Home > Authors in Action > Nikos in Interview

Nikos in Interview

Knowing how journalists rewrite us, the answers below are probably more or less what Nikos said 🙂

5 questions

To

Nikos Ntirlis (“Reporter”, 29/9/2012)

Famous…away from home

He has got an enquiring mind and that’s why from a little kid he studied a lot of things, like astronomy. He also got involved with sports and especially martial arts where he got 2 Black belts. Today, Chess is his primary pursuit. He has got the title of “FIDE Trainer”. We are talking about the 28 year old from Patras, Nikos Ntirlis, the coach of Danish National Team…

How did you start working on chess?

N.N: When I was 17 years old, a big age for someone that wants to become good at international level. My first teacher, Nikos Karapanos, said to me that someday I’d become a good player, but not a great one, but if I was determined enough and worked hard I’d become a great chess coach! My teacher sadly passed away in August 2009, at the age of 42. In his memory I wrote my first chess book that was published in English.

How come an English-speaking publication house got interested for your work?

N.N: In Greece, today especially due to the financial crisis, it is next to impossible to publish a chess book if you don’t posses in your own the money for it and you don’t have the necessary support. Abroad, those things don’t count. What really counts is the quality of your work. The best world-wide publication house dedicated on chess decided to publish a book with my name on it, in their most prestigious series, the Grandmaster Repertoire series, where only famous authors sign the books. At the beginning I couldn’t believe it (and still, sometimes it seems that everything is a dream), but the book got published, it sells relatively well, the reviews are good (it was even voted for the second best book of the year) and the publishers are pleased with it. I don’t need more than that to be happy.

How did the work for the Danish Federation happen?

N.N: As a trainer I work mainly today with students abroad. Some of them are very successful players in their countries and this is always a good referral for a trainer. In August 2011 the European Team Championships took place in Halkidiki and this is when I was first approached to work for the Danish Team. After the event they went pleased with our co-operation, so I got a proposal for working again for them in the Chess Olympiad at Istanbul this year, 27 August to 10 of September. The Chess Olympiad is the biggest and most important tournament in chess.

And how did the team perform?

N.N: Among 158 countries, we ended up 18nth which seems to be the second best placement of the Danish team in their history (they were 9nth at 1978 but before the Soviet Union and the Yugoslavia destruction produced so many new countries) and we left behind teams with great tradition in chess like Israel, India and also Greece who has done well in the last times.

What are you future plans?

N.N: I’d like more people to know about chess and especially young kids to get involved with it because chess offers so many tools to use them later in their lives.

Categories: Authors in Action Tags:
  1. Michael
    October 1st, 2012 at 21:42 | #1

    Hi Jacob,

    Thanks for all of your hard work. Any chance of an updated publishing schedule if you get the opportunity?

    • Jacob Aagaard
      October 2nd, 2012 at 11:44 | #2

      I hope to have time to put one up next week, but compared to writing, it has a low priority :-).

  2. Michael
    October 2nd, 2012 at 00:31 | #3

    Congrats Nikos…

    A while back you gave me the advice to start to work with the Yusupov Books, and I finished the first one. So my question is I feel like my play got a liitle worse, could this be because I am self taught and having to relearn things are having a temporary delcine in play? I hope! I also totally changed my opening rep, and lost lots of blitz points(playing blitz to learn the new lines) probably the same thing yes? You also told me that I would get to a point in my studies where my mind eants to give up, and to push past that because thats what the mind does to you, and if you can push past your comfort zone then you wil start to see improvement…What would you suggest on days where I do not want to study so hard and have a little fun. Blitz and tactical puzzles, if I play an hour of blitz how much time is good to solve some tactics puzzles before I play. I noticed last time I got carried away with the tactics at emerald.net for over an hour and then when I went to play some blitz games I was not doing well, think I used up to much energy on the puzzles, Maybe I should do tactics training on different days then blitz practice? What do you think?
    Anyway congrats again on having your name out there now and getting some well deserved recognition!!!

  3. Michael
    October 2nd, 2012 at 00:55 | #4

    Playing 1.d4 the Indian Defence I have some comments…The Benko line is great, but something I find intersting is a lot of players even good ones play the following line

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. d5 b5 4. cxb5 a6 5. f3 axb5 6. e4 b4 7. e5 Ng8 8. f4

    This can’t be good for black? Does anyone else see this a lot, I see it quit a but and find it very strange especially with an opening like the Benko, which is one of those openings you dont really play just by feel, its so sharp you I would think you need a book of some kind and I would think that they would not recommend this 6…b4

    Also in the Englund gambit I used to see 6…Bb4 but now I mostly see 6…Nb4

    as in the following line

    1. d4 e5 2. dxe5 Nc6 3. Nf3 Qe7 4. Bf4 Qb4 5. Bd2 Qxb2 6. Nc3 Nb4 7. Nd4 c6 8. Rb1 Qa3
    and I guess the correct move would be 9.e4, instead of 9.Rb3 anyone want to chyme in?

    You guys did a wonderful job on this book, like I said before on a previous post that I thought when the lines were being guessed that they were going to be more positional in nature as compared to Playing 1.d4 the Queens Gambit, but I sure was happy when I read through the book and took a deeper look at the variations chosen, In the Nimzo I thought e3 was to positional for my taste but love it now, looking at ideas like Qf3 followed by g4! in some lines very exciting, and the Samisch, Wow! Like Lars’ said in the intro the one most likely to be attacking on the kingside in white! Great lines, very exciting chess. The Benko line I did not know at all before the book but I am a big fan now, these games can get crazy with white sacking a piece in one of the main lines, with great play and losts of dynamic features to the positions. And a treat to get both an early e5 game and the more positional Be2 against the Hungarian variation against the Grunfeld.

    These two books make up an awsome white rep!!!

  4. Michael
    October 2nd, 2012 at 00:58 | #5

    @Jacob

    I have a question about your hard cover books, as I do not own any yet but am thinking of buying your GM Prep Positioanl play when it comes out in hardcover first…When working with the book open with a chess board does the book stay open and lay flat, sorry if that’s a dumb question, just some hard cover books don’t lay out flat that well.

    Thanks

  5. Nikos Ntirlis
    October 2nd, 2012 at 07:51 | #6

    Hello Michael,

    It always takes some time the new knowledge to get into practical play. It is different for every person and it doesn’t happen to everybody but it happened to me also. Before i won the championship of my area 5 years back, i thought at some point that despite working hard my playing strenght was declining, which didn’t make sense at all. How it is possible to work on chess and become a worse player? But i understood that i was wrong when i beat many strong players in my area in a single tournament shortly afterwards. So, work hard and look for serious tournaments.

    And never connect your blitz play with your chess level. From blitz you can get the “feeling” from some positions and built your “opening intuition”, but nothing more. Rapid chess is much more serious and you can make more conclusions. The days you are bored and cannot get a motive to work you can have fun by playing blitz and so on, but just allow yourself few days like that!

    Thanks for your nice words. Keep updating me for your progress!

  6. Joeri
    October 2nd, 2012 at 08:18 | #7

    @Michael I own Playing d4 The Indian Defenses in hardback. It lays perfectly flat and it really is a joy to work with. Worth the extra 5 euro’s for me.

  7. Michael
    October 2nd, 2012 at 08:32 | #8

    Thanks Nikos!!!

    I really appreaciate your advice, I think I am one of those people…I have to relearn some areas of Chess, but I have a nice foundation. I do tend to rate my playing strength due to my Blitz play, and this is probably a mistake. So I will try and remember to use it for fun and Opening practice and intuition. I live about an hour away from San Francisco and they have some good tournaments at the Mechanics Institute Chess Club downtown, run by John Donaldson I believe. I have just noticed lately looking at my play that one of my weak areas is sticking to a plan even though it is not going to work, I have to learn to “Switch Gears” and change my plan up, once my opp. has thrawted my plan. I am sure there is some info in the Yusupov Series on that and in Jacob’s upcoming GM Prep books.

    Thanks again for advice and encouragement!!! I will keep at it, and push forward.

    By the way I see you all the time on chesspublishing.com, My screen name is “Fight-Club”
    Maybe we can chat there as well…

    I will let you know how my play progresses!

  8. Michael
    October 2nd, 2012 at 08:35 | #9

    Joeri :@Michael I own Playing d4 The Indian Defenses in hardback. It lays perfectly flat and it really is a joy to work with. Worth the extra 5 euro’s for me.

    Thanks a lot for letting me know, now I will look forward to buying some hardcovers…always willing to spend a little more to get a nice product!
    Cheers!

  9. Igor
    October 2nd, 2012 at 09:16 | #10

    Please fix the poll module – it should check the IP/cookies to avoid more than one vote – I voted 3 times Botvinnik as test 😛

  10. Jacob Aagaard
    October 2nd, 2012 at 09:33 | #11

    @Michael
    When you start to think i n a differen way, you will do so worse in the beginning, even though it is a better way to think ultimately. Compare it to something physical, like changing from two finger typing to ten finger typing. The improvement is at first not there at all; on the contrary. But over time you will reach a level impossible with two finger typing.

  11. Jacob Aagaard
    October 2nd, 2012 at 09:33 | #12

    @Igor
    The setting is only one vote per person, but they upgraded it last week and there seems to be a bug in it.

  12. Jacob Aagaard
    October 2nd, 2012 at 09:34 | #13

    @Michael
    5 euros difference is the lowest we can defend financially. It is simply a better product by the margin of €10-15, but at the cost we can sell it at.

  13. Jacob Aagaard
    October 2nd, 2012 at 09:35 | #14

    @Nikos Ntirlis
    My PlayChess level is consistently lower than my elo, while most people are 3-400 points higher!

  14. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 2nd, 2012 at 13:28 | #15

    I think 4…Be7 should be revitalised. The Tarrasch Defence from GM10 has been revitalised, so why not a line in the French? 🙂

    Also I think 3…c5 4. exd5 exd5 needs to be revitalised. I do not know why not many people play it, but if I had to teach someone the French, this would be the first line for the Tarrasch I would teach them.

  15. Seth
    October 2nd, 2012 at 16:32 | #16

    @Gilchrist is a Legend

    It can be funny sometimes to see how people view openings differently. I was “born and raised” in the Tarrasch to believe the 3…c5 4.exd5 exd5 was positionally winning for White! 🙂

    Nowadays, I know this isn’t the case. However, for many years…whenever my opponents played this against me the formula was usually to trade off all the minor pieces and win the endgame. I won tons of games like this.

  16. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 2nd, 2012 at 20:50 | #17

    @Seth

    My coach always instilled in me the enthuasism for 3…c5 4. exd5 exd5, and I won some crucial tournament games against 2200+ with it, so I like this line very much. Of course White’s plan is to trade all the pieces and play against the IQP in the endgame, But when I played this line as Black I always tried to trade only the light squared bishops, and keeping the other pieces on the board. I remember playing …Nce4 after the dxc5 Nxc5 sequence, placing my queen on d7, bishop on d8, and both rooks on c8 and e8. I think Black has the better bishop in this scenario so one should not aim to exchange it unless it is useful. White usually has to play c3 to stabilise the d4 outpost, which also enhances the bishop’s usefulness. Playing the bishop to b6 trying to reactivate whilst also discouraging White from playing f3 due to the weakness of the a7-g1 diagonal is also another plan, but the aforementioned setup is what I usually did, followed by a manoeuvring game. My first win in this line paradoxically was a kingside attack 😀

  17. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 2nd, 2012 at 20:52 | #18

    @Seth

    Also I should add that I used to play 3. Nd2 when I played 1. e4. The only line against which I felt extremely uncomfortable facing was 3…c5 4. exd5 exd5. No one played it against me, but if more people did, I would probably change from 3. Nd2 to another line. I suppose I simply preferred to play this position as Black.

  18. Michael
    October 2nd, 2012 at 21:04 | #19

    Jacob Aagaard :@Michael When you start to think i n a differen way, you will do so worse in the beginning, even though it is a better way to think ultimately. Compare it to something physical, like changing from two finger typing to ten finger typing. The improvement is at first not there at all; on the contrary. But over time you will reach a level impossible with two finger typing.

    I had hoped that this is what was happening and it kind of made sense, the way you just explained it makes it totally clear!

    Thanks!

  19. Michael
    October 2nd, 2012 at 21:10 | #20

    Jacob Aagaard :@Michael 5 euros difference is the lowest we can defend financially. It is simply a better product by the margin of €10-15, but at the cost we can sell it at.

    I will gladly pay more, and appreciate that you are really giving us the lowest price mark up you can. I will look foward to getting my first hard copy when Positional Play gets released…

    That is the book I have been waiting for…I really think it will help me collect and focus my thinking it positional play.

    Thanks for all the wonderful books.

    By the way the Michael that asked you for a publishing updat at the top of this page is not me, is there some way we can make it so we can’t have the same screen names?

    or can we change them?

  20. Jacob Aagaard
    October 3rd, 2012 at 09:23 | #21

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    Not sure the Black bishop is better, but once pieces are exchanged, the d-pawn becomes a bigger liability.

  21. Nikos Ntirlis
    October 3rd, 2012 at 10:00 | #22

    Exchanging ALL the pieces is not the correct strategy, White has to exchange the CORRECT pieces. Of coure this is a well known and researched issue, but it is certain that the exchange of light-squared Bishops definately helps Black. See for example the Classical examples Botvinnik- Zagoriansky, 1943 for the “pure” application of the method White should apply to win those positions and Karpov- Spassky, Montreal 1979 which is essentially the same method shown by Botvinnik but in a more complicated form. In both cases the presense of light-squared Bishops was in the non-IQP side’s advantage simply because there is the relationship of the “attacking Bishop” vs the “defending Bishop”.

    As i have said before, from 2002 untill 2010 i had in my repertoire the …exd5 Tarrasch but in Ikaria Open 2010 (a tournament you should definately consider playing at least once in your life!) i was shown by GM Zagrebelny the correct method for White to get an advantage. My rich experience in these lines made me understand at once that White is better there. Not something very very scary for Black, but certainly annoying and a bit unpleasant (for Black).

    Today, i came to understand that there is a better way to play for Black in the …exd5 line and i’ll show it in the book. I showed Jacob the line in Istanbul and said “no problem”. In my opinion, White is still conceptually still a bit better but not in the degree that he is in the “Zagrebelny” line. Sorry for not offering more on this, but i think that you’ll be convinced after reading “Playing the French” and “Playing 1.e4”. Of course if all these pass the editors’ filtering!

    As for 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7, Jacob “forced” me to consider this line seriously in Istanbul and actually we discovered together some pretty interesting ideas! All i can say for now is that it seems that the Chinese have found a nice way to deal with the Alekhine-Chatard and that a Serbian GM is doing great in the Classical line with Bxe7 Qxe7. If White is better there it is very little and in practice Black will always be fine. Sorry for trying really hard to understand what is going on in these lines and for this reason delaying a bit finishing the analysis, but in all the other lines i have 10 years of experience and i am confident that my suggestions are sound, but in this one i have to be really sure and not jump to quick conclusions based only by database research and a bit of computer analysis. I am sure that everyone will appreciate a good effort, even if they have to wait a bit longer, than paying for a superficial book.

    Thank you all for your suggestions and contributions. Please keep them coming! Everything is taken seriously.

  22. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 3rd, 2012 at 15:05 | #23

    @Nikos Ntirlis

    I am not sure what are your thoughts regarding the Winawer, but I think a good line for Black is 7…0-0 in the main line. I know the French book is based on 3…Nf6, but perhaps sometime in the future 7…0-0 Winawer will get coverage somehow in some form. There are two main lines in the Winawer complex with 7. Qg4, and I think 7…0-0 is underestimated quite excessively, and it seems as if most play 7…Qc7 or 7…cxd4.

    Regarding 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7, there are many lines that remind me of Taimanov, Najdorf, or Kan Sicilians with Black playing …0-0 and White 0-0-0 with kingside attacks. These lines particularly I think are also underestimated and I would encourage you to consider them, as Black is definitely not playing for two results here.

  23. Javimart
    October 3rd, 2012 at 15:26 | #24

    Schandorff´s book about indian defences is great, but it has a very important bug in the last chapter: 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 f3 e5 4 Ne2 and now 4… exd4 5 Nxd4 d5! is critical and not mentioned at all. Perhaps Lars could solve this in a newsletter.

  24. John Shaw
    October 3rd, 2012 at 16:09 | #25

    @Javimart

    Interesting line. Since one of Lars’ main plans is just to transpose to his Old Indian line (which involves f2-f3 and d4-d5) maybe a simpler move order is 4.d5 instead of 4.Ne2. We’ll have a think for the next newsletter.

  25. Patrick
    October 3rd, 2012 at 17:41 | #26

    Michael :@Jacob
    I have a question about your hard cover books, as I do not own any yet but am thinking of buying your GM Prep Positioanl play when it comes out in hardcover first…When working with the book open with a chess board does the book stay open and lay flat, sorry if that’s a dumb question, just some hard cover books don’t lay out flat that well.
    Thanks

    Michael, I can tell you that I own many of the hardcover editions of various books. Here’s what I’ve found with Quality Chess’s Hardcover books:

    – Those over 300 pages, you can typically open the book to where you want to go to, and it will lay flat. Those over 400 pages definitely will.

    – Those under 300 pages, you have to open the book from the center, and then flip forwards or backwards. You don’t need to flip literally a page at a time, but small blocks of pages, like 10 or so at a time. So GM Repertoire the Caro-Kann, which is 256, or GM Preparation – Calculation, which is 304, that’s what I do to get to the page I want to get to.

    Hope this helps.

  26. Javimart
    October 3rd, 2012 at 18:11 | #27

    Thanks for your answer, John. After 4 d5 black can play 4…c5!? In the czech benoni f3 is not considered dangerous, but of course white can play other things apart from 5.c4.
    Or something like 4…Be7 5 c4 c5. Anyway, it deserves a look.

  27. Patrick
    October 3rd, 2012 at 19:05 | #28

    @Javimart

    You may have answered your own question. If you avoid 5.c4, you are no longer in a Czech Benoni, but rather a Closed Benoni, which has less respect than the Czech because White can put his Knights on c3 and c4. That said, with f3 already played, it’s hard to do Nf3-d2-c4 to go along with Nc3.

    Though, of course, another author from “That Other Publishing Company” published a book on the Czech and Closed Benoni for Black about 2 years ago. I’ve only ever followed the Czech part of it occasionally. Never the Closed.

  28. Michael
    October 3rd, 2012 at 21:43 | #29

    @Patrick

    Thanks for the description, it helps.

  29. Tiziano
    October 4th, 2012 at 08:59 | #30

    I’m sorry to be out topic but I don’t know how I can contact you about this. I’m a 2100 player from Italy and I’m reading “Playing 1 d4”. I’m usually very positive about your books but this time I’m very disappointed. Until now, every time I have used the repertoire recommendation I’ve faced answers from my opponents that completely neutralized the variation. Only two recent examples.

    Benko

    1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 c5 3 d5 b5 4 cxb5 a6 5 f3 axb5 6 e4 Qa5+ 7 Bd2 b4 8 Na3 e6 9 Nc4 Qc7 10 Bg5 and now the book shows a nice edge after 10 … Ba6 but 10 … Bb7! completely repels white attack, after 11 d6 Qc6 the Pd6 looks very weak while my (correspondence) game went 11 Qe2 h6 12 Bh4 d6 13 f4 Be7 14 e5 Ne4!! and Black solved all his problems and gained even a little edge in the ending.

    Dutch

    1 d4 f5 2 Bg5 h6 3 Bh4 g5 4 e4 Nf6 (in the book this is given as a note but I feel this is confusing as it’s much more reliable than 4 … Bg7) 5 e5 e6 and now the author gives 6 exf6 Qxf6 7 Bg3 f4 8 Qh5 Kd8 but after 8 … Qf7 White has to exchange the Queens and the ending is (perhaps) just a little better for White…but Black has the bishop pair and I don’t think this ending can be won against decent opposition (on the board I couldn’t against a 2000 player even after long trying).

    I know that every book has its holes but I feel disappointed when these holes comes from
    – not proper computer checking (10 … Bb7)
    – not proper choose of the main line (4 … Bg7 instead of 4 … Nf6)
    – not proper consideration of the defensive resources (8 … Qf7)

    Please consider my words as an incentive to improve and not a polemical criticism.

    Best regards

    Tiziano from Italy

  30. Nikos Ntirlis
    October 4th, 2012 at 10:58 | #31

    Hello Tiziano,

    I looked at your suggestions but sincerely i don’t see problems where you spot them. First of all in the Dutch line the endgame after 8…Qf7 9.Qxf7 is (in my humble opinion) clearly better for White. Maybe the advantage is not that great but i like White a lot. Also the author has suggested a pretty nice alternative which is the 8.Be2 move which gives White an advantage. So, Schandorff gives lines that prove White is better! OK, i can understand that not everybody has the same taste for every position, but clearly i cannot see a problem here.

    In the Benko/Volga line after 10…Bb7 11.d6 Qc6 12.Qd2!? i see that White is again better (according to my understanding). He will play Rd1 (after …Ba6) -Qf2-Be3 (b3 is …Bb5 to protect a2) and i cannot but prefer White. You mentioned “computer checking” and i left my computer quite some time with Komodo 5 running after 10…Bb7 and after it reached depth 29 it gave +0.39 for White.

    Obviously the lines you mention are interesting and obviously my answer isn’t intending as “offering the truth” (i may well be wrong on everything i said!), but my first impression i really cannot see a single problem with the lines you offer for Black. I see White clearly (at least a bit) better. I’ll be happy if you consider my suggestions and provide some feedback.

  31. Tiziano
    October 4th, 2012 at 11:50 | #32

    @Nikos Ntirlis

    Hi Nikos, thanks for your prompt answer. Regarding the Benko line, Komodo seems quite optimistic in that line…all engines are more or less optimistic because a pawn in d6 looks great…but I analyzed for a couple of hours with Houdini/Rybka and after 12 Qd2 Ba6 13 Rd1 Bb5 the threats of Rxa2 and Qa6 look dangerous, for example 14 b3 Qa6 15 Qf2 Qa7 16 Rd2 Nc6 and Black’s knight is landing on d4. It’s just an example but I think that the position is quite murky.

    The endgame after 9 Qxf7 is certainly better for White…the problem are
    – Instead of proposing a brilliant victory against an inferior variation as the main line it was certainly better to analyze with some depth this natural endgame (most intermediate players will not play 8 … Kd8 and will instead prefer the endgame).
    – The endgame looks better…but after playing a tournament game and having analyzed it with some depth I don’t believe it’s so good…I mean that White’s edge is temporary…it depends above all on the difficulty Black has to develop his queenside. But as often happens, to use a temporary edge White has to open the position…but then the bishop pair of Black means something. Finally it seems to me that this kind of endgame doesn’t fit the style of the book…it can be ok…but not in connection with the other proposed lines.

    Thanks again for your feedback

    Tiziano

  32. Jacob Aagaard
    October 4th, 2012 at 15:33 | #33

    @Tiziano
    Two points. 1) Clearly White is taking risk here; which is inevitable when you what these kind of attacking positions. Murky is the choice of the author; and what a lot of people have found attractive. You do not get a serious edge without taking risks in the opening. 2) Secondly; theory advances. We do our bit and clearly you are never done analysing. The points you raise do not indicate lack of proper analysis, as you wrote, but just that you have found an idea in the Benko and are not sure how big the advantage is in the Dutch. No practical player would shy away from a line because of that. (btw. looking at the Dutch line, I think it looks awful for )

  33. Jacob Aagaard
    October 4th, 2012 at 15:44 | #34

    Black 🙂

  34. Tiziano
    October 4th, 2012 at 16:08 | #35

    @Jacob Aagaard

    First of all thanks for your answer. I’d like to clarify my thinking, sorry if my english isn’t good enough to explain myself properly. Theory advances, it’s correct, but I thought that the author choice was to give a reliable repertoire (follow the patriarc!) for the times being. Of course improvements can be found…but even if the line proposed by me (and by houdini/rybka) looks awful (and I agree)…the problem is that it’s not awful as it seems! I agree that a casual opponent will not find this line OTB the first time he meets you…but after 2 or 3 times you use this line, somebody will arrive at the board very well prepared.

    About the Dutch line…I agree that a good endgame is nice and should be enough to discourage black from playing this line…but do you remember Kramnik with the Berlin against Kasparov? I’m not Kasparov and my opponent will not be Kramnik…but if a decent opponent decides to defend this endgame again and again at your local tournament against you…it’s not funny. Perhaps I should become a better endgame player (I agree) but I’d like at least a chance to keep queens on the board.

    I remember Rowson explaining (in his book on the grunfeld) how the grunfeld endgames were rich of imbalances and with winning chances for both players. If an endgame is an important part of my repertoire, I’d like the author to explain it in some degree.

    After 1 d4 f5 2 Bg5 h6 the endgame comes almost by force, so an opponent can choose to enter an endgame against me at his will…I don’t like this very much.

    Thanks again for your time.

    Tiziano

  35. Jacob Aagaard
    October 4th, 2012 at 17:12 | #36

    @Tiziano
    You are talking about a 1000 page book on a game slightly different from chess, as far as I see your expectations. There are possible moves in all positions, so unless a position is for some reason bad, to say that you could also go into an endgame (even though no one have done so and that it looks bad) and explain it, would put a great demand on all positions throughout the book. We try to analyse the best moves played and the obvious alternatives. Not at all junctures. It would simply take too long and too many pages – and people would not be able to remember it!

  36. Michael Agermose Jensen
    October 5th, 2012 at 00:00 | #37

    About the Dutch line:
    1) Malaniuk plays it with Black
    2) White has an absolutely awful score in evenly matched games
    3) I see no “lose-or-draw only” positions that would put me off
    4) The computer’s advantage for White is negligible (I guess this is based on the bishop pair compensation the bad structure, not sure how it values the black King’s position – unsafe or well centralized for the endgame)

    If I were looking for a line to play with with Black and found these 4 facts, I’d normally stop looking.

    So looking at the position I guess it comes down to taste. If you dislike such positions, then the Dutch is the wrong opening.
    I’ve had both the Qh5+ as well as the Be2 line (8.Be2 Bg7 9.Bh5+ Kd8 10.Nf3 Nc6 11.c3 Qf5!?=) and they are a little awkward if you’re unprepared.
    If you claim a clear advantage for White, I guess Donner would say that you don’t know a bishop from a knight 😉

  37. John Johnson
    October 5th, 2012 at 02:32 | #38

    Will there be an excerpt from the Avrukh book soon?

  38. Jacob Aagaard
    October 5th, 2012 at 06:32 | #39

    @John Johnson
    Sooooo impatient!

  39. Lars
    October 5th, 2012 at 09:14 | #40

    Hi

    Have you considered making a full interactive training program using different media and using the wealth of material you have available? I’m thinking something like ICS http://www.chessmasterschool.com/ but of course with your training filosophy as fundation. ICS is good and high quality but it would be nice to see what you guys could come up with. With all the quality material you already have and with the super brand you have both as publichers and individual coaches you could be successfull. And it could be fun – a new challenge for you once Jacobs big GM-prep. series is done.

  40. Jacob Aagaard
    October 5th, 2012 at 11:35 | #41

    @Lars
    Yes, but in a slightly different way than you are probably thinking. I am hoping it will happen over the next two years.

  41. LE BRUIT QUI COURT
    October 5th, 2012 at 18:51 | #42

    # Grandmaster Repertoire 6 – The Sicilian Defence by Lubomir Ftacnik

    Finally you have strong competitor for your upcoming “split-in-two” book. It’s a “The Sharpest Sicilian 2012” by Kiril Georgiev and Atanas Kolev. I hope you’ll check their lines closely cause interferences in repertoire are many 🙂

  42. boki
    October 6th, 2012 at 12:37 | #43

    Proud owner of the first Polgar book ! Simply fantastic, congratulations and cannot wait for the following polgar books !

    I have a small wsh for one of the next QC-Newsletters. In the 6…c5 Saemisch Grischuk has played twice in 2012 after 7.Nge2 Nc6 8.d5 the rare Na5, which was not covered by Schandorff in playing d4 .
    Thanks for your great books !

  43. Gilchrist is a Legend
    October 7th, 2012 at 20:06 | #44

    I wonder how Avrukh will analyse 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 g6 3. Bg5 Bg7 4. e3 0-0 5. c3. This is probably one of the most important lines for me. It looks like a Colle structure but part of the Torre proper, and having played against this variation at least 20 times in tournaments, counting rapid (<1 hour) tournament games as well as slow tournament games, unfortunately my performance against this line is probably no more than 30%. 🙂

  44. Jacob Aagaard
    October 9th, 2012 at 10:04 | #45

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    There is something on that for sure.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

 Limit your comments to