions, insted I get moves like 2.d3 which I would understand if my opp. was an IM or GM and simply did not want me to rely on any theory, but that is not the case, and I only see the mainline open sicilian 20% maybe….So Sad!!! What has happened to our beautiful game?!!!

    Oh well, that is why GM11 and GMa are so important, these are the lines the majority of players are choosing regardless of ratings it would seem…

    I to am baffled that the so called sidlelines are becoming more mainlines as in we see them more often!

    I posted a thread half joking on chesspub.com called grow and be a man and play a real opening, people fiercly defended there colle and london, and I thought it was weird because it was a chess opening site. But I was just having fun!!! and poking the hornet’s nest!!!

    Well let us hope that more players find QC opening books and get interested in mainlines!

    🙂

  46. The Lurker
    October 14th, 2012 at 21:00 | #46

    I am always amused by people who get so annoyed when people play sidelines. After all, if the opening is a sideline, that is supposedly because it is inferior. So why cry a river because your oppenent plays an inferior opening? Because you don’t want to spend the time to learn how to beat it? Hey, that’s part of the game.

    Also, sidelines make the game more rich, and appealing to players of all levels. Not all of us have time to stay booked up on the latest nuances of the Najdorf, you know. 😉

  47. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 22:02 | #47

    The crying are tears of boredom not fear! There is a diffeference…But I agree that the sidleines do attract a level of players that otherwise would not be interstested in the game, and of course you have to play certain openings to learn tactics and such as a beginner, the one I miss from my very first days of chess was the King’s Gambit, that was actaully a great first opening because I learned all about attacking and tactics. The complaint is not that people play sidelines, it’s that these sidelines are played more than main lines. But I have to admit part of it is a mind game, and not wanting to play against sielines is a great way to loss a game before you even start it…That is why GM11 is so important, some of us want to study these sidelines finally in depth and want the best possible way to fight for the advantage, hence GM11!!!

    Even though I am not a 1.e4 player anymore I really am looking forward to the release of Playing 1.e4 Grandmasters Guide so as to give my opp. the oppurtunity to investigate playing some mainlines, like you said not every one has the time to stay current with the Najdorf, you could build a rep using Be2 and other ways where the theory does not change so rapidly. But hey after some time spent studying GM11 and GM6a I will weclome these sidleines, but still dream of main line battles!!!

    You know?…
    😉

  48. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 14th, 2012 at 22:09 | #48

    Well definitely a change in attitude towards playing against sidelines would probably lead to more success. But added literature such as the November publication of GM11 and when GM6a will be published will aid in playing against these sidelines. I suppose the best way also is to get a good position and play the middlegame. I played sidelines very occasionally against some opponents, and the worst problems were achieving not an unclear, or even balanced position, but achieving an equal position at best from playing a sideline, where there is little counterplay. I remember when I played the Grand Prix Attack against an IM, which resulted in my having a prospectless middlegame, although my position was not very bad, but rather dull. So perhaps this is an objective of playing against sidelines: to get an at least equal position that does not have to be winning or a clear advantage, but wear the opponent’s position of counterplay.

  49. boki
    October 14th, 2012 at 22:20 | #49

    GRANDMASTER PREPARATION – ATTACKING PLAY – Thats a goof Idea !

  50. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 22:29 | #50

    I used to play the Grand Prix also and at the beginning had some great success with it, and then as I got stronger and my opp. got stronger I found that it was no problem for them to handle and I found myself trying to continue an attack that was simply not going to work! I see you point about what you said “So perhaps this is an objective of playing against sidelines: to get an at least equal position that does not have to be winning or a clear advantage, but wear the opponent’s position of counterplay.” And I agree but also would like to really fight back, and try and take advantage of the fact that my opp. did not grab it first!

    All of which is not to say the Grand prix is bad, look what a great weapon Sergei Tiviakov and Gawain Jones use it as…

    I think for me personally there is nothing wrong with the sidelines I just do not personally like to play them for either side, and there is my hope that GM11 will spark my interst to really start to study these openings as much as my mainlines!

  51. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 22:33 | #51

    @boki

    boki :GRANDMASTER PREPARATION – ATTACKING PLAY – Thats a goof Idea !

    A very good idea indeed!
    🙂

  52. Blue Knight
    October 14th, 2012 at 22:56 | #52

    @Michael

    I agree and not agree with you at the same time. 🙂 And about the Tromp, I don’t see why we should go exactly where our Tromp opponent wants to go… This is just playing in his/her hands. And specially when his/her ground is a tactical, full of traps, double edge, unusual with irregular pawn structure, with much theory etc game and for just an offbeat line, this is/can be a dangerous and perilous thing to do. The chess game is also a psychological battle, right? 😉

    About the Sicilian, this is not the same as my subject here (the Tromp) It is a main line, so yes you must study and play some double edge and sharp variations as Black and White, but not the Tromp.

    But don’t misunderstand me. I wait impatiently GM11 and I’m sure I’m going to be quite happy with it, except maybe with the Tromp repertoire. 🙂

  53. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 23:12 | #53

    @Blue Knight
    Well we agree on a couple of things!!!
    1. The Tromp is a srious weapon in the right hands!
    2.Chess is a psychlogical battle!
    3.We both are impatiently awaiting the release of GM11

    As to how we should handle the tromp, it has been covered in many books in a more solid or simple approach, so I am looking forwad to something more aggressive.

    But not doubt about it the Tromp players are looking for a fight which is why it is one of the 1.d4 sidelines I respect
    😉

  54. Blue Knight
    October 14th, 2012 at 23:38 | #54

    @Michael

    In any case, in a repertoire book of this type there are generally always lines that do not suit us, or at least less than the others, and that we do not use by substituting others. It is rare to use absolutely 100% of the book … Well, I think. 😉

  55. Michael
    October 14th, 2012 at 23:48 | #55

    Agreed…very rare
    😉

  56. Michael
    October 15th, 2012 at 01:07 | #56

    @Jacob Aagaard

    What about GM Prep Attacking and Defensive play, or would this not work as one book and have to be two?

    Just a thought…

    🙂

  57. Michael
    October 15th, 2012 at 01:19 | #57

    Sometimes we have to know how to attack and defend simultaneously…

  58. Barry
    October 15th, 2012 at 07:03 | #58

    GRANDMASTER PREPARATION – ATTACKING PLAY is a great idea. I’m planning to buy every book of the series; whether it’s 5, 6 or 7 – the more the better! Thanks for the great books!

  59. The Lurker
    October 15th, 2012 at 16:16 | #59

    @Michael
    I didn’t mean to imply that you were afraid of the sidelines. But you do seem to resent the fact that you need to devote memory space to the London system, let’s say, instead of the mainlines. What I’m saying is that the main point of chess is to play moves that your opponent doesn’t like! So resenting what your opponent plays only helps him. You must learn to love the London! 😉

    I do think the GM11 and 6a books will be valuable. I may buy them both, but not until Nessie comes out.

  60. Patrick
    October 15th, 2012 at 17:38 | #60

    Gilchrist is a Legend :@Michael
    I also think it is sad that most people seem to play sidelines, especially at levels above 2250, which for some reason I thought would decrease and more mainlines played against me, but it seems that even 2300-2400s play sidelines against me, for reasons I find inexplicable. GM11 will be extremely helpful in this respect, since most opening books are for main lines and few are for sidelines. I think all of the past GM Repertoire books were based on main lines, so GM11 sounds like it will be the first in the series insofar to focus specifically on sidelines (of 1. d4).
    But then if those players get “boring” positions, the question would be is that to their favour? Years ago I knew someone who advanced in rating almost identically to me, and even when he was approaching 2300 FIDE, he seemed to play openings to achieve very stale positions, such as rook endgames with pawns on the board but little counterplay for either side, but won most of them and enjoyed those positions. So not all who play sidelines will want very tactical positions. It can sometimes be difficult to guess.
    I also was acquainted with a player who played the Grand Prix Attack against the Sicilian and Fantasy Variation against the Caro-Kann, but was a positional player, which I never understood.

    Gilchrist, the reason is easy. IMs and GMs don’t want to play into your prep when you are clearly below them. This happened with me in August of 2010. I was at a tournament, playing in the open section (next highest was Under 1800, not eligible). I was rated 1999, in a bit of a slump. I won rounds 1 and 2, and round 3, I face a 2447 player. I had Black, and he played 1.b3, a typical move played by masters against lower opposition, figuring they are probably booked up for the Dragon, Najdorf, French, Nimzo-Indian, King’s Indian, etc, but by playing 1.b3, they feel like they are just “playing chess” and will outplay the lower rated that way. Well, I won because I know my 1.b3 theory (specifically the main lines with 1…e5, 2…Nc6, 3…d5, 4…Bd6, etc, where if White goes mainstream all the way, he typically gets 2 Knights and 2 Pawns for Rook and Bishop. He deviated at move 11, and I won in about 60 moves. 2 rounds later, the final round, he faced a 2300 with White and played 1.d4, but even there, he deviated as after 1…d5 2.c4 c6, he replied 3.Bf4.

    The Torre, Colle, London, Tromp, etc can be used by masters against lower opposition for the same reason, figuring opponent is booked to the teeth, like you, in things like the Grunfeld!

    With this being the day of the database rather than the day of the opening book, higher rated players are going off the beaten track as their way of beating lower opposition. The same would be the case with someone like myself against a 1700. I think I’d have a better chance of beating a 1700 player in an equal position where both sides have to think for themselves than I would beating a booked up King’s Indian player who is 1700 with myself having a slim advantage 25 moves into the main line Classical, even though objectively, the position might be +0.00 in the first scenario and +0.30 in the second.

    So the fact that you appear to get more and more irritated with every post you put up on 1.d4 sidelines says that this must be working for players you face rated higher than you. I’d wager that for every 50 games you play as Black against a Colle, London, or Torre where your opponent is 200 or more points higher than you, that same opponent is not playing those lines against 2500+ GMs in 49 of the 50 cases.

  61. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 15th, 2012 at 19:38 | #61

    @Patrick

    I was thinking that was their strategy, however I noticed that some of these players play London, Colle, Torre, etc against all opponents, not only me, so perhaps they enjoy only those sidelines openings, regardless of opponent. As I said I had acquaintances and friends who were around 2200-2350, some even higher, who continuously played those openings regardless of opponent or rating of opponent. In this respect I find it more difficult to understand.

  62. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 15th, 2012 at 19:43 | #62

    Regarding the player who played Grand Prix against the Sicilian and Fantasy against Caro-Kann, I watched his games since we used to play in the same tournaments and he played those openings against all opponents, from 1800 to 2500, all the time, so many cases players must somehow study and like those openings, not as a tactic of reducing chances of encountering preparation against certain players or ratings.

  63. The Lurker
    October 15th, 2012 at 20:54 | #63

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Just being the Devil’s advocate here…

    If a player doesn’t want to deal with the book of somebody far below him, why would he want to deal with the book of somebody who’s equal or better? Wouldn’t that be even worse? Wouldn’t you rather be in “home territory”, even if that is the London, against somebody equal or better?

  64. The Lurker
    October 15th, 2012 at 22:51 | #64

    Since we’re speaking of sidelines… I’m thinking about what I want to play against 1.d4. I don’t play it much, since most of the fellow amateurs that are in my circle play 1.e4. So should I bother learning something “mainline” + learn how to deal with all the sidelines? Or should I drag White kicking and screaming into my own book from move 1, by learning something less popular like the Leningrad Dutch? If I spend the time on the Leningrad now, will I regret it later, assuming that I’m never going to make it to a high level anyway?

    In other words, how respectable is the Leningrad? Is it unrespectable enough to be considered a sideline, or is it just unpopular but sound enough for an amateur? It seems to be the Rodney Dangerfield of d4 defences… some people give it no respect.

    Thanks in advance to anyone who responds.

  65. Michael
    October 15th, 2012 at 23:03 | #65

    @The Lurker
    Your words
    “But you do seem to resent the fact that you need to devote memory space to the London system, let’s say, instead of the mainlines.”

    Exactly!!! I do not want to…tear…
    I am saying that is a problem for me is I have no respect for these lines and therfore do poorly against them! So yee indeed I need to learn to love the Colle and the London and all the sidelines, but love them because I amm well prepared with aggressive responses which I am hoping GM11 wii provide!!! And in the intro Boris even says that he chose lines to fight for a win, I enjoy that kind of approach to sidleines. So in the end your totally right I am losing a game before it is played simple because I resent and have no respect for such sidles, which is my problem to fix, and I think it is time to do that!!! With the help of GM11…But even after I learn to “Love” these opening I will still always consider them inferior and alway curious as to why a certain opp. chose a certain sideline…

    I get it, play what your opp. hates and you are a leg up, so I will try and get over my contempt for these sidelines and study them, prepare for them, and hopefully punish them!

    And ah yes, Nessie. My first love…

  66. Michael
    October 15th, 2012 at 23:15 | #66

    @The Lurker
    Sometimes what you play against 1.e4 has some influence againt what you play againt 1.d4, just a thought, for example I like the Sicilian, couter attack! I play the Grunfeld, and other people l ike the Sicilian, Kings Indian Defense Combo, and sometime you 1.e4 response has nothing to do with what you choose against 1.d4

    What kind of game do you want againts 1.d4

    Sorry I do not know much about the Dutch, or the plan for black, I was never attracted to it. I cant even really think of what it compares to so no help there.

    So I guess we are back to what kind of position do you want, tottally closed, Semi-closed, defensive, counter attacking chances, or super solid and simple?

    🙂

  67. Joeri
    October 16th, 2012 at 07:53 | #67

    Dealing with (boring) sidelines reminds me of this article from chessvibes concerning dealing with the incredibly boring Petroff.

    http://www.chessvibes.com/columns/zen-and-the-art-of-chess-opening-maintenance

  68. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 16th, 2012 at 13:21 | #68

    Perhaps the greatest challenge is psychological, perhaps soon more than 95% of tournament games below 2300 will be sidelines, so Sicilian players should spend almost no preparation time on 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6/e6/Nc6 3. d4, but on 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3/3. f4, 2. Nc3/3.g3, 2. c3, 2. b3, 2. Nf3/3. Bc4, 2. Nf3/3. Bb5, 2. d3, 2. Qe2, etc. But then there is the question, if Sicilian players, or any main line player attempts to study extremely thoroughly the sidelines so that they know them as well as the main lines, and maybe even more than the opponents, will the sidelines players still play the sideline?

  69. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 16th, 2012 at 13:40 | #69

    Oh Nessie, Where Art Thou?

  70. John Shaw
    October 16th, 2012 at 14:41 | #70

    Shurlock Ventriloquist :
    Oh Nessie, Where Art Thou?

    I had another chapter just about finished, but I am going to delete it in protest at your impatience and bad pseudonym.

  71. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 15:20 | #71

    @Michael
    I want to play something against 1.d4 that has decent counterchances, not just a pure defence. Since I only play for fun, draws don’t interest me; I always want to play for the win, even as Black. But I don’t want to play the KID, because even amateurs are booked up to the teeth against it. I’d rather play something that requires general familiarity with the position.

    Against 1.e4, I want to book up on the Sicilian (not sure which one yet). One of the reasons I am considering the Dutch is because it is similar to the Sicilian, in that it puts White in my Dutch territory from move one.

  72. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 15:24 | #72

    @John Shaw
    Impatience? Rudeness, perhaps. (Although not as bad as my past rudeness, for which I belatedly apologize.) But impatience? After four years? Really?

  73. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 16th, 2012 at 15:26 | #73

    @The Lurker

    Based on my experience and the above comments, I think you will need to study playing against Colle, Torre, London, etc. instead of studying a mainline defence. Even against the Dutch Defence, I have seen people attempt to play London and Colle setups, so perhaps that is the first part for the repertoire instead of thinking of Leningrad :D. You might not play the Leningrad in more than 10% of your games against 1. d4.

    I consider playing different openings, but after seeing so many sidelines, perhaps it would be better that I focus on theoretical study and understanding of playing against sidelines. I have not played in slow tournaments for quite a while, but the last time I played against the Open Sicilian was probably in 2008. I stopped playing the King’s Indian in 2007, but still the last time I had a main line King’s Indian was 2006. So it seems as if even at 2300 level, studying sidelines is perhaps more useful.

  74. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 15:39 | #74

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I already know there are a number of “anti-Dutch” possibilities from my copy of Kindermann, including one that seemed Torre-ish, IMS. And Lakdawala’s London book (picked up at a book store going-out-of-business sale) even has a chapter on the Dutch vs. London. Against a Colle or Zuke, I’ve no idea… Worth thinking about, I suppose. Thanks.

  75. Patrick
    October 16th, 2012 at 15:45 | #75

    The Lurker :@Michael I want to play something against 1.d4 that has decent counterchances, not just a pure defence. Since I only play for fun, draws don’t interest me; I always want to play for the win, even as Black. But I don’t want to play the KID, because even amateurs are booked up to the teeth against it. I’d rather play something that requires general familiarity with the position.
    Against 1.e4, I want to book up on the Sicilian (not sure which one yet). One of the reasons I am considering the Dutch is because it is similar to the Sicilian, in that it puts White in my Dutch territory from move one.

    Actually, I think I have the answer for you. Take up the Modern. “Tiger’s Modern”, published by QC, is an excellent book. There are a few lines out of date, and recommend you also get the recent Everyman book that is currently only in EBook, but hitting paperback shortly, by Cyrus Lakdawala.

    Cyrus does a great job of explaining how these d4 “systems” don’t work against the Modern. He plays them as White himself. He wrote a book on the London, another on the Veresov (I have this one), and is coming out with one on the Colle, so a 1.d4 without 2.c4 player himself is saying that they just don’t work. I also own the “Chess On The Edge” series talking about the games of Duncan Suttles. What he did against the London is also interesting, and I’ve used it as Black with strong success. After 1.d4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.Bf4?! d6 4.e3 Nc6 (I believe Lakdawala advocates 4…Nd7, which is also good, but don’t quote me on that) 5.h3 e5!. The whole point of the London is to control e5. Smack to the face of the London Player!

    I have had very strong success in the Modern, and games that I have lost with it, like this Saturday, I’ve lost in grand style, this time White sacrificing his Queen! Nothing boring about the Modern!

    There’s also a few other recent publications on the Modern, like a starting out book, but I would recommend Tiger’s Modern and the new one in the Move By Move series, along with studying the games of Suttles, Davies, and Speelman.

    Lots of tactics. Fun to play. And, in essence, an excellent “Anti-London”, “Anti-Colle”, “Anti-Torre”, “Anti-Veresov” type of defense. I myself play many QP systems. Mostly Veresov and Torre (My other 2 games on Saturday, as White, were a Torre, which I won, and a Veresov that transposed to a French Alekhine-Chatard attack, which I drew), and I outright refuse to play and boycott the London as White), and I can tell you as White, nothing better to play against the Modern than the Main Lines!

  76. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:09 | #76

    John Shaw :

    Shurlock Ventriloquist :
    Oh Nessie, Where Art Thou?

    I had another chapter just about finished, but I am going to delete it in protest at your impatience and bad pseudonym.

    Happy Birthday, nonetheless!

    🙂

  77. John Shaw
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:12 | #77

    The Lurker :
    @John Shaw
    Impatience? Rudeness, perhaps. (Although not as bad as my past rudeness, for which I belatedly apologize.) But impatience? After four years? Really?

    Do you think it’s possible I was joking?

  78. John Shaw
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:15 | #78

    @Shurlock Ventriloquist

    Thanks. Just for that, I have hit Ctrl-Z and saved the chapter.

  79. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:17 | #79

    @ The Lurker: Rudeness? Really? 🙁

    Don’t think so , and it wasn’t my aim. Proper maintenance and upkeep on a running joke is mandatory forum duty . … only reacting to the fact that book after book keep leap frogging Nessie to the printer’s press …It’s a point of humor for me, not contention or ire.

    We being teased

    🙂

  80. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:28 | #80

    John,
    Hey, I’m a geek, so I’m subtlety-challenged. *shrug*

    Shurlock,
    I guess I’ll be able to laugh at the “running joke” once Nessie is actually finished and I have a copy in my grubby little paws. Until then, it’s not a joke to me, at least not in the funny way. I would very much like to buy myself a copy for a Christmas present to myself, if the schedule is not delayed again.

  81. John Shaw
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:35 | #81

    @The Lurker

    Hi Lurker,

    The King’s Gambit all analysed, written, edited and proofread before this Christmas? Highly likely. The book printed and in the shops for Christmas? Impossible. For one thing, the printers are swamped with work in the pre-Christmas rush, so there would be a delay there anyway.

  82. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:50 | #82

    @John Shaw
    Thanks for the info, John. Maybe an Easter present, then…

  83. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 16th, 2012 at 16:54 | #83

    @The Lurker

    In conjunction with the comments on sidelines, since I started playing in tournaments around 1999, I have probably only seen the Leningrad on a board in the playing hall maybe somewhere around 5% of the time when the game was a Dutch Defence. Perhaps I am unlucky, but many seem to simply play moves such as 2. Nc3, 2. Bg5, 2. e4, 2. Nf3/3. e3, 2. Nf3/3. Bf4, 2. c3, 2. e3, etc. Even around 2200 to 2400 level, I see players trying to avoid any lines with c4 or the Fianchetto variations. So if you did choose the Dutch, you will understand the frustration with sidelines 😀

  84. Formerly The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 17:08 | #84

    Thought I should change my handle, since I’m posting so much… 😉

    @Patrick
    Interesting choice. I have always been impressed with the stats on the Modern at sites like chesstempo.com. And I actually have the Tiger book. But Tiger himself seems to be not-so-happy with his own choice against the Averbakh, I think it’s called (c4, d4 and e4). And I don’t want to have to learn to play the KID against this, even though it seems to score the best. What’s your opinion on this “critical line”?

  85. Seth
    October 16th, 2012 at 17:22 | #85

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    Leningrad fans have problems, but Stonewall fans get to laugh…try playing the Trompowsky against 1…e6 and see what happens. 🙂

  86. Paul
    October 16th, 2012 at 17:55 | #86

    @John Shaw
    Tell ’em Christmas can wait! 🙂

  87. Andre
    October 16th, 2012 at 18:05 | #87

    This (rare) mainlines / (many) sideline discussion is the reason why I recommend to everybody at my club who asks for opening advice that he should buy a Move by Move or Starting Out type of book on his prefered opening and study especially the first few moves carefully, concentrate on the side lines and only slowly work on the main lines (meaning find a playable side exit, then expand from there). Of course an oversimplified ‘one size fits all’ tip, but for practical play on even strong amateur level it’s +EV to attack the side lines and be happy with an okayish or unexplored position in the main lines, if we agree that there is not enough time available to learn both at the same time.

  88. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 16th, 2012 at 18:24 | #88

    @Seth

    I remember when I tried to, and played, the King’s Indian I would think to myself after the opponent pauses on either move 2 or 3 or does not reach for the c-pawn to play 2. c4, “I have a feeling this will be a Colle/Torre/London”, and I think I did that at least 80% of the time. The problem was also when I got to play it, it might be against a 2600, and that would be probably an even bigger challenge 🙂

    But for some reason when I play sidelines it does not seem to work against my opponent in that I get a position with few prospects, or perhaps I just feel better playing main lines. My games as White in the very occasional occurrences in which I played the Grand Prix, I won only once (against a 2100 who I think did not know what he was doing from the opening anyway) and lost to two 2400s, but the losses against the latter were slow positions where my position gradually deteriorated. I usually played sidelines when I have poor playing form or chances for prize or norm were zero, but I still felt when I played them that I should be playing the main lines anyway regardless of frustration. The only reasonable game where I succeeded with sidelines was when I played Trompowsky and had my pawns on d4, e4, f4, g4, and h4 around move 18 😀

  89. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 20:54 | #89

    @Patrick
    Interesting choice. I have always been impressed with the stats on the Modern at sites like chesstempo.com. And I actually have the Tiger book. But Tiger himself seems to be not-so-happy with his own choice against the Averbakh, I think it’s called (c4, d4 and e4). And I don’t want to have to learn to play the KID against this, even though it seems to score the best. What’s your opinion on this “critical line”?

  90. Michael
    October 16th, 2012 at 21:32 | #90

    @The Lurker
    Looking at the Dutch, like I said I don’t know to much, but it could be looked at like an accelerated try at a Kings Indian set-up. But you are facing the fianchetto white set-up, which you may like, but I think it is way more popular now a days the you will see Bg5 on move two or three, with queenside castling a kingside attack from white. So if that sounds ok then I would say that it may be a good opening for you, The latest three white rep books, Watson’s, Kaufmans, and QC playing 1.d4 all recomend this early Bg5 so I would say that if you like this position then it sould be the opening for you, I personally love to play the white side of the dutch, I have every intention of trying to expliot the tiny weakness of advancing the f pawn. But that my be all in my head, but chess in a mind game and being happy in a position can be like having a smaill advantage, nothing that would stop anyone from playing it though. Other than the KID I don’t know of any of the same type of set-ups. But you have such a reange to choose from. The QGA, QGD, Tarrasch,KID,Grunfeld,Tango,Budapest gambit, on and on it goes. And I guess some of it depends on how you wish to meet the sidlines, with 1…d5 or 1…Nf6. And if your feeling agressive there is always the Benko Gambit!!!

    I think it is very important to have at least one mainline against 1.d4, and you have so many choices, try out the Dutch and see what kind of set-ups you get, and look up Nakamura’s Games, I think he is the only top player playing the dutch still. And a KID player so he is playing for a win, looking through his games might give you some ideas or inspiration. good Luck!

    Cheers!

    🙂

  91. Patrick
    October 16th, 2012 at 22:05 | #91

    @The Lurker

    The new eBook out (soon to be available in paperback as well) by Lakdawala also advocates the 4…e5 line, but has many updates in it, and the reason why I advocate owning both books (or eBook in the case of the latter at the moment) is that I think both sides have their strengths. Lakdawala does a better job in covering what to do in the line you question. 6 complete games in the main line, 4 more in offbeat lines of the Averbakh with 4…e5, and 3 more on Anti-Queen Pawn lines, like how to beat garbage such as the London, Torre, Colle, etc, which really just don’t work against the Modern Defense. Also keep in mind the analysis here is 7 years more recent than Tiger’s

    The other area where Lakdawala goes really deep is in the main lines with Be3, along with the Austrian. His coverage is a little on the light side, though not missing, with some of the more offbeat lines, like early Bc4 lines, early Bg5 lines, and the Organization of that ultimate question, when to play the Hippo, is a little better organized in Tiger’s book. He groups all the hippo lines in a chapter whereas Lakdawala goes more strictly based on separate chapters by move order for White, and so the Hippo pops up in various spots.

    Long story short, I wouldn’t be worried playing 4…e5 over the board today!

  92. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 22:24 | #92

    @Michael
    Thanks, Michael. What I initially liked about the Leningrad is that in the mainline White is working the queenside instead of going for an instant kill against me as Black, whereas I can try to kill White before he succeeds on the queenside. At least that is my limited understanding. At my low level, that would give me decent chances, I think. But the sidelines….

    I knew there were a lot of anti-Dutch sidelines, but I didn’t know they were so much more popular than the main line, as per Gilchrist. I must confess, that is a bit off-putting. I don’t want to follow Seth’s suggestion (1.e6 into a Stonewall) because then I’d have to play the French (*shudder* ;-)). The KID would be a fulltime job. And I don’t want to go into the QGD because it seems so drawish/purely defensive. I don’t know enough about the rest. I like Patrick’s suggestion of the Modern because it doesn’t seem drawish, and I can use it as a backup plan against pretty much anything, even if I tire of it later on.

    Is there a main line against 1.d4 that’s not too drawish, not too much work, not too many sidelines? Or is that too much to ask for? I’d settle for two out of three…

  93. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 22:32 | #93

    @Patrick
    Thanks, Patrick. I’ll keep an eye out for the Lakdawala book. Maybe I’ll buy it as my Christmas present to myself instead of Nessie! 😉

  94. Nick
    October 16th, 2012 at 22:55 | #94

    Hi a question to Jacob or John

    Regarding GM6b on the Sicilian.

    Apologies if this has been answered previously.
    1. Do you save an idea when this is likely to be published?
    2. What lies are recommended against 6.Bg5 is it same as before or something different?
    3. Are you going to add the missing lines to the 6.Be2 e6 chapter?

    Regards

    P.S. Really like the two Playing 1.d4 books, looking forward to John’s playing 1.e4 ones!

  95. The Lurker
    October 16th, 2012 at 23:08 | #95

    Another way of thinking about my 1.d4 rep has occurred to me. If I take as a given that I will seldom see a main line, I shouldn’t worry too much about which one I choose, right? Hypothetically, I’m going to see much more of the sidelines. So instead, what if I choose a 1.d4 main line based on which sidelines it avoids? Which avoids the most troublesome sidelines, 1…d5; 1…Nf6/2…e6; or 1…Nf6/2…g6?

  96. Blue Knight
    October 16th, 2012 at 23:16 | #96

    @The Lurker
    No move order is the best. All the side lines are harmless if Black knows how answering. It’s just a matter of taste and what you play as main defense 1. d4… That’s all.

  97. Michael
    October 17th, 2012 at 00:20 | #97

    @ Lurker

    I guess the main openings I did not mention are the Slav and Semi-Slav, these are two really good opening…I see them a lot in practice. And you can choose lines that are wild and tactical or more positional. I guess I am the opposite, I do not want to weaken my king, I want to attack on the queen side and casltle on the kingside against 1.d4 therefor the Dutch and the KID are the 2 defensed that do not appeal to me, but it sounds like you do wasnt to attack on the kingside, so then the Dutch and KID are perfect weapons, as far as the KID being to much to learn you can play lines like exd4 or Na6 and avoid things like the Bayonet Attack with so much theory, or what I see a lot is Nbd7 and then e5, so many options there. Then there is the Nimzo Indain which of course has a lot of theory but can be played still I think and is maybe the best defense, All the top players have it in there rep at one time or another. You could play the Nimzo/Bogo to cut down on study time. I play the Grunfeld and love counter attacking on the queen side, and the early c5 reminds me of the Sicilian which is ky main weapon, so I picked two defenses that I felt were solid, dynamic, counter attacking and fit my tastes, of wanting to fight back as black!!!

    And as an added bonus perhaps two of the best opening books, by our beloved Boris on the Grunfeld are truly works of art, he really looked at almost all possibilities and the depth and detail of GM8&9 are amazing!

    I still think you have to play what you like to have success, and besides the Slav’s the Nimzo, you seem to want to attack on the king side and I can’t think of a better one then the KID for that, and then the Dutch has the same idea, but with the fianchetto with white I find this plan in the dutch less effective, but like I said play the positions that you like and have fun with, when I started playing the Grunfeld it was because I was bored to tears in the openings that friends and teachers where telling me I should play, and to stay away from the Grunfeld, not only becasue it had so much theory, but at that time it was not as solid as it is now and really now it is a top contender, long story short I did not listen to my teacher or othe people and started playing it, I found my self hoping for 1.d4 when I would sit down to play a game, and yes it has tons of threoy and I still don’t know a lot of it, but sometimes our personalities fit an opening so well, that we can play it pretty well, even when we don’t know the exact theory.

    If you don’t like any of the suggestions, then try out the Dutch, and Modern, and maybe even give the KID second look…
    🙂

  98. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 17th, 2012 at 14:23 | #98

    I simply play the Grünfeld and if sidelines are played against me, then I have no choice anyway. I have to play against 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bf4/3. Bg5/3. e3/3. c3/3. Nc3, etc. and the second move sidelines that 1…Nf6 allows. My hope is that after studying these sidelines further and more thoroughly, playing against them, to which one is resigned anyway, will be as enjoyable as playing against main lines.

    Interesting if you like to play the Modern is to play both Modern and Grünfeld if given the chance, i.e. 1. d4 g6 2. c4 Nf6 and transpose to Grünfeld. As said above by various commenters, if you prefer to play against the sidelines with a Modern Defence setup, but enjoy Grünfeld positions should White play 2. c4, then I think this could be considered. So 1. d4 g6 2. e4 is a Modern, 1. d4 g6 2. Nf3 Bg7 3. Bf4/3. Bg5/3. e3/3. c3 are the sidelines, etc. Then if 1. d4 g6 2. c4, finally you can play Grünfeld with 2…Nf6, which is basically reversing the Grünfeld move-order to play Modern setups against sidelines.

  99. The Lurker
    October 17th, 2012 at 15:18 | #99

    @Michael
    I’m not really wedded to a kingside attack as Black, I just want to play something that gives me decent chances to fight back.

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Interesting idea, playing the Modern into the Grunfeld. I might have to look into that.

    What do you guys think of the idea that the Grunfeld is too drawish? And what do you know/think about Kaufmann’s new book as an intro? I think it uses the Grunfeld against 1.d4.

  100. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 17th, 2012 at 15:52 | #100

    I do not believe the Grünfeld is drawish. Many positions in the theoretical lines can be long and end in draws, but not every opponent will play these lines memorised to move 25 and try to draw. The only level I can see this happening is only perhaps above 2500, but even then I do not understand why any GM or 2500+ will deliberately memorise 25-30 moves after playing 1. d4 to get a drawn position, especially against someone who is 2300 or so. If the Grünfeld is considered drawish due to some drawish positions arising after very long theoretical lines, then the Najdorf, Semi-Slav Botvinnik, etc. would also be considered drawish. I would play the Grünfeld to win if I were 1800 or 2400. As of now, I have not played one game where someone followed book moves via memorisation and with an intent to draw after long theoretical sequences. I only get unbalanced games. I use mostly Avrukh’s GM8/GM9, and I have not encountered an opponent who follows the 30-move theoretical sequences to drawn rook endings.

    I do not think playing openings according to playing situation (fun or serious) would matter excessively. When I was younger I played the Slav even though I rarely won prizes. When I became older and tried for norms I played more recklessly, usually King’s Indian Defence, Najdorf and Kan Sicilians, and 1. e4 with Open Sicilian, Four Pawns against Alekhine, Advance Variation with 4. Nc3 and 5. g4 against Caro-Kann, etc. (But I played all main lines :D). I never played more conservatively if I wanted to try for example the usual 5,5/9 for norm (I think it might be 6.5/9 for GM norm now) or if I knew prizes were too difficult.

  101. Blue Knight
    October 17th, 2012 at 18:12 | #101

    The Sveshnikov is also now considered relatively drawish. By the way, the GMs use now often this “agressive and double edge and sharp” Sicilian variation for a draw. This is why many have began to move towards another variation for seeking another thing… I guess it’s more or less the same thing for the Grundfeld. BUT this is just true at elite level… At low level, the players have not the technic for that, so the opening you choose has not a big importance…

    @ Gilchrist is a Legend

    People play side lines it’s not a real surprise. At low level, few players are really booked with much theory neither have the time for this, so learn and follow a side line is much easier. And at this level, if you play correctly and good, at least better than your opponent, you can win with almost everything. At high level, the players are more booked with theory of course, so if you want to surprise them and to bring them on another ground where they can not be in their comfort zone, you have few choices and almost must use some side line. It’s also a psychological battle and choice…

    Why an opponent would play 30 or 40 theory moves in a Grundfeld for instance against you when he/she knows you know it quite well and probably the out of the game, if White and Black play well, should/could be a draw when he/she can surprise you and you bring out your comfort zone and your theory with a side line? Actually, this approach seems works well against you for your opponents. 😛

    If sometimes the sidelines are better results than the main lines, this is not a hazard… even if these sidelines are harmless in reality.

    P.S.= I hope I have been quite clear in what I meant here…

  102. Seth
    October 17th, 2012 at 18:34 | #102

    I fear for the fate of the King’s Gambit book. John Shaw is not playing 2.f4 in blitz games on Playchess! GM Aagaard, I suggest you deal with this personally. 🙂

  103. The Lurker
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:00 | #103

    Thanks to everyone for the advise. I think I will ditch the Leningrad idea, and check out the Grunfeld. It seems dynamic and tactical, probably what I should get into at my low level to hone my tactical abilities. Not sure yet if I want to go 1.Nf6 and deal with sidelines as they come, or 1.g6 and try to confuse the sideliners with the Modern. Maybe I’ll have to buy GM11 and the Lakdawala Modern book and find out!

  104. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:20 | #104

    @Andre
    Don’t care about marketing risks that much…

  105. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:22 | #105

    @Michael
    I still feel that the Attacking Manuals was my peak, but I care a lot about the work I am doing now. It is just less original.

  106. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:23 | #106

    @Blue Knight

    I meant not that I am surprised they do not play 30 move theoretical lines because I memorised them (because I cannot even memorise them myself :D) but I would not understand why anyone, especially for example, a 2500 GM, would want to memorise a drawing sequence as White to play against me. I am sure that player would want to win against me, but at the same time, play the theoretical line and deviate earlier, perhaps moves 12-16 or so.

    I anticipate reading GM11 and more thoroughly studying sidelines, perhaps spending most opening time on sidelines than main lines since the percentage of facing those is greater anyway. Then the onus will be on those sidelines players because those who study them more thoroughly will understand them better, or at least that is the ideal. I do not mind eschewing studying the 7. Bc4 c5 8. Ne2 Bg7 9. Be3 Nc6 10. 0-0 Bg4 11. f3 Bd7 for example and focus on the extremely annoying 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bg5 Bg7 4. e3 0-0 5. c3 d6 6. Nbd2.

  107. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:24 | #107

    @LE BRUIT QUI COURT
    I have thoughts along those lines long term, but short term I have the GM Prep series and the GM Rep 1.e4 books to complete, both big works I have been working on for a while.

  108. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:27 | #108

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I actually think about 25-30% of the GM Rep series have dealt with minor lines; but usually from the ambition of playing the main lines. GM11 support other of the books in the series exclusively.

  109. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:27 | #109

    @boki
    goofy or good?

  110. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:28 | #110

    @Michael
    And a very constructive and interesting thought indeed!

  111. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:29 | #111

    @Barry
    Maybe just finish a new one every three months for the rest of my life (which would only be 2-3 years before a double barrell exit :-)).

  112. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:31 | #112

    The Lurker :
    @John Shaw
    Impatience? Rudeness, perhaps. (Although not as bad as my past rudeness, for which I belatedly apologize.) But impatience? After four years? Really?

    I resnt that. It is far more than five years by now. On the other hand it will be the biggest QC book ever…

  113. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:32 | #113

    @The Lurker
    The printer will not have more slots before Christmas. Sorry.

  114. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:34 | #114

    @Nick
    I hope GM6B will be out May/June.
    We will keep and add lines on 6.Bg5 and so on with all lines.
    All lines will be updated. No mistakes this time.

  115. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:35 | #115

    @Jacob Aagaard

    On this active topic on sidelines, how do you think GM11 will impact the status of those 1. d4 sidelines and those who play them? Would you predict a more theoretical investigation of sidelines that was insofar previously unheard? I thought about it, but I am unsure whether more or less people will play sidelines, or no change.

  116. Jacob Aagaard
    October 17th, 2012 at 19:35 | #116

    @Seth
    I do play 2.f4 personally. John is afraid that it will be used against him if he plays it and does so badly…

  117. werner
    October 17th, 2012 at 20:12 | #117

    @Gilchrist
    “I thought about it, but I am unsure whether more or less people will play sidelines, or no change.”

    Don’t worry…
    Maybe that’s because, ‘the future’s not ours to see’…
    There’s a secret recipe: Just wait…

  118. John Johnson
    October 17th, 2012 at 20:13 | #118

    Another year and no confirmed Nessie sightings….

  119. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 17th, 2012 at 20:18 | #119

    ‘I’ll find him for three, but I’ll catch him, and kill em, for ten.’ ~ Quint

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/08/03/article-2183094-145BAD3A000005DC-270_306x423.jpg

    ‘I think you’re gonna need a bigger book.’ ~ Chief Brody

    https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR1uHVTxoPSV6c99mOa0f30hezlGY_K-uF3tXJygYnBlHu0ew8o

  120. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 17th, 2012 at 20:30 | #120

    I saw on the news there is the independence referendum signed by Cameron and Salmond for 2014. Will “Nessie” appear in the UK or have to wait for when Scotland vote? 😀

  121. Michael
    October 17th, 2012 at 21:58 | #121

    @The Lurker
    I think the Grunfeld is a good choice, I have to, it’s what I play!
    But really, try it out, very Dynamic and losts of counterplay, and piece activity.
    As far as being Drawish, I don’t think any of us have to worry about that at our level, even 2700 play it with success for black, check out Svilider, Giri, Caruana, and Kaufman’s chose it at the time of writing his book becasue Carlsen was playing it, not the mention maybe the greatest player and my favorite Garry Kasparov!

    Svidler used to during the World cup last year and won the tournament, getting him into the Cadidates for the next cycle!

    [Event “World Cup”]
    [Site “Khanty-Mansiysk RUS”]
    [Date “2011.09.13”]
    [EventDate “2011.08.27”]
    [Round “6.2”]
    [Result “0-1”]
    [White “Ruslan Ponomariov”]
    [Black “Peter Svidler”]
    [ECO “D85”]
    [WhiteElo “?”]
    [BlackElo “?”]
    [PlyCount “86”]

    1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nxc3 6.bxc3 Bg7
    7.Qa4+ Bd7 8.Qa3 Nc6 9.Nf3 e5 10.Be3 exd4 11.cxd4 Qe7 12.Qxe7+
    Nxe7 13.Rb1 O-O-O 14.Bc4 f5 15.Ng5 fxe4 16.Nf7 Nf5 17.O-O Nxd4
    18.Bxd4 Bxd4 19.Nxh8 Rxh8 20.Bd5 b5 21.Bxe4 c5 22.g3 a5 23.Kg2
    b4 24.Bd5 Kc7 25.Bc4 Kd6 26.Rfe1 a4 27.f3 Rb8 28.Re2 Bf5
    29.Rd1 b3 30.axb3 axb3 31.g4 Bd7 32.Re3 b2 33.Rb3 Rxb3 34.Bxb3
    Bb5 35.Ba2 Kc6 36.Rd2 Kb6 37.f4 Bc6+ 38.Kg3 Be4 39.Rd1 Kb5
    40.Re1 Bd3 41.Re7 c4 42.Rd7 c3 43.Rd5+ Bc5 0-1

    I you decide on this defense, I give my highest recommendation to GM8&9 two of the best opening books I have ever seen.

    Good Luck!

  122. Blue Knight
    October 17th, 2012 at 23:11 | #122

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    > I would not understand why anyone, especially for example, a 2500 GM, would want to memorise a drawing sequence as White to play against me. I am sure that player would want to win against me

    Well, I don’t know your Elo but in a tournament at the first round I played a 2300/2400 player, about 400 points above me, and after the game, where he had chosen a side line, he said something such as this: “Often it is not really good to play main lines or very theoretical lines against more feeble Elo than you because they are often relatively booked with theory and you can be grabbed into some trap or preparation” etc. More or less, you can have almost the same words for more advanced opponents. Currently, the players know the theory, some have even some preparations in some lines, so for an opponent this can be a quite difficult and dangerous way to follow. At least, more dangerous than some side lines…

  123. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 17th, 2012 at 23:35 | #123

    @Blue Knight

    I understand that idea, but I try to hybridise the concepts sometimes if I have to play against someone whom I know is very theoretically prepared, especially those above 2200. I will play the main line sequences, but not the very main lines of the main lines, if that makes sense. For example one time I had to play a 2450 in the last round of a rapid tournament when prize was in contention, I knew he was theoretically prepared, but regardless, I decided to play Najdorf. After 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 I thought about the choice, and chose 7…Qc7. He did not know this line I suspected as he spent inordinate amounts of time in the opening stage, which caused him time trouble and he blundered towards the end (although his time was probably going to cause him a loss anyway). He had a poor position in the middlegame even after spending excessive time, so I chose main line (Najdorf) but a not very main line choice after (7…Qc7) instead of the more seen 7…Qb6, 7…Nbd7, 7…Be7, 7…h6, etc. I think many players do this to avoid having to adapt to a completely new system to avoid a theoretically prepared opponent.

  124. Fight Club
    October 17th, 2012 at 23:50 | #124

    I notices two Michael’s on the blog so will change my handle as well to match also my handle on chesspub.com ,@ Previously known as The Lurker, really I would get GM8&9 and GM11 and have a complete rep!

  125. Blue Knight
    October 17th, 2012 at 23:51 | #125

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    Yes, of course, but this also means you must know lot of theory for playing all these lines correctly… Lot of work, much more than for a side line. 😉

  126. Blue Knight
    October 17th, 2012 at 23:54 | #126

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    Oh and we should have a very good memory… 🙂

  127. Fight Club
    October 18th, 2012 at 00:07 | #127

    @Jacob Aagaard
    Just changed my handle because I saw two Michael’s and plus now it matches my chesspub.com handle. Didn’t want any confusion with comments made.

    About GM Prep Attacking play, could we just buy you 2 attacking manuals and your book on defensive play and that would be enough? Or is there more you would like to write on these subjects?

    No matter what you anwser these 3 books are on my list, but there are a couple ahead of them, GM11 and Yusupov’s first green book, and then yours. You guys are putting out so many good books I can’t keep up with my shoping list!!!

    RE: Your Attacking manuals, as I said once before I had problem in the Sicilian when oppisite side caslting took place and I was good at getting my peices into play and then did not know the best way to start the attack, I am guessing that you Attacking Manuals would be gold for me in this area? As I find my self losing many games after gaining an advantage and letting it slip away because I did not choose the right plan of attack giving my opp. time and couterplay.

    Maybe I should move your first Attacking Manual up the list? As after all these opening discusions I find my self wanting to study other aspects of the game, and Attacking correctly is something I need to learn.

  128. Fight Club
    October 18th, 2012 at 00:09 | #128

    @Jacob Aagaard
    Thanks!
    🙂

  129. Jacob Aagaard
    October 18th, 2012 at 10:19 | #129

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I really do not know. I would guess that most people would abandone one sideline only to get murdered in another.

  130. Jacob Aagaard
    October 18th, 2012 at 10:20 | #130

    @John Johnson
    I have seen 2/3s of the body; and clearly, but not the head…

  131. Patrick
    October 18th, 2012 at 15:24 | #131

    @The Lurker

    I’ve had 3 recent games with the Modern. I think the games below will reduce your concern about drawish tendencies. In all 3 cases, I had Black, and White was somewhere between 1880 and 2100 (Myself being about 2050). Included is the game I lost that I referenced earlier where I “went down in style”! Keep in mind these are amateur games, not GM games, and the last 2 involved time trouble, as all 3 of these games were a short time control, Game in 90 minutes with 5 second delay.

    Game 1 – October 3
    1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nc3 a6 5.Be3 Nd7 6.a4 b6 7.Qd2 h6 8.Bc4 e6 9.O-O Bb7 10.Bd3 Ne7 11.Ne1 c5 12.dxc5 bxc5 13.f4 d5 14.exd5 exd5 15.Bf2 O-O 16.Be2 d4 17.Nd1 Nf6 18.Bf3 Ne4 19.Bxe4 Bxe4 20.Nd3 c4 21.Ne5 Nf5 22.Re1 Bb7 23.Bg3 Qd5 24.Qf2 Rfe8 25.Qf3 Qxf3 26.Nxf3 Bxf3 27.gxf3 Rxe1+ 28.Bxe1 Re8 29.Kf2 Bf6 0-1

    Game 2 – October 13
    1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Be3 a6 5.Qd2 Nd7 6.O-O-O b5 7.g4 Bb7 8.f3 c5 9.h4 h5 10.g5 Qc7 11.Nh3 Nb6 12.Be2 b4 13.Nd5 Bxd5 14.exd5 Na5 15.Bd3 Qa5 16.Bc4 Nc3 17.Qd3 Nxa2+ 18.Kd2 b3+ 19.c3 Qb6 20.dxc5 dxc5 21.Nf4 Rd8 22.Ke2 e5 23.dxe6!! Rxd3 24.exf7+ Kd8 25.Rxd3+ Kc7 26.fxg8=Q+ Rxg8 27.Bxg8 Qb5 28.Rhd1 Bxc3 29.Kf2 Bxb2 30.Rxb3 Qa4 31.Be6+ Kc7 32.Nd5+ 1-0

    Game 3 – October 17
    1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6 4.Be3 a6 5.Nbd2 b5 6.c3 Nd7 7.Nb3 Bb7 8.Bd3 Ngf6 9.d5 c5 10.Bc2 Ng4 11.Bd2 a5 12.a4 b4 13.O-O e6 14.h3 Nge5 15.Bf4 Nxf3+ 16.Qxf3 e5 17.Be3 Ba6 18.Rfe1 O-O 19.Nd2 Nb6 20.Qg3 f5 21.exf5 gxf5 22.Bh6 Ra7 23.Bg5 Qd7 24.Rad1 Nxa4 25.cxb4 axb4 26.Qb3 Bb5 27.Nf1 Nb6 28.Qf3 Kh8 29.Ng3 e4 30.Nxe4 fxe4 31.Qxe4 Be5 32.Qh4 Qf7 33.Re3 Qxf2+ (With 8 minutes left for White, and my having already spent 7 of my remaining 14 minutes, I couldn’t find anything better than giving the material back, and trying to use the positional advantage of the Rook on the 2nd rank.) 34.Qxf2 Bh2+ 35.Kxh2 Rxf2 36.Bh6?? (Panicking a little too quickly with the clock, still having 7 minutes, White overlooks that Black’s Bishop on b5 covers the mating square, and so there is no threat.) 36…Rxc2 37.Rde1 Ra8 38.Re7 Rg8 39.Rg1 Bf1!! 0-1 (White had enough, 40.Rxf1 Rgxg2+ leads to mate on the 42nd move while 40.Bg7+ Rxg7 41.Re8+ Rg8 42.Rxg8+ Kxg8 43.Rxf1 just leads to a lost endgame for White.)

  132. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 15:28 | #132

    @Fight Club
    I know I’m not exactly lurking now anymore, so my name is no longer appropriate. But I tried to change it and got hung up waiting for moderation forever, so I changed it back.

    You’re right that GMs 8,9 and 11 would form a complete rep for me. I am afraid that the Grunfled books, especially, would overwhelm me, though. That’s why I was wondering about another book as an intro. But I am definitely considering them.

    I am especially considering 11. I looked at the Modern as a way into the Grunfeld, but I don’t know if I like the possible early endgame after the Averbakh in the Tiger book. Just not my cup of tea. So I think that just dealing with sidelines as they come, and learning to love the London, is the way to go.

  133. Patrick
    October 18th, 2012 at 16:22 | #133

    @The Lurker
    A trade of queens doesn’t equate to an endgame. Check out Bareev – Morozevich, Monaco 2005. I can’t give out the annotations as I’d be violating copyright laws, but let’s just say that a very interesting sacrifice occurs at move 20, Black fails to play the best move at move 22, and gave White the opportunity to get full comp for the piece on move 24, but failed to find the right move, and lost 14 moves later. Doesn’t take Queens to have a wild middle game.

  134. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 18th, 2012 at 16:47 | #134

    @The Lurker

    I may have overcomplicated, but I tried thinking about the Averbach Varation from 1. d4. If White plays 1. d4 g6, then 2. e4, that means White would essentially be playing 1. e4 as Black can choose Modern or Pirc. Then after 2…Bg7, and then 3. c4, that means White is equally ready to play both 1. d4 and 1. e4, since after 3. c4, the game can transpose into 1. d4 main lines, such as the King’s Indian as stated above, or even the Benoni complexes. I usually see the Averbach played from either more commoner 1. d4 or less common 1. c4 by 1. d4 g6 2. c4 Bg7 and now 3. e4 since White does not have to play as if playing 1. e4 at the beginning in comparison with 1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 then 3. c4.

    So, unless I overlooked something, if you mean you do not want to play against the Averbach from 1. d4 move order, then would that not mean such an opponent who plays that sequence essentially is ready to play both 1. d4 and 1. e4 main lines? I am sure there are players who do that who are not over 2500, but at club level that seems quite ambitious for a player who is around 1900 or 2000 to play 1. e4 and 1. d4 fluently and regularly.

    Of course I did not get much sleep this week so maybe what I thought and wrote above might be rubbish if it does not make sense 🙂

  135. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 16:47 | #135

    @Patrick
    Point taken. But still, I can see it now. I book up on the Grunfeld, go into it via the Modern move order, and every single person I play pushes the king’s pawn on move 2, since I’ve given them the opportunity. And I know that one guy I play will play into the endgame every single time, until I figure out how to totally crush him every single time.

    I’m still wavering between Grunfeld and Modern, because the stats on the Modern are so surprisingly good, and because it can be played against so many things. But I think I should either play the Grunfeld or play the Modern, not try to mix and match.

    Which do you guys think is better for teaching a club level player how to play good chess, the Modern or the Grunfeld against 1.d4? Or no difference?

  136. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 18th, 2012 at 16:49 | #136

    @The Lurker

    I just saw above that I made a massive grammatical error (“more commoner”) but anyway it would be useful if you already know which players play which openings, or have a higher likelihood, of playing Colle, Torre, London, etc. If you know this, then trying to play a main line and avoiding a sideline is probably >95% useless, and if you want to avoid that then play the Modern if you are almost sure they will never transpose to main lines, and want a creative, ambitious game. I am considering this approach as well, although I still want to learn GM11 😀

  137. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 18th, 2012 at 16:55 | #137

    @The Lurker

    Another idea, why not try both? I played two openings for Black against both 1. e4 and 1. d4 even as 1900, as many do, since it creates unpredictability and you can use certain openings for certain opponents, such as Modern for those who 100% play sidelines (and even those who >85% play sidelines), and main line opponents play Grünfeld.

  138. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 17:02 | #138

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Yes, I am thinking about the 1.d4/2.e4/3.c4 move order. The thing is, since I am a social player who plays mostly against 1.e4 players, they only occasionally toss out 1.d4 for a change of pace. If I play 1.Nf6 against them, I am maybe taking them out of their home territory. If I play the Modern, they might decide to take my kind offer to switch back to safe ground with 2.e4. Does that make any sense?

    And maybe I’m being too afraid of the Averbakh endgame… I mean, queenless middlegame ;-). I dunno. It’s definitely between the Modern and Grunfeld right now. I’ve rejected the Leningrad idea. So much studying to do, so little time…

  139. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 17:09 | #139

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I’m not sure I have that much time to invest in both. That’s one of the things that makes the Modern appealing, that it can be used as a fallback position against a lot of openings, thus saving me time. I think I’ll have to wait until the new Modern book that was mentioned earlier comes out before I can make up my mind. I can’t buy GM 8/9/11 until after Nessie comes out. 😛

  140. Patrick
    October 18th, 2012 at 17:23 | #140

    @The Lurker
    I think you are confusing lines. The odds of facing 2.e4 AND going into the line that you are calling an endgame is very slim.

    If they play 2.e4, it’s more likely that they will play into an e4-Modern, which has no early Queen trade. Yes, they can do 1.d4, then 2.e4, then 3.c4, but that move order is extremely rare. Much more common is 1.d4, 2.c4, 3.Nc3, and 4.e4, in which case if you took the Grunfeld Route, with 2…Nf6, there is no e4 to deal with. If they answer 2.e4, I can tell you that at least 90% of the time, they are playing the e4-modern with 3.Nc3 or 3.Nf3, and not 3.c4.

    Of course, there is another option if they do play c4. You can go into the lines of the Sniper. If you answer 2.c4 with 2…Nf6, then the only concern would be 1.d4 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.c4, to which you answer c5, to which 4.Nf3 leads to positions “similar” to the Accelerated Dragon, and could directly transpose, but doesn’t have to. The more common 4.d5 d6 5.Nc3 e5 gives Black a good version of closed benoni lines, and Black’s ideas are either a6 and b5, or else f5, the latter with ideas similar to the King’s Indian, but you haven’t developed the Knight yet, so there’s no moving the Knight out of the way, and the locked up position doesn’t allow White to break with c5 line he can in the King’s Indian. It’s an improved version, kinda like how 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Bb4 is an improved version of the Nimzo-Indian while 4…d5 is horrible because of 5.Bf4, 6.e3, and 7.Bd3.

    That’s the other advantage with knowing the e4-Modern, in case White transposes. It makes Black’s options against 1.d4 endless! 🙂

  141. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 18th, 2012 at 18:05 | #141

    @The Lurker

    You say you do not want to spend time on the Modern, but you could also use Modern Defence against 1. e4 if you do not want to learn another 1. e4 defence, so you play Modern against 1. e4 and 1. d4, and transpose to the Grünfeld depending on opponent. If you do not want sideilnes against 1. e4 or 1. d4, then basically you will have eliminated 75% of work expended studying for a repertoire as Black. 1. e4 g6 and 1. d4 g6 2. sideline or 1. d4 g6 2. c4 Nf6 with a Grünfeld. The theory of the Modern in my experience, is absolutely much less than that of the Najdorf, Grünfeld, Benonis, King’s Indian, etc. and at club level I highly doubt that most players playing against the Modern will know the theoretical sequences of the Modern well, especially past move 10. 1…g6 is probably a good way to avoid sidelines since basically 1…g6 seems like a sideline itself–a first move sideline 😀

  142. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 18:05 | #142

    @Patrick
    The line I’m thinking of is 1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. c4 d6 4. Nc3 e5 5. dxe5 …

    Maybe I’m worrying too much about it. The stats don’t look so bad, once I bother to look them up. And if I don’t see it that often, as you say, why worry?

  143. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 18:15 | #143

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Hmmm… True. I have been playing the Sicilian against 1.e4, but I have already switched from the d6 to e6 Sicilian because of a guy who *always* plays the Moscow (not that I did so badly, just not what I wanted to play). Now I’m waiting for him to discover the KIA against e6 Sicilians. *groan* Maybe I can book up on the Modern as my “universal solvent”, and add to my rep from there as I have time.

    Now my question is, if I were my opponent, how would I try to “sideline” the Modern? Can the Modern be played successfully against the Nimzo-Larsen (1.b3)?

  144. Michel Barbaut
    October 18th, 2012 at 18:15 | #144

    I don’t knox if it had been asked before but in the excerpts of GM 11, I notice that the Colle is under 1.d4,Nf6 2.Nf3,e6 but what about 1.d4,d5 2.Nf3 and 3.e3 ? Is it cover this way too or is there a transposition possibility from one chapter to another ? Thx

  145. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 18th, 2012 at 18:23 | #145

    Like said above, that essentially means White is ready to play both 1. d4 and 1. e4 main lines, which at a level below, for example, 2100, is quite ambitious and rare. Even if an opponent chooses 1. d4 and 1. e4 although they play the other, you play the Modern against 1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. Nc3 or 3. Nf3, and if 1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. c4, again I highly doubt any 1. e4 player will use a 1. d4 move order and then risk playing against the King’s Indian, Modern Benoni, etc. with no preparation, study, understanding, or experience. If they do that, you should be able to achieve a good position easily.

    The only time I tried to play 1. d4 when I knew no theory and never studied it was years ago when I played 1. e4. When I played a 2250 I played 1. d4 and entered the Grünfeld with 7. Nf3 c5 8. Be3 and a theoretically heavy position and only won because for some reason my opponent did not know what he was doing. But I would not choose openings so recklessly ever again, nor do I think any tournament player will take such a risk in a slow tournament game.

  146. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 18:48 | #146

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    You are thinking too much in terms of formal tournament play. I play socially; my circle play as seriously as we can given the time we have to devote to hobbies, but not in a formal tournament environment. It’s sort of the chess version of a fight club. No money, no recordkeeping, no ratings, no clocks… just playing for fun and for blood. So somebody might very well “risk” playing a KID as a 1. e4 player. Or somebody may be booking up on the KID, which I very much want to avoid, not being booked up on it myself, hence my not wanting to transpose into it from the Modern.

  147. Patrick
    October 18th, 2012 at 19:16 | #147

    The Lurker :@Patrick The line I’m thinking of is 1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. c4 d6 4. Nc3 e5 5. dxe5 …
    Maybe I’m worrying too much about it. The stats don’t look so bad, once I bother to look them up. And if I don’t see it that often, as you say, why worry?

    Yes, this is the line that leads to the Queen Trade, but again, if you take the latest message of mine, you can avoid that by going for the Sniper when White plays 1.d4, 2.e4, 3.c4. The Sniper is playable in any line of the Modern, but in the case of the 1.e4 Modern, if you play the Sniper (i.e. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c5 (or 3.Nf3 c5), you have to be ready for lines of the Sicilian Dragon.

    That’s why I only advertise the Sniper in your case for that one line. 1.d4 g6 2.e4 Bg7 3.c4 c5! See Message 140 for details.

  148. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 19:41 | #148

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    On chesstempo.com, when looking at all games in the database, no matter the ratings of the players, after 1. d4 g6, the most common move is 2. e4 at 40,956 games, followed by 2. c4 at 13,399 games. After 2. e4 Bg7, you’re right that the e4 Modern is more common; 3. Nc3 at 21,613 games, 3. Nf3 at 9,856 games, and then 3. c4 at 5,965 games. But excluding less common moves, that’s still about 15% of the time.

  149. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 18th, 2012 at 19:58 | #149

    What were the ratings of the 15? Still I would not worry about such a possibility, and even then, the endgame I do not find bad. I used to play the King’s Indian and worry about the Exchznge Variation, but only one opponent (a 2200) played this against me out of the 6 or however many years I played the King’s Indian, and the only reason I suspected was because in that tournament he played me in the last round and needed a draw to win first place. You cannot avoid queen swaps all the time, for example if you played the Grünfeld, there is a massive theoretical line that occurs after 7. Nf3 c5 8. Be3 Qa5 9. Qd2 cxd4 10. cxd4 Qxd2+ 11. Kxd2. And then of course, extremely popular openings are basically endgames, like the Berlin Wall, where Black consigns to play an endgame already from move 3 🙂

  150. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 20:11 | #150

    Gilchrist is a Legend :What were the ratings of the 15?

    It doesn’t say; I’d have to track down every individual game. But if I look up the 2200+ games, and subtract, to get under 2200 games only, the percentages don’t change much. About 14%.

    But yeah, I should probably quit worrying about it. If I have any book on it at all, I am probably doing better than my opponent in that respect. Especially in the Modern. In all games, it’s behind the Dutch in popularity against 1.d4 and behind the Scandinavian against 1.e4!

  151. Fight Club
    October 18th, 2012 at 20:41 | #151

    @The Lurker
    Boris does such a ggod jod on explaining ideas not just variations, that is what makes it such a good book, I have about every book on the Grunfeld available and I think if you really are going to play it you have to have these two books. I can not recommend other books on this blog, but I will say this, Kaufman’s book is a good book th have if you are considering playing 1.d4 and the Breyer as black against 1…e5 (Ruy Lopez) But the Grunfeld section I found strange, he uses computers to come up with moves that lead to good poditions, but I found that almost all the line he choose where not to my liking, I use on line he gave, the Hungarain against the Russian, but it is hardly enough coverage to really play this defense against a strong opp. So even though GM8&9 seem like big projects, you acttually get more information on how to play the opening and he covers moves I never would have imagined becasue he is such a strong player, but the kind of lines club playes would play not knowing what htey are doing, for example an imediate d5 by white before any piece developing? Weird…But covered. That is just one example of the detail, which is exactly what you need as a club player, because your opp. are more likely to choose Bg5 systems against you, or an early e3 with out Qb3, just to develop with out knowing what the theory is, well you will after these two books and will be ready to attack! Of course you have to make up your own mind, and there are a couple good books out there and some really bad ones!!!

    RE: The Modern, I can’t really help you there, I vowed to not fianchetto in open games, execpt in certain places like the Sicilin Kan for instandce, but by that time the position is semi-closed and it’s not really a problem, speaking of Kaufman’s book against the Modern he recommends 2.e4 followed by a king side assault with pawn storms, which has never been something I liked to play against, so you have to be ready for that, and the way I play againt it is d4-c4-e/4 and then if I can close the center with d5 and play f3 somewhere in there and go for a type of Saimicsh set-up. In other words trying to get them into KID territory. Which none of this is bad It’s just the way I like to play. But the Modern can also be very flexible so you can come up with variation against thses set-ups.

    I am curious, what is you main defense to 1.e4? the Sicilian and of so which one.

    Like Gilchrist is a Legend mentioned above I used to play d6 way more often, but with all these anti’s I see in the majority of my games I have been playing the Taimanov and Kan Latey, But am still looking forward to GM6. I don’t study the sidelines at the moment right know because when someone play an anti against me I just try and get d5 in as soon as it is possible, it will work for now but I have to learn these Anti-Sicilians also. I have noticed that the Kan feels a little like the Grunfeld sometimes, because you do fainchetto your DSB in some lines, but then you have to learn how to play hedgehog positions, which is complicated but rewarding to your chess in general. I shyed away from the Kan at first because I used to play the Acc. Dragon and came to my own conclusion that the Bind just killed any counter play, but the Kan is much different, and it you look up the games say at like chessgames.com you will see that black just has to be a little paitent and wait to see what white’s plan is, and once the position does open up. BOOM! you got your self some great couterplay because you have all of your pieces on the board. And then there are games with a fast h pawn rush to crack open the king side and those games are very dynamic and fun.

    Got off topic there for a minute, I don’t now if you want a “way into the Grunfeld. I would think it better to just go into it from the beginning. And just so you know, I play 1.d4 and what do I play against my beloved defense, I still am working that out, I have problems with the white side, so far I play the exchange with Bg5 and Qa4+ and now with Playing the Indian defenses there is the Russian to try out, but still it is hard opening for white to handle unless of course your Kramnik or Giri.

    Best of luck to you, I would just go to chessgames.com and play though Grunfeld games and see if you like the positions and the couter attacking possiblities!

    🙂

  152. October 18th, 2012 at 21:08 | #152

    GM Aagaard:

    How long before you give us another PUBLISHING SCHEDULE, no matter how tentative?

    Thanks

  153. October 18th, 2012 at 21:14 | #153

    Simple off-topic question:

    Could someone please point out to me where in Yusupov’s books he covers the topic of LINE-OPENING SACRIFICES, like the tactical sequence 35 Ng3-h5+!! g6xNh5 36 Qh4xNg5+! f6xQg5 in the fantastic Carlsen vs Harestad Politiken Cup 2003?

    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1268980

    Thanks

    —-

    [Event “Politiken Cup 2003”]
    [Site “Copenhagen”]
    [Date “2003.07.23”]
    [EventDate “?”]
    [Round “9”]
    [Result “1-0”]
    [White “Magnus Carlsen”]
    [Black “Hans K Harestad”]
    [ECO “C98”]
    [WhiteElo “2385”]
    [BlackElo “2249”]
    [PlyCount “75”]

    1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O b5 6. Bb3 Be7
    7. Re1 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 Qc7 12. Nbd2
    Nc6 13. d5 Nd8 14. a4 Ra7 15. Nf1 g6 16. Bh6 Re8 17. Ng3 Nd7
    18. Nh2 f6 19. Be3 Nb6 20. axb5 axb5 21. Bd3 Bd7 22. Qd2 Nf7
    23. Rxa7 Qa7 24. Qe2 Qa6 25. Ng4 Kg7 26. Bc1 Na4 27. Bc2 Ra8
    28. Qe3 c4 29. Rf1 Nc5 30. Nh6 Ng5 31. f4 exf4 32. Qxf4 Bh3
    33. Qh4 Bd7 34. e5 dxe5 35. Nh5 gxh5 36. Qxg5 fxg5 37. Rf7
    Kxh6 38. Rh7# 1-0

  154. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 21:20 | #154

    Fight Club :@The Lurker I am curious, what is you main defense to 1.e4? the Sicilian and of so which one.

    The Sicilian. I first tried 2. Nf3 d6 looking for a Najdorf (I have the old Ftacnik book), even though I hadn’t studied much and knew incredibly little theory. But it didn’t matter, as I got sidelines mostly, especially the Moscow. I’d rather fight than draw, so I tried 3…Nd7, which I did OK in. (I think Ftacnik covers 3…Bd7.) But sometimes I got cramped positions. So I switched to the 2. Nf3 d6 as an anti-Moscow, looking for the Kan, which I also know very little of, and again it doesn’t matter since I seldom get 3. d4. *shrug*

    As for Kaufman and the Grunfeld… I had read somewhere that Kaufman uses weird computer moves, and seems to think he has refuted the classical KID. Don’t know about that… Anyway, I was thinking of Kaufman because I thought with GM8/9 it would only cover main lines that I would never get to play in practice, whereas with Kaufman I wouldn’t be overwhelmed with lines I would never get. But if Avrukh covers lots of weird little no-name sidelines, that would probably be a good thing for me. Thanks for the info.

  155. The Lurker
    October 18th, 2012 at 21:42 | #155

    Meant to type “So I switched to the 2. Nf3 e6 as an anti-Moscow”. Oops.

  156. Gambiteer
    October 19th, 2012 at 09:29 | #156

    @John Shaw
    I am waiting for your book on King’s Gambit and Sherlock new season with same eagerness. Any chance of a trailer(Table of Contents)?

  157. Gambiteer
    October 19th, 2012 at 13:15 | #157

    @Jacob Aagaard
    On a different note, I recently bought the ebook reader NOOK.
    I’m trying to find an ebook version of Mayhem in the Morra in Barnes & Nobles NookStore but only paperback is available. I’m wondering if “Quality Chess” books are available in ebook format.
    Your reply will be well appreciated.

  158. John Shaw
    October 19th, 2012 at 15:35 | #158

    Gambiteer :
    @John Shaw
    I am waiting for your book on King’s Gambit and Sherlock new season with same eagerness. Any chance of a trailer(Table of Contents)?

    The Table of Contents is still subject to minor revisions. The main point being that I am not sure how many chapters 3…g5 will need. I keep thinking I do know the answer, but then a chapter swells so much it has to be split in two.

  159. John Shaw
    October 19th, 2012 at 15:38 | #159

    Gambiteer :
    @Jacob Aagaard
    On a different note, I recently bought the ebook reader NOOK.
    I’m trying to find an ebook version of Mayhem in the Morra in Barnes & Nobles NookStore but only paperback is available. I’m wondering if “Quality Chess” books are available in ebook format.
    Your reply will be well appreciated.

    Quality Chess books are not currently available in ebook format. Paperback or hardcover are available for the title you mentioned – Mayhem in the Morra.

  160. Patrick
    October 19th, 2012 at 15:43 | #160

    @Gambiteer

    No they are not. There have been many threads in the past on this topic. Quality Chess doesn’t do eBooks unlike Everyman because it’s too easy to distribute. With paperbacks and hardbacks, yeah, I could buy it, spend a year reading it, pass it off to my friend, he spends a year reading it, he passes it to another friend and spends a year reading it, etc.

    However, I can’t just re-produce the book and distribute across 500 people. With an eBook, while technically illegal, there is nothing that physically stops a person from distributing PGN, CBH, or even PDF files. Everyman mentions how it’s illegal on their site, and trust that their customers use the honor system. Most probably don’t, but that’s the difference between Everyman and Quality Chess. Everyman takes an “Optimistic” approach and trusts that people won’t cheat the system, even though they know that some will. They think that the availability will up sales enough to outweigh the illegal activity. Quality Chess takes a more “Pessimistic” approach, figuring if they don’t make it available, nobody can execute the illegal activity.

    Which is better? It depends. It’s like a guessing game. You’d have to figure out which leads to more money, and each book is different. Let’s say you made $8 profit on each paperback, $7 profit on each hardcover, and $12 profit on each eBook (They cost less for the publisher because no paper is used, so profit is higher).

    Now let’s say you have 25,000 people interested in that given book. Let’s say if they were only available in paperback and hardcover, 10,000 would buy the paperback, 5,000 would buy the hardcover, and 10,000 would say forget about it and buy another book on a similar topic that is available in eBook. You would get $8*10,000 + $7*5,000, or $115,000 in profits.

    Now let’s say you offer the eBook. Let’s say now that you sell 5,000 Paperbacks, 3,000 Hardcovers, 5,000 eBooks, and the other 12,000 cheat the system. You would get $8*5,000 + $7*3,000 + $12*5,000, or $40,000 + $21,000 + $60,000, or $121,000.

    In this hypothetical scenario, having the eBook would win, but that wouldn’t be true with all books, and having the eBook available would be the equivalent to Higher Risk, Higher Reward (due to lack of paper cost). Only paper copies is a “safer” but “slower” way to make money. With eBooks, they might make 4 times as much with GM Reps 3 thru 5 (English Opening), but take a major hit with GM Rep 10 (Tarrasch Defense). Quality Chess would rather have the “sure thing”. Everyman plays the “Chess Stock Market”. Quality Chess invests in “Chess Bonds”.

  161. gambiteer
    October 19th, 2012 at 15:54 | #161

    John Shaw :

    Gambiteer :
    @John Shaw
    I am waiting for your book on King’s Gambit and Sherlock new season with same eagerness. Any chance of a trailer(Table of Contents)?

    The Table of Contents is still subject to minor revisions. The main point being that I am not sure how many chapters 3…g5 will need. I keep thinking I do know the answer, but then a chapter swells so much it has to be split in two.

    Thank you very much for your kind reply.

  162. gambiteer
    October 19th, 2012 at 16:01 | #162

    Patrick :
    @Gambiteer
    No they are not. There have been many threads in the past on this topic. Quality Chess doesn’t do eBooks unlike Everyman because it’s too easy to distribute. With paperbacks and hardbacks, yeah, I could buy it, spend a year reading it, pass it off to my friend, he spends a year reading it, he passes it to another friend and spends a year reading it, etc.
    However, I can’t just re-produce the book and distribute across 500 people. With an eBook, while technically illegal, there is nothing that physically stops a person from distributing PGN, CBH, or even PDF files. Everyman mentions how it’s illegal on their site, and trust that their customers use the honor system. Most probably don’t, but that’s the difference between Everyman and Quality Chess. Everyman takes an “Optimistic” approach and trusts that people won’t cheat the system, even though they know that some will. They think that the availability will up sales enough to outweigh the illegal activity. Quality Chess takes a more “Pessimistic” approach, figuring if they don’t make it available, nobody can execute the illegal activity.
    Which is better? It depends. It’s like a guessing game. You’d have to figure out which leads to more money, and each book is different. Let’s say you made $8 profit on each paperback, $7 profit on each hardcover, and $12 profit on each eBook (They cost less for the publisher because no paper is used, so profit is higher).
    Now let’s say you have 25,000 people interested in that given book. Let’s say if they were only available in paperback and hardcover, 10,000 would buy the paperback, 5,000 would buy the hardcover, and 10,000 would say forget about it and buy another book on a similar topic that is available in eBook. You would get $8*10,000 + $7*5,000, or $115,000 in profits.
    Now let’s say you offer the eBook. Let’s say now that you sell 5,000 Paperbacks, 3,000 Hardcovers, 5,000 eBooks, and the other 12,000 cheat the system. You would get $8*5,000 + $7*3,000 + $12*5,000, or $40,000 + $21,000 + $60,000, or $121,000.
    In this hypothetical scenario, having the eBook would win, but that wouldn’t be true with all books, and having the eBook available would be the equivalent to Higher Risk, Higher Reward (due to lack of paper cost). Only paper copies is a “safer” but “slower” way to make money. With eBooks, they might make 4 times as much with GM Reps 3 thru 5 (English Opening), but take a major hit with GM Rep 10 (Tarrasch Defense). Quality Chess would rather have the “sure thing”. Everyman plays the “Chess Stock Market”. Quality Chess invests in “Chess Bonds”.

    If I have to guess your profession, I’ll say you are either an investment banker or a management consultant.

  163. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 19th, 2012 at 16:13 | #163

    I think with GM11 I will attempt to enjoy playing against sidelines. A thorough book with coverage on a vast majority of sidelines is probably quite helpful, especially a book of 504 pages. Since sidelines are less critical and generally less theoretical than main lines, perhaps if people play sidelines against me 95% of the time, they effectively reduce my need to prepare for main lines and can simply spend more time on sidelines, which is less tedious than, for example, the Najdorf Poisoned Pawn line with 10. f5 and 15. Ne4. Theoretically also it means if White does not want to fight for a += then that would be their problem, which if their opponent learns proper lines deeply and with new novelties for Torre, Colle, London, etc., then those who play sidelines might encounter grim positions repeatedly, if that is what they want as an exchange for avoiding theory. Maybe a psychological victory in that respect? 😀

  164. The Lurker
    October 19th, 2012 at 16:22 | #164

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Have you ever analyzed your past games to get a statistical breakdown of what you face most often as Black nowadays?

  165. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 19th, 2012 at 16:36 | #165

    @The Lurker

    As of now, no, but I remember doing an estimate years ago. I cannot remember the percentages exactly, but when I used to play the King’s Indian, if I counted my scoresheets correctly, I would play against Torre, Colle, London, etc., around 80% of the time when I was between 2100-2300. The majority of times I played against a main line King’s Indian was in more major tournaments where titled players and those above 2300 will obviously usually choose main lines.

    When I started playing the Grünfeld, the percentages were approximately similar.

    The Sicilian I have had the highest amount of sidelines. Probably 90% are sidelines between when I was 2100-2300. The majority of those who played the Open Sicilian against me were either above 2300 or titled players. I do not completely understand why to avoid main lines against lower rated players. Even if they are prepared, so should the other player, and avoiding a main line might avoid preparation but lead to a position which the player does not like. I had some 2100s play main lines against me, which I did not mind. I do not remember the last time losing to a lower rated in a main line, usually I lost in the main lines to those around my rating and above. I need to improve on sidelines because some 2100s have beaten me with them.

  166. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 19th, 2012 at 16:41 | #166

    For example, one time (the only time in my life) when I suddenly decided to play the Torre was against a 2100, because I was playing badly anyway so I decided to try a sideline. Even though I won, I did not like my position even after move 5, and wished I had played 2. c4. My opponent probably did not like his position either, but neither did I. Then I suppose the question converts itself into who dislikes their position the most will have a disadvantage. My opponent did not seem to know what he was doing, but neither did I, and the win was not enjoyable. I decided to play main lines always thereafter 😀

  167. The Lurker
    October 19th, 2012 at 16:50 | #167

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Sounds like the reason the 2300s play sidelines is because they assume that the lower-rated players will spend all their time booking up on main lines, and won’t be sufficiently prepared for sidelines!

    Call me crazy (or simply ignore me because I’m a rank amateur), but based on what you’ve said, if I were you, I’d spend about 80-90% of my opening prep time on sidelines, only about 10-20% on the mainlines.

    As for me, I’ve decided on the Modern for now. I already own a copy of the Tiger book, so I can start right away. And if I play it against 1. e4 players and drive them crazy, maybe I can get a gentlemen’s agreement to stop playing the Modern if they’ll play the Open against my Sicilians! Then, after Nessie makes her world debut, I can get GM 8/9/11 and expand the rep if I want.

  168. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 19th, 2012 at 18:20 | #168

    @The Lurker

    Probably it is logical to spend more time on sidelines since everyone sems to play them, but I often studied illogically back then :D. I remember spending days and weeks on the 10. f5 Najdorf Poisoned Pawn with 15. Ne4 or on the Perenyi Variation of the English Attack in the Najdorf and barely any time for sidelines, when I only played these theoretical positions in tournaments literally less than 1% of the time in my games. Studying sidelines was something like cleaning one’s room; one has to do it but one does not want to do it. So I could play 25-30 moves of the 15. Ne4 Najdorf Poisoned Pawn, but did not know much after five moves of the Torre, Colle, Trompowsky, or London.

    Of course with GM11 I hope to finally learn the theory of the sidelines and get good positions against them.

  169. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 19th, 2012 at 18:27 | #169

    Also this is incentive to surpass 2350 or however high the rating is where players basically stop playing sidelines. Avrukh wrote GM11, but I doubt his rating group, which is around 2600-2700 I think, will play Torre, Colle, London, etc. as often as my opponents did. Looking at the FIDE rating list, I cannot imagine Gelfand, Dreev, Tkachiev, Potkin, etc. playing Torre, Colle, London, etc. on a regular basis. I suppose that is one of the privileges of playing at 2350+/2400+/titled level.

  170. tony
    October 19th, 2012 at 18:38 | #170

    Blue Knight :
    @The Lurker
    No move order is the best. All the side lines are harmless if Black knows how answering. It’s just a matter of taste and what you play as main defense 1. d4… That’s all.

    I don’t really agree, after 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 d5 both the Torre and the London are completely harmless after 3.Bg5 Ne4 (I see Avrukh calls it “the Lame Torre)” and 3.Bf4 c5 4.e3 Nc6 5.c3 Qb6 (move order may vary)

  171. Patrick
    October 19th, 2012 at 18:51 | #171

    @gambiteer

    LOL – I do work for a bank, but I’m not an Investment Banker or Management Consultant. I’m a QA Analyst (QA = Quality Assurance). In essence, I write test scripts and execute them to test items coded by the Development Team, looking for Defects (kinda how I’m always looking for the Defects in my opponent’s play! :-))

    Oddly enough, I’ve only been doing this for 2 1/2 years. The 11 years prior to that, I was a Developer. Now instead of my code getting bashed by a list of defects, I do the bashing! 🙂

  172. Fight Club
    October 19th, 2012 at 23:16 | #172

    @The Lurker
    Ok, So you can play both d6 and e6 in the Sicilain I think it is really good now a days to know how to play both, 1. for a back up weapon for instance mixing the GM6 Sicialin with the Kan, and so your no so predictable. Another good reason is say like me say you have problems with the English attack and you know your opp. is going to play it, then I switch to the Kan where it is not effecticve. I am gueesing you are just playing for fun, a think that is what you said, so a local club and internet sites? One thing I have noticed while playing for free on the Internet, is at Chess.com I see anti-sicilian almost always while if you log into playchess.com as a guest you get to play some better players. Of course you don’t know who they are or what there ratings is, but I have an account on playchess.com and do not always feel like playing rated games, so I log in through chessbase light as a guest and play some games that way, I get more open sicilians and this is where I practice my openings, like the Najdorf, the Taimanov and the Kan. I have many games played in these variations that I can look back at, then look up a free database like 365chess.com and look at how I played the opening, where I made mistakes, and so on. I have no idea if you are already doing all of this, and if you are then good for you. Just incase you didn’t know of these free resources, playchess.com and ICC are the only paysites that I find worth it with a better level of play, which means they actually crack open a chess book at leaset once in a while.

    RE: Kaufman refuting the KID, if it where true all the top players would be playing his suggested lines, which they are not. And many of the top players still play the KID.

    Last but not least you may find yourself studying your main defense to 1.d4 more than 1.e4, just the mainlines, I see mainlines in the Grunfeld way more often than I do in the Sicilian. Bg5 lines are very popular as is the main line exchange with Bc4, Be3, and even 8.Rb1, I get to play against these lines more, than my main line sicilans. But Boris does a great job of covering all the annoying sidlelins within the Grunfeld complex! I personally find that 1.d4 players will play 2.c4 more than 1.e4 players will play 3.d4 going into the open sicilain. Really though look at how many books are out there suggestinf to avoid the open sicilan, a lot!!!

    That is why I am looking forward to Playing 1.e4 Grandmasters Guide and GM series by Jacob on the open Sicilian. This may spark interest in people playing the open sicilain again!

    If I were still an 1.e4 player my greatest joy would be playing against the sicilian and I would play it open, and take up the challenge!

  173. Michael
    October 19th, 2012 at 23:17 | #173

    Ok, So you can play both d6 and e6 in the Sicilain I think it is really good now a days to know how to play both, 1. for a back up weapon for instance mixing the GM6 Sicialin with the Kan, and so your no so predictable. Another good reason is say like me say you have problems with the English attack and you know your opp. is going to play it, then I switch to the Kan where it is not effecticve. I am gueesing you are just playing for fun, a think that is what you said, so a local club and internet sites? One thing I have noticed while playing for free on the Internet, is at Chess.com I see anti-sicilian almost always while if you log into playchess.com as a guest you get to play some better players. Of course you don’t know who they are or what there ratings is, but I have an account on playchess.com and do not always feel like playing rated games, so I log in through chessbase light as a guest and play some games that way, I get more open sicilians and this is where I practice my openings, like the Najdorf, the Taimanov and the Kan. I have many games played in these variations that I can look back at, then look up a free database like 365chess.com and look at how I played the opening, where I made mistakes, and so on. I have no idea if you are already doing all of this, and if you are then good for you. Just incase you didn’t know of these free resources, playchess.com and ICC are the only paysites that I find worth it with a better level of play, which means they actually crack open a chess book at leaset once in a while.

    RE: Kaufman refuting the KID, if it where true all the top players would be playing his suggested lines, which they are not. And many of the top players still play the KID.

    Last but not least you may find yourself studying your main defense to 1.d4 more than 1.e4, just the mainlines, I see mainlines in the Grunfeld way more often than I do in the Sicilian. Bg5 lines are very popular as is the main line exchange with Bc4, Be3, and even 8.Rb1, I get to play against these lines more, than my main line sicilans. But Boris does a great job of covering all the annoying sidlelins within the Grunfeld complex! I personally find that 1.d4 players will play 2.c4 more than 1.e4 players will play 3.d4 going into the open sicilain. Really though look at how many books are out there suggestinf to avoid the open sicilan, a lot!!!

    That is why I am looking forward to Playing 1.e4 Grandmasters Guide and GM series by Jacob on the open Sicilian. This may spark interest in people playing the open sicilain again!

    If I were still an 1.e4 player my greatest joy would be playing against the sicilian and I would play it open, and take up the challenge!

  174. Blue Knight
    October 20th, 2012 at 02:30 | #174

    About the Modern, it’s an quite interesting opening, you can play it against everything… but however, it is quite dangerous for Black. Even Shirov who played it often with brilliant results sometimes, gave it up after some bad and tough losses…

  175. Atticus
    October 20th, 2012 at 21:25 | #175

    @Jeffrey Boost Your Chess, Beyond The Basics, Chapter 19

  176. The Lurker
    October 20th, 2012 at 21:40 | #176

    @Blue Knight
    That’s OK for now. I’m looking for fun, sporting chess, not tournament points. If I need to add to my rep later, I will.

  177. Michael
    October 21st, 2012 at 01:10 | #177

    @The Lurker
    good Luck and have fun!
    🙂

  178. Jacob Aagaard
    October 21st, 2012 at 12:33 | #178

    @Patrick
    The way I see it is that income would be down with e-books and costs would be down. I think that the income for us would be about unchanged. However, the reason for this is that the payment to authors would be down and the cut taken by the shops would be down.

    Is this a good thing? I cannot see it.

    I do think that the future is digital and we will be there eventually. But we cannot like Everyman blunder into this market without knowing if it will work or not. Mark owns a number of companies and can take such risks. We rely entirely on our very low salary from Quality Chess. So, we have to do this more carefully, but hopefully also wiser, than Everyman.

  179. The Lurker
    October 21st, 2012 at 18:41 | #179

    I know a fellow chess geek who has quite an impressive collection of ebooks, including quite a few Quality Chess books. So it’s not like QC books aren’t out there in electronic form already. That being the case, I can’t see why QC doesn’t avail itself of this market.

    I know I personally wouldn’t have a problem paying for ebooks instead of hard copies, as long as the price difference made it worth my while. And I wouldn’t have to wait for the books to get out of the print shops, across the pond, and to Amazon or Barnes & Nobles. Maybe you could set up a system where buyers get a year’s worth of free email updates about any line that gets busted, or something like that, as added value.

  180. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 21st, 2012 at 19:34 | #180

    I do not think the market or the prices are the problem, but the issue of people purchasing one copy and distributing them en masse.

    But the digital world is already too big, what will happen to people like me who never read e-books and only have physical copies of books? Turning pages of paper is a joy of reading.

    I hope physical books never become extinct, since that will not only make reading more difficult for those who want physical books, but other aspects might become more digital. Maybe I am the only one who washes and dries clothes manually now, or washes dishes without a dishwater, but I rather keep it that way, just like physical books.

  181. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 21st, 2012 at 19:38 | #181

    I am also impatient about receiving books, but I would rather wait longer for the physical book than e-book, but that is just my feeling. Or if I am very desperate to read it, maybe I would even consider buying both the e-book and the physical book to read the e-book in the time required to ship the physical book then switch 😀

  182. Gambiteer
    October 22nd, 2012 at 08:02 | #182

    @Jacob Aagaard
    Probably, one way to see if ebooks work as a business proposition is to test the waters with one series or a few books.

    Or Provide an option to buyers to pre-order ebook version of a yet-to-be-released book. You may see higher initial revenue but in the long run, revenue will go down significantly compared to paperprint. You can do a cost-benefit analysis by trying this option with a book (preferably with King’s Gambit by John Shaw 😉 )

  183. Jacob Aagaard
    October 22nd, 2012 at 09:18 | #183

    @The Lurker
    We have a newsletter and your friend is a thief.

  184. Jacob Aagaard
    October 22nd, 2012 at 09:19 | #184

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Unfortunately I think you will find that paper books will be hard to come by in the future. Already Newsweek will stop being a paper publication soon…

  185. Jacob Aagaard
    October 22nd, 2012 at 09:20 | #185

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I could easily see a system where buying both would cost 125% of the cost of buying either, but I am not sure what set-up we will end with.

  186. Jacob Aagaard
    October 22nd, 2012 at 09:23 | #186

    @Gambiteer
    There is no way we will send the original files out to people. The guy saying his friend has e-books from QC is talking about scanned books where you can see that they are copies and stolen. People who do this should continue to look at this, like a mirror.

    I am on a lower wage than some of our employees. I worked for four years without pay to build up this company. If you have a friend that proudly tells you he has our books in digital format, I suggest you “unfriend” him in the same way you would any other criminal.

    I do think we will have something digital to offer in 6-12 months, but until then I ask people to obey the law and not steal from people who are making less than you are.

  187. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 15:29 | #187

    @Jacob Aagaard
    He’s not really a friend, and yes, he is a thief. I wasn’t trying to argue otherwise.

    That does not change the truth of the point that I was trying to make; electronic copies of QC books are already out there for those who want them. That being the case, since you can’t stop them from circulating anyway, why not try to profit from the demand for them? That’s all I was trying to say.

  188. Jacob Aagaard
    October 22nd, 2012 at 15:38 | #188

    @The Lurker
    I essentially agree. Good to know he is not your friend…

  189. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 15:51 | #189

    @Jacob Aagaard
    I think that “timeless” works will continue to be printed; e.g. Shakespeare or other canonical literature. Works that have a more limited lifespan, perhaps not so much; e.g. a book on the latest novelties in the Najdorf. Ephemera like Newsweek? Who cares? Apparently not enough of their readership.

  190. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 22nd, 2012 at 15:53 | #190

    @Jacob Aagaard

    I surely hope not. I want books with paper and a cover. I still have a typewriter and two rotary dial telephones in the house. The old ways of doing things still work. Just as I want to keep using dish soap and a towel to wash my dishes instead of a mechanical dishwasher, I want to be able to look in my postbox, open the parcel, and remove the chess book to turn the pages.

    Going to Waterstones and Blackwells I find more enjoyable than going to search online for e-books, but that is just my opinion. Likewise, if I lived closer to a chess book shop I would visit to browse physical books.

    What happens also to those who never learnt computers or do not want to? For example, one’s grandparents, if they were born in the 1910s, might not want to take the time to learn computing, that does not mean they should not have the alternative method of reading chess books with pages instead.

  191. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 16:06 | #191

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Give it a few more generations, and there will be nobody left alive who does not use a computer as easily as you read a book. For children nowadays, life without the Internet is as inconceivable as life without electricity would be to us.

  192. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 22nd, 2012 at 16:13 | #192

    @The Lurker

    Mostly anyone over 50 whom I know do not use computers, or if they do very sporadically and not for important things, and some never care to learn. I still have a radio in the house that works and is used, even though it was built before I was born.

    Electricity is easy to avoid during the daytime though. Even here it is late afternoon (16h15) in the UK the overcast skies still allow sufficient light to enter the room so that I can read and write properly without lights. In summer if you live in Sweden, especially in Östersund, or in Trondheim in Norway, I think they have sun at midnight 😀

  193. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 16:28 | #193

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    My father was always perversely proud that he never had anything to do with computers. But he has passed on, and was part of a dying breed.

    My mother, on the other hand, is in her 70s, and uses her computer daily, for work and hobby.

    Like I said, just give it time. I foresee that most books will only be available in electronic format of some sort, and if you want a hard copy, you will have to send a copy of the PDF (or whatever) to an on-demand printer / bookbinder, and have the hard copy shipped to you.

  194. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 22nd, 2012 at 16:36 | #194

    @The Lurker

    Or hopefully QC still offer hardcovers in 2050 :).

    But I do not like reading chess books, or any very long documents, on a computer since it hurts my eyes and is much easier to turn pages instead of using the clicker button to scroll down and read. If I read a long document on a computer, it feels as if one had played video games for 7 hours continuously, but that is just my feeling. If I need information I rather go to the library instead.

    What happens if one stores all of their chess books on the laptop, and loses the laptop (which includes the memory card)? That would be the equivalent of having a bookshelf of 100 chess books and somehow all 100 of them disappeared instantaneously. At least if I lose (or accidentally break) a book, it is only one.

  195. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 16:47 | #195

    I’m not saying that hard books will go away completely. But even though most people will complain that things aren’t built the way they used to be, they won’t spend extra money to buy things that are built the way they used to be. Which, of course, is why things are no longer built like they used to be. 😉

    I prefer hard copy books for many things, such as just sitting down and reading. For things that require that I use my computer while reading (e.g. books that teach programming), I prefer a PDF format looks like a book (paginated), not like a web page (continuous). (It’s ironic that computers and the Internet have taken technology from books back to scrolls, isn’t it?) And if the document is too long, I sometimes print it out to read.

    What happens if a laptop crashes or is lost? That’s why God invented backups!

  196. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 17:14 | #196

    Speaking of chess books… I was going through my books to get together my desired White rep. I would like to play 1. e4 and go towards a Spanish against 1…e5. (I know it’s a lot of work, but I don’t want to wuss out with sidelines as White.) I have a beginner’s survey, a book on playing against non-Morphy deviations by Black, one on everything up ’til the Worrall, one on the Open, one on the Marshall and anti-Marshalls, and one on the main lines (all hard copies, bought and paid for :-)). But except for the survey and the Open book, every deviation by Black from the main line between 5. O-O and 8. c3 is pretty much a blank. Any suggestions?

  197. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 17:26 | #197

    Now that think about it, the hole is probably more like every Black deviation from 5. O-O all the ways to the main lines.

  198. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 22nd, 2012 at 17:38 | #198

    I’m not a luddite on any level, but do not care at all for digital readers and e-books. I think one thing I enjoy a lot with physical books that is not possible with digital is not only having multiple tomes open to multiple pages simultaneously but the tactile sensations that come from the physicality of turning pages. I also like the look of books on shelves and magazines on tables … easier to show off what one is reading! 😉

    Physical books are not going anywhere anytime soon, despite Newsweek pulling the plug on their already failing enterprise of printing that rapidly-declining rag.

  199. Andre
    October 22nd, 2012 at 18:08 | #199

    My thoughts on the topic, in random order:

    a) Ebooks will replace printed books in the volume segment. Even in the rather low volume chess market.

    b) There will always be a place for paper books. They make a better gift and you can read them on the crapper.

    c1) Printed books may become an optional service.
    c2) Or ebooks may become the de facto standard, apart from a small print run for release.

    d) I doubt the successful ebook formats will include DRM or CP of any kind. The surviving companies will have to find a way to sell enough ebooks in formats based on pgn or cbh to make a decent business.

    e) As of today ebook marketing is in the stone age. The same asking price for paperback and ebook? How creative.

    f) There’s A LOT to be learned from the current changes in the computer game industry. In short: Retail is dying. The publishers (1) are aggressively trying to establish their own download channels but (2) are also selling through competing channels to improve market penetration.
    Keywords for trends:
    – Steam Sale
    – Royal Indie Bundle
    – “Pay what you want”
    – pre-order boni
    – selling publisher catalogs. $2.50 for an ebook isn’t much. But how about 50 books for $2.00 each? In case of computer games it turned out that many gamers are willing to “collect” digital back catalog titles without actually playing them. Maybe a d4 player would buy the e4 GM Reps too for a few bucks ?! Hard to say, but there’s still a lot of room for experiments.

    g) Or why not give the old edition away for a symbolic price, or maybe even for a free site registration, a month before the new edition comes out? Everyman definitely should have done this with Play the French.

  200. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 22nd, 2012 at 18:26 | #200

    Despite being under 40, most people older than 40 probably know computing and technology better than I, so my stance is always for the manual method of doing things. A handwritten letter feels better than an e-mail or text message, and I feel that I wash dishes more thoroughly than a dishwasher, for example.

    If somehow in 2040 or 2050 chess book prices increase due to a smaller market and the increase in digital technology for books, I am desperate enough to pay £50 for a good hardback chessbook, or at least, if pensions allow for such 😀

  201. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 18:27 | #201

    Andre :e) As of today ebook marketing is in the stone age. The same asking price for paperback and ebook? How creative.

    I definitely agree with this one. Ebooks should be less. After all, it’s not like I’m buying paper or ink. And some computer book publishers recognize this. Manning has a system that allows the purchaser of a hard book to download the electronic version for free.

  202. student
    October 22nd, 2012 at 19:25 | #202

    Dear Jacob, I am also a bridge player and they have an interesting e-book format on Bridge Base Online (the most popular online bridge server). It goes like this: you can buy an ebook but you can only read it if you are logged into their server. It is an interesting format and not trivial to copy it. Of course you could, in principle, give your user name to someone else but then you can’t read the book when they are. Needless to say, this kind of service falls short of actually giving full access to a book so one should charge less than a full book but it might be worth a try?

  203. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 22nd, 2012 at 19:43 | #203

    Andre :
    My thoughts on the topic, in random order:
    a) Ebooks will replace printed books in the volume segment. Even in the rather low volume chess market.

    I believe this has already happened … at least for the largest player in the game, Amazon ….

    You make good and salient points with your other statements as well and I agree 99 44/100ths … 🙂

  204. Patrick
    October 22nd, 2012 at 20:23 | #204

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    Rotary Phones? No Dish Washer? No Washing Machine? I was wondering. Do you use Candles instead of Light Bulbs? Outhouses instead of bathrooms? Horse and Carriage instead of a car? Finger Prick Blood instead of ink? I know of a group of people you’d feel right at home with if you wanted to move here to the United States, specifically those that speak Pennsylvania German or Pennsylvania Dutch! 🙂

    Welcome to the 18th century!

    Jacob, in your case, I can easily see your concern about eBooks, but I think you stretch it a little. Yes, people do illegally copy. However, at least here in the United States, it’s not like a whole bunch of people open up an eBook distribution center. You might have 3 or 4 friends share with each other. 3 or 4 more friends from another area of the country share. Etc Etc. So instead of selling 4 paperbacks, you sold 1 e-book. However, there are also those that will only buy eBooks, and those people will offset a portion of sales lost due to eBook distribution. So like you said, probably a wash long term. You simply end up with a different audience instead.

    I’ll be honest, I barely just started studying eBooks, which I have 5 or 6 right now, all by Everyman. However, eBooks are harder to take to tournaments. So when I’m between rounds, and don’t feel like going all the way back to the hotel room, I grab a book and study in the skittle area. Great time to study a game from a game collection, bio book, or middlegame book.

    I find eBooks to be more effective for Opening Books than I do for any other book. Maybe I’ll pick up a middlegame eBook in another 10 years!

  205. The Lurker
    October 22nd, 2012 at 20:37 | #205

    @Patrick
    In fairness to Jacob, all that has to happen is for one of the 3 or 4 friends you mention to upload his copy to a filesharing site located in Outer Elbonia, and then it is out there. All anyone would then have to do is google the name of the book, and he could get a free copy of it.

    The point is not that Jacob will get ripped off if he sells electronic versions of his books. The point is that he is already getting ripped off, whether he sells electronic versions or not.

  206. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 22nd, 2012 at 20:40 | #206

    @Patrick

    No, I feel my dishes are cleaner if I wash them manually, and a washing machine and dryer is expensive. Similarly some may study better with a physical chess book, or enjoy better a book with pages. Sometimes old ways are preferable by some due to familiarity or comfortability. At least our rotary telephone is only used for answering now and not dialing. And I am not sure that the Amish use phones anyway? 🙂

    I am sure the train culture in the States is very different than here in Britain (Although the train is blasted expensive I find, but that is another subject), where a train from here in Manchester to London, which is basically one half the “vertical” distance of England only probably takes 3,5 to 4 hours, or Manchester to Liverpool, the Beatles capital in 50 minutes, I am sure in the States that would be impossible to get from one end to another in that time, as even when I took the train in Canada, a similarly sized but larger country, on holiday 3 hours barely got me to another county within the same province.

    In that case, I brought chess books with me with which to read. I enjoyed passing the hours flipping the pages instead of worrying about taking out my laptop (which unfortunately only has about 6 minutes left of battery) and trying to read an e-book on the train. It simply feels nice to have a tangible copy of the book with three dimensions, especially which with to fill a bookshelf for easy reference at home.

    Despite being under 30, I am extremely bad with computers and any technological equipment, already accidentally breaking around 5-6 of my own personal computers since 1999 (my first computer). Clicking and typing is probably all I need to do, and likewise I suppose it feels more comfortable for me to read books the “old fashioned” way.

  207. Michael Agermose Jensen
    October 22nd, 2012 at 21:08 | #207

    Books are more than a string of 0’s and 1’s. Reading a book on a screen is only using one of your senses. Reading should be a physical sensation, leafing though the pages, sensing the smell of fresh ink, feeling the quality paper between your fingers. “Print is dead” has been declared at least since the eighties. I recently at work heard one moronic reseracher with a degree in communication repeating the statement as he was pontificating to us all how he was in sync with the “digital generation” (his words). Of course this was all hot air. Big books should be, well, big! I fully expect Nessie to be “big” when she finally surfaces from the depths and not just some apparition or file of 0110111001001.

  208. Jacob Aagaard
    October 22nd, 2012 at 21:55 | #208

    @Michael Agermose Jensen
    Latest estimate is 750-800 pages…

  209. Michael
    October 22nd, 2012 at 23:32 | #209

    Personally most of the ebooks I do have I also have in paperback! There is something about a real book in your hand, a real chess board in front of you. We are plugged into the web, and tv and all the digital world all day long, one of life’s great pleasures is to disapear into a room with just a book and you imagination with novels and a chesboard with chess books, doubt this will disapear as soon as everybody thinks.

    Long live the Hardcover and the paperbacks!

    This is not to say that I do not so a lot of my chess studies and reading on the computer, I do, but I love my chess books! Like someone else would collect anything they love.

  210. Jacob Aagaard
    October 23rd, 2012 at 09:53 | #210

    @Michael
    I cannot see that paper will go out of fashion. Radio once was king; now it is the Duke…

  211. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 23rd, 2012 at 13:43 | #211

    The poll is showing comfortably more than 50% of voters want physical chess books, which is a good thing…

    I am an old fashioned person in my twenties, but I am proof that there still are those in my generation who prefer physical books and paper for communication and writing/reading. Before I had my first computer, I used a typewriter until the year 1999 🙂

    Regarding chess, I see people also use electronic scoresheets with which to notate their games. I tried it once, but it did not suit me. I prefer to write my moves with pen and paper, but perhaps that is me, since when I tried it once in the Canadian Open, I required three or four attempts each move to move the pieces on the electronic board as notating. Technology seems to be a problem for me in all aspects, so it is unsurprising that I prefer manual methods.

  212. ray
    October 23rd, 2012 at 14:51 | #212

    Hey QC guys you seem to be busy thse days by the way truly loved ur indian defenses helped me serve some aces in a local tournament ! while preparing for the games i found a few very interesting ideas missing for example Giri’s Be6 in the grunfeld against moro also grischuks 8…Na5 in samisch gambit instead of 8…Ne5 But of course cant cover everything

    Over all Loved THE BOOK !!
    Happy Customer 🙂 ( As always )

  213. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 23rd, 2012 at 15:31 | #213

    Jacob Aagaard :
    @Michael Agermose Jensen
    Latest estimate is 750-800 pages…

    Let me go find some supports for my book shelf …

    On another note, an old prophecy predicts a violent end for Inverness if the monster is ever captured.

  214. The Lurker
    October 23rd, 2012 at 15:49 | #214

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    It’s no wonder you prefer pieces of wood on a board over an XBox or Wii. 😛

  215. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 23rd, 2012 at 16:31 | #215

    @Jacob Aagaard

    So does that mean there are two volumes of the King’s Gambit or will this be one book that is simply larger than Avrukh’s GM2?

  216. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 23rd, 2012 at 16:40 | #216

    @The Lurker

    Regarding losing or breaking laptops accidentally, I still have not learnt properly how to do a backup. The first time I tried was probably in 2006, but I still do not know how to do it. But if I have a paper and cover book this will not be a problem 🙂

  217. The Lurker
    October 23rd, 2012 at 22:33 | #217

    If you have an external hard disk (USB or what have you), then I would recommend getting something like LapLink DiskImage. You put in the CD, reboot, and the computer reboots to an operating system on the CD. Then you run the DiskImage program, which creates a backup file of your laptop’s hard disk(s), which it stores somewhere else (like the external hard disk I recommend). This backs up *EVERYTHING*, hidden operating system files and all. If you have a problem, you go through a similar procedure, except you restore from, instead of back up to, the external hard disk. Easy peasy. 😉

  218. Jacob Aagaard
    October 24th, 2012 at 07:33 | #218

    @ray
    We will include them in the newsletter at some point.

  219. Jacob Aagaard
    October 24th, 2012 at 07:35 | #219

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    One book; no cop-outs!

  220. Patrick
    October 24th, 2012 at 15:00 | #220

    LOL – King’s Gambit

    I still to this day have little to no respect for the King’s Gambit from White’s perspective (with pretty much nothing but wins as Black, the majority of them via 1.f4 e5 2.e4, but a few 1.e4 e5 2.f4 instances). I just looked at the preview, and the fact that the game on page 263 is “Game 2” and the game that starts on page 266 is “Game 2” is a sign of what playing the King’s Gambit does to the mind!

  221. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 24th, 2012 at 15:36 | #221

    @Jacob Aagaard

    So how much will the hardcover King’s Gambit book weigh? Or at least will it be under 6 kg? 😀

    I actually would not mind if King’s Gambit were delayed slightly more so that Playing the French was given more focus. Perhaps it is time to construct an updated publishing schedule?

  222. The Lurker
    October 24th, 2012 at 16:23 | #222

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Be quiet, you! There are plenty of new French books out. John should be locked in a high tower with no view of the outside world until Nessie is finished!

  223. Jacob Aagaard
    October 24th, 2012 at 16:30 | #223

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    @The Lurker
    Not related projects; no overlap at all.

  224. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 24th, 2012 at 17:40 | #224

    @The Lurker

    I am not sure where you are located, but according to Google Maps, I am 616 km away from Loch Ness. Maybe I should go check? 😀

    Yes I know there are many books for the French. But one more is also good. Anyway I am still trying to understand how much this possibly 800 page book will look, and weigh, as well. I have hardcover books that are more than 800 pages, but they are not chess books, but textbooks 🙂

  225. The Lurker
    October 24th, 2012 at 19:20 | #225

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I have phone books that are less than 800 pages, I think. 😉

  226. Andre
    October 24th, 2012 at 19:28 | #226

    The Lurker :
    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I have phone books that are less than 800 pages, I think.

    But probably with less diagrams too. 😉

  227. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 24th, 2012 at 20:27 | #227

    @The Lurker

    I have GM6 with the old paper, so it is quite large. I suppose King’s Gambit with the new paper, if 800 pages, will be around that size, but I wonder how the King’s Gambit could have more pages than Avrukh covering a repertoire for all systems that do not start with 1. d4 d5 🙂

  228. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 24th, 2012 at 20:28 | #228

    Sorry, above should be GM2.

    Maybe when winter holidays arrive I should take the train up to Inverness and see if there are any sightings 😀

  229. Patrick
    October 24th, 2012 at 20:40 | #229

    Gilchrist is a Legend :@The Lurker
    I have GM6 with the old paper, so it is quite large. I suppose King’s Gambit with the new paper, if 800 pages, will be around that size, but I wonder how the King’s Gambit could have more pages than Avrukh covering a repertoire for all systems that do not start with 1. d4 d5

    Easy, one’s a complete work, the other is a repertoire, one answer for each Black Line.

    Since the overrated Najdorf (overrated in that everybody thinks it’s that much better than anything else when in reality, it’s simply another defense available to Black) gets tons of publicity, maybe a complete work on the Najdorf in 1 Volume should be next in the works. It should be about 4000 pages! 🙂

    800 pages just means that there are that many more busted lines for White. My favorite is 2…Bc5, which I mated an 1800 in 11 moves, beat a 2100 in 13 moves (an f4-player that answered my 1…e5 with 2.e4, so probably not a KG-Guru), and defeated many others anywhere ranging from 20 to 80+ moves, though by move 40, if not before that, I’ve usually got a winning endgame, and it just a matter of finishing him off, which can be time consuming in say those pawn-up Rook endings!

  230. FM To Be
    October 25th, 2012 at 05:55 | #230

    GRANDMASTER PREPARATION – ATTACKING PLAY

    In principle I would like you to produce such a book, but thinking about it, what could you put there that is not already covered by your “Attacking Manuals” & “Grandmaster Preparation – Calculation”?

  231. Gambiteer
    October 25th, 2012 at 08:00 | #231

    I’m wondering if working on chess books is hindrance to author’s chess career or it helps them in their preparation.

  232. John Johnson
    October 25th, 2012 at 11:47 | #232

    Spare yourself Gilchrist no sightings of fewmets. Nessie has gone dormant again.

  233. Shurlock Ventriloquist
    October 25th, 2012 at 15:57 | #233

    Some KG/Nessie facts:

    (1) There is more water in Loch Ness than all the other lakes in England, Scotland and Wales put together and this book will have more pages than all the other QC books combined.

    (2) It is said that the loch never freezes and John Shaw never sleeps and this is true.

    (3) It is around twenty two and a half miles long and between one and one and a half miles wide, a depth of 754 feet with the bottom of the book being as flat as a bowling green.

  234. Jacob Aagaard
    October 25th, 2012 at 16:32 | #234

    @FM To Be
    There is a big difference between combinations and attack. One guy I work with is a monster with combinations and a bambi in attacking positions.

  235. Jacob Aagaard
    October 25th, 2012 at 16:33 | #235

    @Gambiteer
    If you do not work seriously and try to discover new things in the process, it is a hinderence. But if you do, it is an asset.

  236. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 25th, 2012 at 16:34 | #236

    Are you sure? I am a six hour train journey from Inverness, maybe Nessie swam towards the North Sea now?

    However, I am more interested in the GM11 and French book still, perhaps because I do not play the King’s Gambit and if I played 1. e4 e5 no one seems to have played it against me, but a Najdorf multi-volume pack of books would be quite interesting. I am not sure if anyone would finish writing (or reading) them though.

    @John Johnson

    @Shurlock Ventriloquist

  237. The Lurker
    October 25th, 2012 at 19:36 | #237

    @Jacob Aagaard
    I’ve always thought of an attack as a combination that leads to mate. Maybe that’s why I can only see short and obvious attacks?

  238. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 25th, 2012 at 20:22 | #238

    @Jacob Aagaard

    What is your psychological response to playing against the Torre, Colle, London, etc. as well as if you play Sicilian and you have on the board the Grand Prix, Closed Sicilian, 2. c3, 2. Qe2, 2. d3, any of those systems with 2. Nf3 d6/e6 and 3. c3, etc. and how to psychologically prepare and play against thenm? I think a chess book on preparation should include this topic. However at grandmaster level these systems are probably much less frequent.

  239. John Johnson
    October 25th, 2012 at 21:31 | #239

    I thought Loch Ness was on the western side and emptied into the Irish Sea. At any rate Gilchrist rouse the monster!

  240. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 25th, 2012 at 22:05 | #240

    @John Johnson

    According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Morayfirthmap.png), the lake flows towards Inverness, and then to the Moray Firth.

    But QC’s offices are in Glasgow–Inverness is not that far away for a short journey. Although of course going to Inverness might compound the delay of the book 😀

  241. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 26th, 2012 at 21:04 | #241

    Looking at the Table of Contents, probably for me, Chapters 21, 22, and 23 are most important. I would estimate that Chapters 21, 22, and 23 comprise 40% of the games I have had to play for the last few tournaments I had, including games for both Black and White 😀

    I am anticipating the publication which is exactly in 2 weeks (9 November) of the fifth Avrukh GM Repertoire book–I feel that I will have to use it quite more than other opening books due to opponents liking these systems…

  242. Michael
    October 27th, 2012 at 00:17 | #242

    And don’t forget GM6a is really important!!
    I tried out some other sicilains like tha Taimanov and the Kan, but had to return to my Beloved Najdorf and Scheveningen. And have found my self happier with 2…d6 vs. things like the delayed c3 sicilian with Nf3 first, whats this called? The delayed Alapin? Something like that! Any way really want to get my hands on both the GM6 books, this is one of the most interesting and exciting openings to play, and when chess stays interesting I stay interested! And I like these more open complicated positions in the Najdof/Schevy positions as to the Bind type positions I find in some other sicilians, I always think if I have to lose do I want fast lose with a tactical blow or have my opp. torture me with some kind of bind while they turn the screws tighter and tighter, until your position finally falls apart.
    I find that the latter happens to me in the Kan and sometimes the Taimanov, The Najdorf if I lose I usually go down fighting!

    And yes!!! GM11 will be such a needed adition to my rep. These 1.d4 lines are getting on my nerves and I do not want to play it safe and stop their counterplay, I want to as Boris says in his intro fight for the win, like Ne4 against the Tromp!

  243. Michael
    October 27th, 2012 at 00:21 | #243

    GM6!!!
    🙂

  244. Michael
    October 27th, 2012 at 01:48 | #244

    GM11!!!
    🙂

  245. Michael
    October 27th, 2012 at 01:59 | #245

    Just a heads up to all the QC fans and chess players here on this blog. I just recieved my copy of Chess Evolution the Blue 3rd book by Yusupov and I got a added bonus treat on top of these being fantastic books, there rep given for black vs. the English in on e of the chapters based on the move 1…e6 which I think is great because I was thinking my back-up defense to my Gunfeld could be th QGD which this can tanspose into and in an earlier book there is also a QGD rep. for black. And then there is also a chapter with a black rep. to meet the Reti based on

    1. Nf3 d5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 Bf5 4. O-O e6 5. d3 h6 and reatreating the LSB to h7

    So a great book just in itself, but also a very needed rep, to counter the English and the Reti, all the other opening like 1.b3 you can play with some common chess sense but I find it is important to have a good anwer to both the English and the Reti…

    Just a heads up, this has really helped me fill in my Opening Rep!!!

    Great book!!!

    🙂

  246. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 27th, 2012 at 12:45 | #246

    I am not sure where you sre, but if living in the UK I am sure you could get GM11 within the first week of publication. I hope to read it around 13 November or so 😀

    @Michael

  247. John Johnson
    October 27th, 2012 at 13:44 | #247

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    It will be Christmas time before it lands in Florida I think.

  248. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 27th, 2012 at 16:24 | #248

    @John Johnson

    I do not think it would, if you order GM11 from any European chess store, such as London Chess Centre, ChessDirect, Schachversand, New In Chess, Svenska Schachbutiken, etc. I am not sure exactly how long shipping would take, but I doubt more than 2 weeks.

  249. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 27th, 2012 at 16:25 | #249

    @John Johnson

    And of course, QC ship their websales directly from Glasgow as well. And according to my experience they usually receive the books the following Monday after publication, in this case of GM11 my guess would be Monday 12th November..

  250. Michael
    October 27th, 2012 at 21:25 | #250

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I live in the the United Sates, so I will get it a little bit latter than you, but I will still get it soon I hope and that is all that matters.

    In my above post I left out, the Reti line for black, if white plays c4 we take and then if Qa4+ the c6 then as in the following line

    Nf3 d5 2. g3 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Bg2 dxc4 5. Qa4 c6 6. Qxc4 b5 7. Qc2 Bb7 striving for a c5 break. again just a heads up for anyone intersted.

    I just preorderd GM Prep form the QC website so am deciding how I should buy GM11, either here, or NIC most likely, I think amazon said something like they will not have it until January!!!

    So Maybe next month I hope!

    I have a feeling it is going to be fantastic!!!
    🙂

  251. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 27th, 2012 at 22:06 | #251

    @Michael

    Post from the UK to North America should probably average about one week I would think, of course with fluctuations for each case. And QC usually receive their books the Monday after the publication date (which is usually a Friday). So when they post them the shipping time already starts on that week with the Monday.

    Avrukh already wrote GM Repertoire on the Grünfeld, and now GM11 I suppose will cover every other deviation from the Grünfeld proper, so basically I think of it as GM 8 and 9 then GM11 is basically a repertoire against 1. d4 for Black. Avrukh is my favourite author with the “mathematical” style he uses in the books, which should probably suit especially any science/engineering graduate 😀

  252. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 27th, 2012 at 22:07 | #252

    @Michael

    Also I figured that the location was somewhere in the Americas since I typed the first post today at 12h45 UK time, which is about 4h45 Vancouver/Los Angeles time, or 7h45 Toronto/New York/Miami time, I doubt anyone wants to wake up extremely early and post on a forum so early on a Saturday morning 🙂

  253. Michael
    October 27th, 2012 at 23:40 | #253

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Northern California…That is where I live, I agree GM8,9 and now GM11 are a complete rep for 1.d4 and it will be nice to have the whole rep written by Boris…He is a great chess writer and really goes deep into the lines he suggests. I am hoping GM11 sells really well, so that Boris will do another book on the black side of the English and Reti, and offbeat stuff like the 1.b3, 1.f4 and all the off-beat openings. Of course it should sell very well, seeing as everbody loves to play these 1.d4 sidleines!
    🙂

  254. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 28th, 2012 at 00:47 | #254

    @Michael

    It is 01h00 now but yes I hope Avrukh does another book, especially GM Repertoire series. I have said this before, but I think a Breyer GM Repertoire book would be ideal. If not, then at least a Grandmaster Guide book. Grandmasters generally seem to know how to play against sidelines well, much better than I can. They probably do not play against sidelines much anyway, but when they do, players of the calibre of Avrukh seem to make one not want to play sidelines again 😀

  255. Michael
    October 28th, 2012 at 01:33 | #255

    And that is the hope is to start beating up these sidleline players making think about trying some mainlines, I also think that the books GM Guide 1.e4 and Jacob’s GM book on the open Sicilian might get some chess players intersted in the main lines. When I think about all these chess players chosing the London and the Grand Prix, I notice how many books there are out there telling people to not play mainlines but to play something more like a system, there are a lot of books pushing these sidelines, of course I am not talking about QC, but Im sure you have seen them to…

    Play x and win, or beat the x with x and so on…

    So now we will learn the sidelines and come prepared to do battle, and knowing Boris the lines he chooses are always exiting, for instance Ne4 against the Tromp! And we have ourselves a possible sharp, dynamic interesting game, with lots of chances to take over the game if white does not fight for the advantage.

    At GM level there are called sidelines, because at that level they really are not that good, but under GM and they are pretty popular, and maybe when someone plays these lines against someone like Boris or Jacob, there is a little smile inside them…
    🙂

  256. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 28th, 2012 at 15:52 | #256

    So grandmasters feel relief when they have to play against a sideline, but under 2300s feel relief when they play against main lines? Either that is why they are grandmasters, or they are simply very good at playing against sidelines. However I still see people who are under 2300 play sidelines against titled players. Somehow navigating through playing sidelines is more difficult to me than playing against the 6. Bg5 Najdorf, even if I am completely unprepared.

    I think ICC had (I am unsure now since I have not been there for a long time) thematic tournaments, whereby all players had a set opening on their board, for both White and Black. For example, the Sicilian Najdorf 6. Bg5, or the Alekhine-Chatard. The opening moves are therefore essentially chosen for both players in each round of the tournament, which I think is interesting. They should have those tournaments for FIDE 😀

  257. Michael
    October 28th, 2012 at 21:47 | #257

    I thought they did have theme touraments, maybe I am not remebering correctly. I play in theme touraments every day online, called the Colle and the 2.f4 Sicilian!!!

    Pretty funny actaully somteimes I wonder from what book are these players chosing there reps from because they all seem to be playing the same thing, and Wow!!!
    Do I see the Marshall Defense way to often 1.d4 d5 2c4 Nf6? on lower rated players you can set up the Greak Gift Sac. and on higher rated opp. it’s like there trying to get to a Grunfeld, but with the Knight on b6, which as a Grunfeld player myself I do not like to block my c5 push. Oh well…

    For me it’s much more about wanting to feel challenged and a fighter on the other side of the board, I am put to the test in the main lines of the English Attack and 6.Bg5 then playing against sidelines that seem boring and I know that there are a couple opf reasons they are playing them, lazy, they really would rather be playing checkers! (Kidding), or they are on purpose trying to get you out of book. Which for me is boring with lower rated players, but when an I plays say the Bird 1.f4 or 2.d3 against my sicilain that can be very exciting too, because now I know he is just trying to out play me without any of my prep. And this makes the games very exciting to me!!!

    I think if you don’t want to play sidelines the best thing to do is chose not the most popular line say for instance the Bg5 against the Grunfeld, or chosing to play the a really good Anti-Sicilan, like Bb5 or something like that. But what do I know, my personal feeling is you play whatever keeps you interested in the game, So then for me I play main lines and don’t mind that I have to check in with chesspub, and this blog to see if evaluations of lines have changed I find it a lot of fun. Some people including my first teacher did not like this at all, and would stick to System type openings, which worked great for him he was a positional player and like to sqeeze his opp. until they cracked. My style is totally different, I am looking for a street fight!

    Kasparov has my favorite style, and I play many of the same opening. He came to the board to do battle…I love it!
    🙂

  258. Michael
    October 28th, 2012 at 21:50 | #258

    Exuse me…Correction from above..When they play the Bird, not me! 🙂

  259. Michael
    October 28th, 2012 at 21:51 | #259

    Meant to say when a IM play the Bird or 2.d3 against me!

  260. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 28th, 2012 at 22:58 | #260

    @Michael

    My chess teacher taught me to always play the main lines since I started tournaments, I played I remember my first game with the Slav when I was 1300 ELO I drew a 1800 in the gambit line 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. e4 when I followed the theory to past move 15 and I thought this is not that difficult if one actually studies the theory, for any opening. So when I was 1500 I played 1. e4 with the Open Sicilian, Spanish Main Line with 9. h3, etc., and the Taimanov Sicilian for 1. e4 and Slav for 1. d4. Learning the main lines enriched my chess and probably that is why I continued to play…

  261. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 28th, 2012 at 23:03 | #261

    The few times I did not play main lines were only in extremely select cases when I knew that I had to play an opponent who would probably spend one week preparing with computer analyses and databases, and opening books, and played 1…g6. Only in those cases would I play something different, but never regularly. For example, I knew an opponent who often prepares excessively so I played 1. e4 c6 instead of the Najdorf. I suppose he expected that I prepared the Caro-Kann, but after 2. d4 then I played 2…g6 and he thought for almost 30 minutes. Then after 3. Nf3 I suppose he expected the regular Modern setup with 3…d6 and that I prepared this. Instead I played 3…d5 and he thought for another 15 minutes. Then after 4. e5 Bg4 it was a Gurgenidze structure and around move 15 he already was in time trouble. So avoiding theory is probably only a tactic I use sparingly against certain opponents to achieve this result.

  262. Michael
    October 28th, 2012 at 23:36 | #262

    I would have probably got bored with chess if I had listen to my first teacher, I live in a place where chess trainers don’t really exist. So I decided to teach my self, and started with the King Gambit actually one good suggestion from my first teacher, was to play this to learn about tactics. I felt as black I really wanted to fight back and the Sicilain fit that bill. So on I went as a beginner with my Grand Prix and my Worrall Qe2 Ruy, and after a while I thought why am I playing these sidelines…Then I found the book Starting Out 1.d4! After reading John Cox’s intro and his reaoning behind choosong maillines over sidlelines was inspiring, I was transformed as a chess player, after looking at these amazing sharp beautiful games in the Slav the Sem-Slav, Nimzo, KID, how could I go back and play my boring sidleines, I decided I would play mainlines. Thanks to Cox I got reinterested in chess and a whole new passion for the game came to life. So if I was going to play all mainlines as white then I had to play the with black also, hence Play the Najdorf Schevy style by Emms, ever since this book the Najdorf has been my true love. I was taught the Nimzo and Bogo, and found them boring just for my taste and again against higher rated players and friends was warned not to take up such a theory heavy opening, but I like the positions so much that I never looked back. Plus like I said Kasparov is my chess idol and the Najdorf and the Grunfeld felt like they went together, plus gettig to look through old games of my favorite player!

    I am so thankful to John Cox for his book, that sparked my interest just as it was starting to fade…

    But before I switched to 1.d4 I remember playing the main line Ruy and the Open Sicilian, and I remeber having so much more fun and holding my own with better players!
    🙂

  263. Michael
    October 28th, 2012 at 23:39 | #263

    Edit:

    I was taught the Nimzo and Bogo, and found them boring just for my taste and again against higher rated players and friends was warned not to take up such a theory heavy opening like the Gunfeld

    Meant to say take up the Grunfeld as a beginner!

  264. Michael
    October 28th, 2012 at 23:47 | #264

    And of course a once I found Quality Chess Publishing I realized I would buy most of my chess books from them!!!
    🙂

  265. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 29th, 2012 at 00:38 | #265

    I thought about the Worrall, but my teacher taught me to simply play 9. h3 and face the plethora of variations. Perhaps quite a few times I lost due to forgetting theory, but that is my fault. So if I lost to a GM in 20 moves because I forgot the move on move 15 of a Chigorin Spanish, that means I simply did not prepare well, not because the main lines are bad. Similar to how if one forgets a complex process on an exam it is not the fault of the exam.

    Some of the 6. Bg5 Najdorf reminds me of trying to solve heat equation partial differential equations in thermodynamics. It is long, complicated, but ultimately rewarding and constructive in building one’s cognitive abilities. And so do main lines 😀

  266. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 29th, 2012 at 00:42 | #266

    Someone also mentioned here about transposing to a 4. Bg5 Classical French through the Veresov. I think that would be an interesting method of converting a sideline 1. d4 opening into a main line French. Even if White knows this line (although it is weird to play the Veresov with the aim of transposing into an extremely theoretical main line French complex), at least Black is allowed to play against a main line opening instead of a sideline 🙂

  267. Michael
    October 29th, 2012 at 00:46 | #267

    I like playing against 6.Bg5, I find the games are so Dynamic and exciting. When I was a beginner atried this move out as white, I remeber one online opp. that we would play this line over and over, and he was much stronger than me, and would whip out different lines each time, but then he whiped out the g5 pawn sac and the knight attack on my queen, I lost so fast it made my head spin, but that whole time after the games I would go look up the moves in the database and try and prepare my self for the next enounter, I learned so much doing this, not just about this opening but about chess in general, and now even though I no longer play 1.e4 I do love to play the black side and it is one of my favorite positions to play!!! I am really looking forward to GM6b as to add possible the DPP to my rep, on top of the Nbd7 line given. Why any 1.e4 player would want to avoid these positions is beyond me, but then again what do I know???!!!!

    🙂

  268. Michael
    October 29th, 2012 at 00:48 | #268

    Same with the Semi-Slav Botvinnik positions!
    Now these are the positions that catch my interest, so complex!

  269. Michael
    October 29th, 2012 at 00:53 | #269

    Yeah I cant see choosing that way of transposing to the French as having any real benifits, All I remeber about the French is it was my first real defense to 1.e4 and after I got better I just got tired of some of the cramped positions, I know you can play lines that avoid this, but I wanted to be a Sicilain player. I had lots of problems with French as white though, and I know at least one good player that lives near me that the French is a problem sometimes for him.

    I was very happy when I awitched to 1.d4!
    🙂

  270. Michael
    October 29th, 2012 at 00:54 | #270

    Edit:

    I was very happy when I switched to 1.d4!
    🙂

  271. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 29th, 2012 at 16:58 | #271

    I think there should be a statistic somewhere, I wonder how many players have played 1. d4 sidelines against IMs and GMs. If the aim of playing sidelines is to outplay a lower rated opponent without theory, would they try this gamble against a grandmaster? Objectively I think I would rather play 1. d4 with 2. c4 main lines than the Colle or Torre against grandmasters such as Gelfand, Aronian, Zvjagintsjev, Bologan, etc., although I will never probably have an opportunity to play such high rated opponents 🙂

  272. wolfsblut
    October 29th, 2012 at 17:23 | #272

    What happened to the plannend new PS?

  273. John Johnson
    October 29th, 2012 at 22:24 | #273

    Speaking of sidelines I just got the Morra book. The intro is certainly interesting, and Esserman is surely full of enthusiasm about his work. It looks like it would be fun to try, maybe even in a serious game after some work.
    Gilchrist isn’t there some sort of function like that in ChessBase?

  274. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 30th, 2012 at 17:30 | #274

    I am not sure, as there are many constraints to do such a search, and also I am very bad with computers. But I feel that a 2300 would want to play a main line against a GM for example. Playing the 6. Bg5 or 6. Be3 against the GM’s Najdorf seems better chance to win than playing for example 1. e4 c5 2. Qe2. If the plan is avoid theory, then the game will transform into a game between each player’s strengths. And the GM probably is a stronger player…

  275. Gambiteer
    October 31st, 2012 at 05:34 | #275

    John Johnson :
    Speaking of sidelines I just got the Morra book. The intro is certainly interesting, and Esserman is surely full of enthusiasm about his work. It looks like it would be fun to try, maybe even in a serious game after some work.
    Gilchrist isn’t there some sort of function like that in ChessBase?

    I also got my Esserman yesterday. Reading the introduction gives you a lot of confidence. Have to see how the lines fare in classical time controls.
    Sicilians!! Here I come…

  276. Patrick
    October 31st, 2012 at 16:54 | #276

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Going to the extreme of 1.e4 c5 2.Qe2, yes, the GM would probably win on shear strength, but what about a “legitimate” sideline that possibly the 2300 player knows better than the GM because he has specialized in it and plays it all the time. Examples here would be 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 (intending either 3.Bb5 or 3.g3 depending on 2…Nc6 or not 2…Nc6), or also 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 (Instead of 6.Be3, 6.Bg5, Fischer’s 6.Bc4, or Karpov’s 6.Be2)

    Sometime a small tweak to throw off a higher rated opponent isn’t a bad thing. Doesn’t mean you have to jump off the deep end and play stupid like 2.Qe2 against the Sicilian. I don’t think 2.Qe2 is legitimate against anything except MAYBE the French.

  277. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 31st, 2012 at 17:20 | #277

    I have seen many players, including people whom I knew, who were around 2200-2300 who were quite obsessed with playing 2. Qe2 against the Sicilian, French, and sometimes even Caro-Kann. I suppose the idea is to play a King’s Indian Attack setup with c3, d3, then g3, Bg2, Nf3, Nbd2, and e5. But even though they would lose against titled players they still played it. But if they managed to surpass 2200 or 2300 then I suppose they must have their own preparations or opinions, even if I would probably never understand.

    1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. f4 is actually a Najdorf and technically a main line, and since I play the Najdorf I would ensure that I know this line well enough. Although 6. Bg5 and 6. Be3 are much more popular, 6. f4 is still a main line (and definitely more enjoyable than playing against a sideline :)), and in my experience I had a GM play 6. f4 against me twice and a 2300 play 6. Be2 against me twice. So 6. f4 is perhaps moderately popular, or at least not as rare as thought. It is possible to deviate from the main line of the main line with a “sideline” of the main line, which is what I do sometimes. For example, I play sometimes 5. e3 instead of 5. Bg5 and entering the Botvinnik Semi-Slav, because the positions are so complex that I find them at least very difficult to understand.

    But if a 2200 or 2300 wants to try this tactic against a GM, they will have to know the line quite well, but even if they succeed with a += against the GM, the GM might still nevertheless win due to the rating difference. I am not sure how IMs and GMs handle playing against sidelines or less popular lines, but from my experience of very occasionally in the past playing some sidelines like the Grand Prix Attack against titled players, I lost badly enough that I was convinced to continue playing the main lines.

  278. Michael
    November 1st, 2012 at 08:06 | #278

    I love mainlines!!!
    🙂

  279. Jacob Aagaard
    November 1st, 2012 at 09:11 | #279

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    An old question is how you define a main line. Next poll!

  280. Gilchrist is a Legend
    November 1st, 2012 at 11:41 | #280

    @Jacob Aagaard

    I would suppose any concrete name is a main line after a certain sequence of moves i.e. 3. Nc3 Bb4 is the Winawer French and 3…Nf6 is the Classical French. 5…a6 is the Najdorf, so everything move 6 onwards is a main line I would think, with everything before move 5 not leading to 5…a6 is a sideline.

    Also should make a poll asking do players prefer playing against main lines or sidelines 🙂

  281. Jacob Aagaard
    November 1st, 2012 at 13:13 | #281

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Two polls in the pipeline; let the people speak (after the current one, of course).

  282. The Lurker
    November 1st, 2012 at 15:35 | #282

    @Jacob Aagaard
    The mainlines are the Closed Spanish and the Najdorf. 1. d4 is an irregular opening. 😉

  283. gambiteer
    November 1st, 2012 at 16:35 | #283

    The Lurker :
    @Jacob Aagaard
    The mainlines are the Closed Spanish and the Najdorf. 1. d4 is an irregular opening.

    Good one.
    Any line with atleast 30 moves of theory is mainline.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

 Limit your comments to