Home > GM Repertoire > Shipping of GM2 has commenced

Shipping of GM2 has commenced

Today we received 132 copies of GM2. Here at 12:50 Andrew and John have just taken off to the post office with the first 40 websales. They will soon be back for the next batch. The final result comes in at 1,025 grams (2.25 lbs) at our office scale (which was expensive) and looks damn good in our opinion. The photo is a bit clumsily doctored, but I did not want to struggle to pretend these guys could look good in a photo at the same time…

March 1, 2010 - packing Avrukh GM2

Categories: GM Repertoire Tags:
  1. Abramov Anjuhin
    March 1st, 2010 at 23:01 | #1

    Today I got your 2 new books Jacob! An “Attacking Manual 1&2”.

    I noticed that the quality of paper and binding heavily dropped in comparison for example “Beating the Open Games 2nd ed”.

    The books are flabby with curves. But the paper seems to be glossy.

    All in all you still have to work hard to be on the same level as EDITION OLMS.

    Unfortunately I do not find you to be a “quality chess” in layout/paper/binding. Even New in chess is in the front of you.

  2. Ponting is a Legend
    March 2nd, 2010 at 00:03 | #2

    Those are a lot of GM2 books. I can’t wait for tomorrow.

  3. mikeel
    March 2nd, 2010 at 03:50 | #3

    I just ordered GM Rep 2 and Attacking Manual 2. I can’t wait! In response to Abramov, Olms books are very expensive (at least in America) and the thick paper can be hard to use when going back and forth a lot. NIC books are high-quality, but to get 620+ pages for $35 is quite a bargain these days.

  4. Tony Rotella
    March 2nd, 2010 at 04:44 | #4

    I eagerly await the day when Abramov has something nice to say about an awesome publisher instead of trying to stage a hostile takeover.

  5. Kobi shitrit
    March 2nd, 2010 at 07:20 | #5

    Dear Abramov!
    I think the books we have are high quality (the paper too).
    Have you something good to say about QC???

  6. Jacob Aagaard
    March 2nd, 2010 at 10:17 | #6

    Abramov is unfortunately 100% incorrect. This is higher quality paper than Beating the Open Games, and more expensive too. The main reason why we use it for our non-theory books now, is that the books are able to stay open in a way the others are not. Olms and NIC have a lower level of paper I am afraid, but I guess you need to know what you are talking about to see it, but obviously their paper is within the range of good. Everyman and Gambit choose poorer paper and look more to cost, which is one of several reasons why their books are a bit cheaper.

  7. Jacob Aagaard
    March 2nd, 2010 at 10:19 | #7

    Btw. I think anyone who has bought one of our books have a right to make their opinion heard here, and I take everyone seriously. I also respect that Abramov prefers the more shine paper to the more expensive, duller paper; however, it is our intention to go with the higher end paper in general, and as the author, I prefer the way the Attacking Manuals look and feel greatly to all my previous books.

  8. Abramov Anjuhin
    March 2nd, 2010 at 12:07 | #8

    I’m trying to be as objective and constructive from my side as I can. Also I always try to give best suggestions regarding paper or publishing scope.

    For those who criticize me: I bought 19 (remember!!!) books published by Quality Chess, so I definitely know about what I’m talking about.

  9. Jacob Aagaard
    March 2nd, 2010 at 12:22 | #9

    I appreciate this and my reply was meant to be respectful. My library have about 500 chess books (and twice that of other subjects), but it was not until I became a publisher that I started to understand paper; the 25+ books I did for Everyman did not help either :-).

  10. boki
    March 2nd, 2010 at 17:01 | #10

    I have 21 🙂

  11. Ponting is a Legend
    March 2nd, 2010 at 17:18 | #11

    boki you must be the first one to have received GM2–do you live close to Glasgow?

  12. boki
    March 2nd, 2010 at 23:06 | #12

    I meant 21 Qualitychess books 🙂
    No, not close to Glasgow

  13. Jacob Aagaard
    March 3rd, 2010 at 10:29 | #13

    Anyone higher :-).

  14. Norway number one:)
    March 3rd, 2010 at 12:46 | #14
  15. Nick
    March 3rd, 2010 at 13:29 | #15

    Mine came yesterday, It’s a beast. Looks realy nice as expected but quite intimidating looking at all the material to get through.

    I noticed there doesn’t seems to be anything aginst 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 3.g3 Bb4+ or am I missing something?

  16. Ponting is a Legend
    March 3rd, 2010 at 15:13 | #16

    It seems that my GM2 order is lost. This is quite a sad coincidence…

  17. Ponting is a Legend
    March 3rd, 2010 at 15:22 | #17

    Wait, nevermind…

  18. Jacob Aagaard
    March 3rd, 2010 at 15:22 | #18

    Also 2…Bb4+ is not covered, which is a more serious option. Basically we had to get move ordered at some point over these 616 pages. I realised there was this problem maybe 12 hours before we handed in the book, but then it was too late to do anything.

    An update will follow as soon as Boris has time to make one.

  19. Daniel Clancy
    March 3rd, 2010 at 21:21 | #19

    The highest quality bindings are Schachverlag Kania and McFarland. Of course McFarland charges up to a hundred dollars.

  20. boki
    March 4th, 2010 at 11:21 | #20

    Besides many things I like at Qualitychess, one of them is that even after a book is published (and sold) they are willig to provide updates on missing lines !
    Except from chess-stars ( on two books) no other chess publisher has bothered to do so !

    @Norway number one:)
    you won 🙂 unfortunatly I have limited place for my chess books already…

  21. Benedetto
    March 4th, 2010 at 12:10 | #21

    I have Avrukh’s books and Marin’s first GMR ….thanks for your wonderfull work!!

    Is it possible little anticipation?… from Marin’s 2 (or 3): 1.c4, c6 2. g3, d5 3. Cf3 ( no 3.Ag2, e5 4.d4, dc4) …on 3…Ag4 ?? only one (two) variation(s)…

    good morning and good play!

    Benedetto

  22. Ponting is a Legend
    March 4th, 2010 at 12:14 | #22

    Everyone seems to have GM2, hopefully my copy will come today…

  23. Jacob Aagaard
    March 4th, 2010 at 14:15 | #23

    Kania is hardback, which is higher quality of course. It is very hard to do this if you want to expert books. They don’t, so they can do it. McFarland do, and have to charge high prices, because making the books expensive in the first place, means the sales will be less, the print run less, and then the costs of producing the books even higher.

  24. Ponting is a Legend
    March 4th, 2010 at 14:28 | #24

    Today have received GM2. It is the best opening book ever. I anticipate that hundreds of games will be played with Avrukh’s lines, and almost all of them those who bought his book.

  25. Jacob Aagaard
    March 4th, 2010 at 15:01 | #25

    All is well that ends well.

  26. Redshift
    March 4th, 2010 at 17:50 | #26

    I look forward to getting hold of this soon, probably early next month. While I wait, can anyone sate my curiosity by telling me what the “Reluctant Benoni” and “St. Petersburg Dutch” are. I’ve heard the latter used to name the Leningrad, but as there is already a chapter on that, I suppose it’s probably something else.

  27. John Shaw
    March 4th, 2010 at 18:58 | #27

    @Redshift

    Redshift,

    The Reluctant Benoni is 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 d6 4.Nc3 g6. It seems to be on the way to a real Benoni, except Black’s e7-pawn refuses to advance.

    The St Petersburg Dutch is 1.d4 g6 2.c4 f5 or 1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.Nf3 f5. A different way of reaching Leningrad-type positions.

    We do on occasion make up opening names for our own amusement rather than seriously trying to be clear.

  28. March 4th, 2010 at 23:14 | #28

    @Jacob Aagaard
    My library have about 850 chess books, and the quality chess have great books i have to say 🙂

  29. Milen Petrov
    March 4th, 2010 at 23:33 | #29

    I received my copy today. At first sight I am quite impressed. I will not have enough time to check the concrete lines inside till next weekend…
    But unfortunately I have some negative comments which I want to share with you – first thing is that the book copy I got is in not in perfect condition – cover edges are somehow smashed, the front cover also looks like i have drawn something on it. Of course i know that Quality Chess are not guilty about this. It is a problem of couriers and packaging. To be honest – every time I order a printed material and when i got it in soft package it is in bad condition. So no idea where is the problem.
    Next thing which i realised is that in the Contents it is written Farajowicz Variation :o). Then I checked the chapter – the chapter title is fine, but the header is again wrong… Not a good advertising for proof readers i think 😉

  30. Redshift
    March 4th, 2010 at 23:52 | #30

    @John Shaw

    Thanks. 🙂

  31. Jacob Aagaard
    March 5th, 2010 at 11:44 | #31

    Hi Milen. Ok, there might be a few mistakes in there. 616 pages…

    About the condition. The damaged edges were not there when they left from here. A few books had slightly banged edges, they all went to reviewers.

    About the “drawing”. We loked out for this and have made a complaint to the printer, who has been shouting in the packing room. This is how it happens: When they package the books they put a piece of paper in the box to protect the book. Unfortunately, some idiot put the blue side towards the book and the white on away from, in some cases. The ink thus can give a slight colouring on the cover. This is easy to remove with a slight damp cloth, as I did a lot Monday. Those copies where I spotted a problem went to reviewers again, not customers. But I must have missed this one case. I am deeply sorry about this.

  32. Michael Yip
    March 5th, 2010 at 13:59 | #32

    Hello

    I just came back from the post office with GM2. The most interesting part is the foreward(so far). Avrukh has some nice stories to tell. Apparently top 10 players like this book.

    MIchael Yip
    Budapest

  33. Ponting is a Legend
    March 5th, 2010 at 21:13 | #33

    I noticed that the material of the GM2 cover is different than the GM1 cover–it is less rigid, but allows the book to remain open at disproportionate locations, i.e. the book remains open at page 500 out of 616, which is nice. No paperweights required.

  34. Axel Müller
    March 5th, 2010 at 22:46 | #34

    Congratulations Ponting! I am still waiting for my copy. It probably takes a bit longer to ship it to California.

  35. Al
    March 6th, 2010 at 04:38 | #35

    I just got the book! It arrived in perfect condition and faster than I expected given that I’m in the US. I haven’t had much time to go into the lines but it seems as comprehensive and honest as GM1 so that’s certainly a good thing. For the most part, I’m very happy with the lines given. Although, I’m not yet sold on the b3 variation (not that I have any better ideas!) against the solid Grunfeld setup. I find it hard to believe that White would really have an advantage. I’m mostly concerned about lines where Black takes on c4.
    I know engines aren’t amazing in these type of positions, but I was surprised Avrukh did not mention some of Rybka’s 1st choice moves. These are likely the first that anyone would consider when preparing. However, these lines aren’t forcing and so it’s impossible to cover everything. Here are some examples:
    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4
    c5 9. Bb2 Qb6 10. Qb3 Nc6 (Rybka’s first choice and extremely natural) maybe it would continue 11. d5 Na5 12. Qxb6 axb6 13. Nfd2 Rd8 14. Rc1 e6 15.e4 b5! 16. cxb5 exd5 17. exd5 Nxd5 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Rxc5 Nf6 and Black seems equal… I’m sure there are better moves for both sides but I’d have liked some guidance from Avrukh.
    or
    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4
    c5 9. Bb2 cxd4 10. Nxd4 Qb6 11. Qb3 Rd8 (Rybka’s first choice and natural as well as flexible) 12. e3 Na6 with plans of e5 and Nc5

    Given that the above moves are the first suggested by engines and also logical/natural, I expected to see some recommendations… even if they don’t lead to advantage.
    Anyway, with this book, you will get a reliable repertoire against just about anything… even 1. …a6. If you’re not happy with some parts of it, it’s possible to replace them. For example, I may stick with my Modern Exchange and Bayonet Attack against the g6 systems basically because of the “Solid” variation of the Grunfeld. We’ll see… it’s too early for me to draw any conclusions but I’m quite pleased overall.

  36. Al
    March 6th, 2010 at 04:50 | #36

    Here’s another line I discovered with Rybka just a few minutes ago. It’s quite interesting and I think Black’s most accurate move order.

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 dxc4 6. bxc4 e5! Rybka’s first choice and again quite tough to handle. This aggressive move seems to just equalize because Nxe5 fails. We need answers because this just seems so easy for Black. The other lines were at least deeper in the game. This is possibly equality at move 6.

  37. Al
    March 6th, 2010 at 10:30 | #37

    I’ve investigated a lot of Grunfeld lines and found many interesting systems outside of the g3 variations. However, I may have a quick solution that eliminates the c6 headache. If I had to play against c6, I’d dump the fianchetto variation because none of what I looked at looks promising… but luckily I found a clever move order.

    Why not:

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. g3!!!!!!!!!!! 😛

    If Black continues normally …Bg7 6. Bg2 Nb6 7. Nf3 Nc6 8. e3 we transpose. If he takes on c3, I’m pretty happy and it also scores well for White. Early c5 ideas don’t work either because after Bg2, Black has to take on c3 and we get similar positions. This gets us interesting dynamic positions with chances to fight for the edge while also saving a lot of theoretical study. Unless I’m missing something big, I can’t understand why Avrukh didn’t go for this. The c6 lines are just dead… Black can’t get them at all: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 c6 4. e4! Moreover, it doesn’t take anything away from the KID lines and I don’t notice other transpositional issues. Please tell me if you see any issues with this!

  38. Al
    March 6th, 2010 at 10:34 | #38

    A note.. This does remove the possibility of the Grunfeld positions with e4 straight away instead of Nf3. However, Avrukh notes in the book that he prefers Nf3 and couldn’t find much for White in the e4 lines. In any case, I think that minor loss in flexibility is well worth avoiding the c6 stuff. The only cool thing I found against c6 were ideas with Qb3 which fizzled out to nothing and ideas with Qa4 so that White can play cxd5 and Black would have to take with the knight instead of the pawn. That way, I figred we could take the center with e4 and that the c6 square wouldn’t be available for his knight. However, I found ways for him to equalize. And then it hit me… if I want him to take with the knight… why not use the move order with 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5. 🙂 It sure seems more economical than Qa4.

  39. Ponting is a Legend
    March 6th, 2010 at 16:20 | #39

    The major drawback to 3. Nc3 is that 3…d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 leads out of Avrukh’s repertoire, and is fairly heavy theoretically. You would have to then consult another source for that line.

  40. mikeel
    March 6th, 2010 at 18:45 | #40

    GM Rep 2 arrived this morning (ordered from classicalgames.com), and it will keep me studying for a long time. There’s soooo much material–maybe a few very obscure lines are omitted, but the two books on 1.d4 are really comprehensive.

    The book arrived in new condition undamaged, and along with Attacking Manual 2, I have a lot of reading to do.

  41. Al
    March 6th, 2010 at 19:01 | #41

    Ponting… I wonder if you’ve read my posts at all.

  42. Ponting is a Legend
    March 7th, 2010 at 01:25 | #42

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 dxc4 6. bxc4 e5 7. Nxe5 Bb4 8. Bd2 Qxd4 9. Bxb4 Qxa1 10. Bc3 Qxa2 11. Nf3 +-

  43. March 7th, 2010 at 04:39 | #43

    I got my copy today, and it looks great. I’m sure I will actually be playing a lot of the lines in this book.

    As for the line you guys are discussing–I wouldn’t presume to make any claims on the basis of my own genius, but an outlaw engine I use (forbidden on the Playchess server but stronger than Rybka) doesn’t like Ponting’s 11.Nf3 (11. . .Nbd7) and suggests, at depth 26 (!), 11.Bg2 0-0 12.0-0 Nh5 13.Bb4 Re8 14. Nc3 Qa6 15.Ne4 Qb6 16.Bc3 f6 17. c5 Qc7 18. g4 fxe5 19. gxh5 Qe7 20.hxg6 hxg6 21.Nd6 Rf8 22.Qd3 Bf5 23.Qg3 Qe6 24.e4 Bg4. . .and then suddenly it changes its mind and wants Black to play another long line starting with 12. . .Qa6 13.Qd4 c5, whereupon all my typing is wasted. . . truly, it’s chaotic, but at any rate White isn’t busted. The machine sees some advantage for White (+0.31). Chess is a hard game, no book could possibly cover everything. . .

  44. Tony Rotella
    March 7th, 2010 at 05:40 | #44

    Hi Alan and Al,

    Taking a quick glance at this …e5 idea and continuing on Alan’s engine’s 12…Qa6 13. Qd4 c5, I came up with 14. Qf4!?, which looks quite good for White on first glance. This position strikes me as a position in which a computer won’t fair well – White’s compensation is a bit more long term and less forcing than other gambits. Both sides can also try a lot of moves, so it might take computers a long time to figure these positions out, if they can at all. 14…Nh5 is met by 15. Qh6 with great compensation, and 14…Qe6 15. Nd2

    -Tony

  45. Alan Hartley
    March 7th, 2010 at 06:14 | #45

    14. Qf4 was indeed the engine’s main line, and lines with a later Qh6 figured in too.

    For what it’s worth, Rybka and its derivatives (?) do seem to be better at recognizing good exchange sacs than previous engines were. Here, even my untrained eyes can see White’s bishops and Black’s weak dark squares.

  46. Al
    March 7th, 2010 at 07:59 | #46

    I didn’t actually look into Nxe5 much as it didn’t seem right after a few moves. I guess it might be better than I thought. Still though, I’d be surprised if White really has anything in the c6 lines. Maybe some of you guys can find solutions to the other lines I posted.

    Also, what do you think of my other move order?

  47. Alan Hartley
    March 7th, 2010 at 16:09 | #47

    Al, your other lines look good to me (for whatever little that’s worth:) ), although in the first I don’t like 11.d5 and would look at 11.dxc5 Qxc5 12.Nbd2, hoping to get in e3 and Nd4. But I’m not happy with your intended solution. . . in the lines after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.g3 where Black takes Nxc3, Rowson’s suggested lines (with . . .c5, Nc6, Bd7 and Rc8) still seem strong. The c4 square is weak.

  48. Ark
    March 8th, 2010 at 13:57 | #48

    so happy to find it in the mailbox today, cheers!!

  49. David Fourrage
    March 8th, 2010 at 16:04 | #49

    Hi all,
    I may have missed something but,even though I must praise Avrukh for his excellent work, hasn’t he overlooked the Fianchetto with 6….c5 in the KID (I see 6…c6, 6….Bg4, 6….Nc6 and 6…Nbd7.).I used to work on that line with the Janjgava book on the Fianchetto Grunfeld and KID and there was quite a lot on it and the Yugoslav Variation (mentioned by Avrukh but without note).
    If this is an omission this would be quite a serious one…or am I missing something?

  50. French Dave
    March 8th, 2010 at 16:06 | #50

    Excellent work but I think I have spotted a real omission. Where is the Fianchetto KID with 6…c5, which, by rights should really be quite a bulk of the work.
    The Yugoslav Variation is mentioned but not devoted a chapter whereas 6….c6, 6….Nbd7, 6….Nc6 are.
    Am I missing something? Or is this a serious omission?

  51. John Shaw
    March 8th, 2010 at 16:15 | #51

    @French Dave

    Hi French Dave,

    I think we are covered on that one, as when White answers 6…c5 with 7.d5 we transpose to the Reluctant Benoni (Chapter 10). Probably we should have added something about the transposition to make it clearer.

  52. David Grasso
    March 8th, 2010 at 16:27 | #52

    Hi,
    I ordered GM Rep 2 almost 2 weeks ago and my order still hasn’t shipped. When can I expect it here in the US. I have a big tournament at the end of the month in Philadelphia. Maybe you’re playing there too…hey! wait a minute…are you guys..hey!?..that’s not fair!

  53. Alias
    March 8th, 2010 at 16:45 | #53

    I couldn’t see anything vs the Vulture. 1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.c4 Ne4.

    Not a major system, but still…

  54. Jacob Aagaard
    March 8th, 2010 at 16:55 | #54

    Yeah. It seems we missed this as well. 616 pages and we still did not cover anything… I’ll live.

  55. Jacob Aagaard
    March 8th, 2010 at 16:56 | #55

    David, your book is in the post. We do not use this online thing much, we should probably have it explained clearly somewhere…

  56. Ponting is a Legend
    March 8th, 2010 at 20:22 | #56

    It is a bit difficult for Avrukh or any author to cover every single position. That would require using permutations to find each possible positions, and that Vulture line for example–I am sure one does not need to actually study extensively the replies to such dubious lines.

  57. Ponting is a Legend
    March 8th, 2010 at 20:27 | #57

    If you notice also Avrukh did not cover all 20 of Black’s replies after 1. d4–because there is no need 🙂

    I also wonder what Avrukh will do with his Grünfeld since he is a Grünfeld aficionado and GM2 effectively busted his own opening. Interesting to know what grandmasters do in such situations…

  58. mikeel
    March 8th, 2010 at 20:52 | #58

    Looks like we have a troll…

  59. David Grasso
    March 8th, 2010 at 22:54 | #59

    Got it today, and it was worth the wait. Having said that…it seems Avrukh offers nothing versus 1…h5. What to do? I can scarcely move a piece these days without his say so.

  60. Al
    March 8th, 2010 at 23:06 | #60

    What? It didn’t bust his opening at all. That c6 variation is maybe very slightly better for White but it’s nothing serious.

  61. Ponting is a Legend
    March 9th, 2010 at 01:16 | #61

    Well I suppose what I meant was if he would continue to play the same Grünfeld lines as Black

  62. Al
    March 9th, 2010 at 11:19 | #62

    @Alan Hartley

    Yeah, the line:

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 dxc4 6. bxc4 e5 7. Nxe5 Bb4+ 8. Bd2
    Qxd4 9. Bxb4 Qxa1 10. Bc3 Qxa2 11. Bg2 O-O 12. O-O Nbd7(?) does seem better for White although it’s extremely complicated and needs practical tests. However, such a line should have been covered because unless White goes for this, the whole b3 idea is refuted as any attempt for advantage. Unfortunately, this line itself is probably way more complicated and sharp than one wants when playing the fianchetto variation with 5. b3. Also, maybe Black can just play Qxe5 instead of the risky Qxa1.

    Anyway, it’s good that we’ve made some progress here. Maybe you guys have ideas for White here too:


    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4
    c5 9. Bb2 Qb6 10. Qb3 Nc6 (Rybka’s first choice and extremely natural) maybe it would continue 11. d5 Na5 12. Qxb6 axb6 13. Nfd2 Rd8 14. Rc1 e6 15.e4 b5! 16. cxb5 exd5 17. exd5 Nxd5 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Rxc5 Nf6 and Black seems equal… I’m sure there are better moves for both sides but I’d have liked some guidance from Avrukh.
    or
    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4
    c5 9. Bb2 cxd4 10. Nxd4 Qb6 11. Qb3 Rd8 (Rybka’s first choice and natural as well as flexible) 12. e3 Na6 with plans of e5 and Nc5″

  63. Jacob Aagaard
    March 9th, 2010 at 15:17 | #63

    I disagree that you have to have a reply to Rybka’s first choice in all positions. Why not Junior, Fritz and other engines as well? Rybka is strong, but the other engines are not weak either. Soon you would cover everything.

    This …e5 move is interesting, but probably really poor. This is my intuitive response.

    Boris is doing a (final) minor update, but please give him a break. After 616 pages for 29.99 of this quality, do you really think he should have added more? Get your 128 page books from Gambit, costing 18.95, and check if you really feel short changed by a former second of Kramnik giving you 616 pages, but not covering every move you ever imagined, or some IM chatting a bit about a critical position, saying “here you need to find something”.

    I would recommend that you discuss these lines among yourself here on the blog. I have seen a lot of good stuff. This way you can also keep it a bit more to yourself :-).

  64. Ponting is a Legend
    March 9th, 2010 at 16:44 | #64

    Avrukh has done more than enough for the book, and it is strange that some find random lines he did not cover–he does not need to guide the reader in each permutation of every position. It’s a repertoire book, not a mathematical combinatorics textbook. 🙂

  65. Ark
    March 9th, 2010 at 17:09 | #65

    Rybka is no longer the strongest engine in the world. Also, people will be willing to pay a suitable amount for a book ‘covering every move you ever imagined’, the fact is someone didn’t make it happen! Unless that is simply an honest admission of real holes in his repertoire? Of course, it is still a good book, but we await the 1000-page volume ‘covering every move you ever imagined’

  66. Axel Müller
    March 9th, 2010 at 18:43 | #66

    @ Jacob: I don’t think people feel short changed – at least there is no reason for it. Boris just wrote such a great 1st volume (I’m still waiting for the 2nd, should make it any day to California now) that his readers got completely spoiled. I hope you can convince him to write another book. I’ll be tempted to buy it regardless of its topic. Just going through his analysis improved the way I think about positions (although at my level that doesn’t mean too much).
    Anyway, I don’t think you have to justify yourself here. Looking forward to the 2nd Volume. I think I should check the letter box again now.

  67. Jacob Aagaard
    March 9th, 2010 at 19:52 | #67

    Hi Ark and Alex, welcome to the blog (first timers?).

    I think volume 2 is better than volume 1, and clearly so. I don’t feel a need to justify anything, but do think it is correct to answer all trends on the blog and state our position. We tried to cover everything, but failed again. It cannot be done :-).

    Boris said he would finish a small update, but not cover everything. Like 3…Ne4, it is the 7th most popular in the position, he covered the five most important.

    Yes, Boris has agreed to do another book. We have a catalogue coming soon and I want to wait talking about titles till it is done.

  68. mikeel
    March 9th, 2010 at 20:10 | #68

    Anything coming out on the Gruenfeld?

  69. Ponting is a Legend
    March 9th, 2010 at 20:49 | #69

    Avrukh would be a great author for the Grünfeld. If he wrote GM Rep Grünfeld then he’d have to refute some of his own GM2 lines 🙂

  70. Al
    March 9th, 2010 at 23:42 | #70

    @Jacob Aagaard

    I’m very pleased with the book overall, as I mentioned. 🙂 That’s why I was trying to avoid it but my move order isn’t as simple as I thought. Nxc3 is much better than I gave it credit for. For instance: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. g3 Bg7 6. Bg2 Nxc3 7. bxc3 c5 8.e3 Qa5! 9. Ne2 Nc6 10. O-O cxd4 11. exd4 O-O 12. a4 and I find it tough to evaluate this position. I think it’s better for White but the question is whether it’s as good for White as the Nb6 lines. If it’s not, it means Black can take advantage of my move order. I guess there is also 8. Nf3 Nc6 but if I castle, the line is almost a forced draw if Black takes on d4 and if I play Be3, I’m not sure how to make progress. Thus, it seems I was wrong to so casually dismiss Nxc3 and c5 ideas.

    BTW: Ark, Rybka is still strongest for long analysis at greater than 2min/move. The clones or more accurately, IPPOLIT derivatives are just better (much) at faster time controls.

  71. Al
    March 9th, 2010 at 23:43 | #71

    One of my lines above got cut out weirdly.. Before “That’s why” I was writing about the annoying c6 variation of Grun.

  72. Al
    March 10th, 2010 at 05:18 | #72

    I was flipping through the Grunfeld coverage and came across:

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. g3 Bg7 6. Bg2 Nb6 7. Nf3 Nc6 8. e3
    O-O 9. O-O Re8 10. Re1 a5 11. Qe2 and I noticed that Bg4 wasn’t covered. This was the most natural move to me because of the pin and active development. It was also Rybka’s first choice. However, looking a little closer, it seemed like the Be6 variation with the inclusion of h3 (at least that’s my solution). For instance:
    12. h3 Be6 13. Rd1 (funny that Rybka didn’t come up with this on its own… actually evaluating it better for Black… which is absurd) Bc4 14. Qc2 Nb4 15.Qb1 a4 16. e4! Qd7 17. Be3 I think h3 helps White’s position and thus Bg4 is less accurate than Be6 but I wonder if anyone else has thoughts on this. It’s interesting that this is the only difference… just the inclusion of h3.

  73. Al
    March 10th, 2010 at 05:20 | #73

    Oh nevermind… after giving it more time it finds Rd1 and evaluates it as better for White. I just wanted to note that before anyone else pointed it out. 🙂

  74. Ark
    March 10th, 2010 at 08:39 | #74

    They do not have some of the old bugs in Rybka and therefore are superior, at all time controls. Also, I have learnt to dismiss clone accusations as sock puppetry.

  75. Jacob Aagaard
    March 10th, 2010 at 10:40 | #75

    With a lot of these things, the first choice of an engine early on in the game does not matter much, as a GM can evaluate some questions far clearer, and an amateur can find a perfectly reasonable reply over the board.

  76. boki
    March 10th, 2010 at 13:15 | #76

    Dear Jacob

    I noticed that the publishing date of the cutting edge -sicilian is approaching.
    Will there be a delay ? Just asking in order to plan my next quality chess books purchases 🙂

  77. Al
    March 10th, 2010 at 13:23 | #77

    @Jacob Aagaard

    Well sure, but the moves I listed in those first two lines are also extremely natural and easy to play. They’d be among my first choices even without an engine. The fact that a strong engine considers them good just highlights the need for coverage. After all, it’s what a Black player would notice first when trying to develop novelties while browsing Mega Base.

  78. Jacob Aagaard
    March 10th, 2010 at 16:45 | #78

    There might be a weeks delay. Half the book is already in proofreading, while the other half is close to the typesetting stage. Unfortunately it will not be finished by Friday as I had hoped :-(.

    Al, I have said my piece, I am not going to engage with you in an argument and ask things such as what is your rating :-).

  79. Ark
    March 10th, 2010 at 18:24 | #79

    “ask things such as what is your rating”

    That’s evil! but so effective

    Any plans to get Boris onto a Black repertoire book? (You may have to pay him life insurance maybe)

  80. Al
    March 10th, 2010 at 21:28 | #80

    OK, but my rating is irrelevant to the objective merits of the position. And in truth, I can’t find much for White in those two lines. For instance, if a 1700 finds mate for White, will the position be any different if a GM looks at it? I don’t think so. Thus, the only thing relevant is moves. Since no one has given much on that, it must be a difficult position for White to get an edge. Otherwise, it would have been dismissed with one or two variations.

  81. mikeel
    March 10th, 2010 at 21:36 | #81

    I’ve read several chapters of GM Rep, and I think the book is really well-done, and busts many dubious variations. Well done!

    And I’ve delved into Attacking Manual 2, and I feel it will be a classic.

  82. Al
    March 10th, 2010 at 22:20 | #82

    The Rd8 line is apparently still good for White. I’m kind of surprised but after trying several move for Black after e3, White is more comfortable. I’m still not sure on 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4
    c5 9. Bb2 Qb6 10. Qb3 Nc6 though.

  83. Ponting is a Legend
    March 10th, 2010 at 23:28 | #83

    True, mikeel. I have read the Kings Indian Defence, Grünfeld chapters so far. I used to play 1. e4 and have ~30% white score and get killed, especially by IMs/GMs, but now I am confident with playing white!

  84. Al
    March 11th, 2010 at 03:15 | #84

    Well, even if you’re not too good in the opening, 30% as White means that you’re being outplayed in many other ways.

  85. Jacob Aagaard
    March 11th, 2010 at 10:15 | #85

    Hi Al, the reason why I was being a bit “evil” as someone pointed out, and referring to rating, was because I do believe there is a hammer and nail issue going on here. I remember one famous author, an IM, writing an opening book that relied almost exclusively on Fritz evaluations. According to Fritz the positions were all ok for Black, but a stronger player would take one look at them and shake his head in disbelief.

    Your lines are computer lines for both sides. The problem in these strategic positions is that the computer just calculates endlessly, while what you actually need, is subtle evaluations and deeper strategies.

    The reason we have not engaged with you on the specific lines is because we are busy, not because we are not interested. Boris just became a father again, and we have endless amount of books in the pipeline.

    Even with 616 pages, not all questions can be answered. Maybe if we do a new edition in 5 years time we will take these questions into account, but for now we are moving on swiftly.

  86. Dan
    March 11th, 2010 at 20:05 | #86

    When is it anticipated that the book will be available in the U.S. at such sites as amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com?

    Thank you.

  87. Axel Müller
    March 11th, 2010 at 20:39 | #87

    “… Boris just became a father again …”

    Congratulations and best wishes!

  88. Al
    March 12th, 2010 at 01:00 | #88

    @Jacob Aagaard

    Yes I understand, and congratulations to Boris. I understand QC is very busy at this time.

    BTW: You’re right that the variations are computer lines but the initial deviation I gave was actually just what I wanted to play intuitively. Still, I only have one line left that I”m not sure about since the Rd8 line is good for White.

  89. Jacob Aagaard
    March 12th, 2010 at 11:37 | #89

    What is the line? I can have a short look next week and give you mine, not Boris’ opinion (on one line I can manage :-).

  90. N.N.
    March 12th, 2010 at 13:39 | #90

    When will Amazon get GM2 in Europe?

  91. Al
    March 13th, 2010 at 01:21 | #91

    The line is: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4 c5 9. Bb2 Qb6 10. Qb3 and now Nc6. Nc6 is very rare and the only game I found was played by some girls in a 1998 u10 championship. Black responded to d5 with Nb4 and lost quickly. I also thought d5 was the reason but if Na5! really forces a Queen exchange on b6, b5 is always an annoying lever that undermines White’s center. One line I was considering went: 11. d5 Na5 12. Qxb6 axb6 13. Nfd2 Rd8 14. Rc1 e6 15.e4 b5! 16. cxb5 exd5 17. exd5 Nxd5 18. Bxg7 Kxg7 19. Rxc5 Nf6 Anyway, I’m glad that you’re interested in giving it a look.

  92. Jacob Aagaard
    March 13th, 2010 at 08:43 | #92

    I shall give it a look when I get back to the office in the middle of the week.

  93. Axel Müller
    March 13th, 2010 at 23:49 | #93

    Still waiting … Did it make it already to the US? Should never have left Yorkshire …

  94. Ponting is a Legend
    March 14th, 2010 at 12:59 | #94

    What? QC are located in Glasgow (Strathclyde), not Yorkshire.

  95. Jacob Aagaard
    March 14th, 2010 at 18:34 | #95

    Glasgow is Lanarkshire, no? Personally I live in East Dunbartonshire, just outside town, and John in Ayrshire…

  96. Axel Müller
    March 15th, 2010 at 19:10 | #96

    @ Ponting, I know, still Yorkshire customers are happily commenting on the book for days, whereas people in remote California are still waiting …

  97. Al
    March 15th, 2010 at 19:46 | #97

    No, I got the book on the 5th and I’m in CA. However, I did preorder.

  98. Axel Müller
    March 16th, 2010 at 00:36 | #98

    Well, York is just around the corner from Glasgow, at least looking at it from the other side of the big pond and I noticed that people from Yorkshire have been commenting here, while I’m still waiting for my copy.

  99. Axel Müller
    March 16th, 2010 at 00:39 | #99

    @AI I preordered as well, on Feb 1st. I hope it didn’t get lost in the mail.

  100. Jacob Aagaard
    March 16th, 2010 at 11:17 | #100

    Axel, we will have a look.

  101. Heinz
    March 16th, 2010 at 15:05 | #101

    I made the mistake and ordered a copy of Avrukh’s vol. 2 at bookdepository.co.uk. Do you know when they (if ever) get the books?
    Next time I’ll directly order at qualitychess! Keep up the good work!

  102. John Shaw
    March 16th, 2010 at 15:20 | #102

    Heinz,

    Sorry, we don’t know when they will get the books because we don’t know how they are getting them. They don’t seem to be buying directly from us.

  103. Benedetto
    March 17th, 2010 at 09:38 | #103

    Is it possible know contents and/or Index of variations of Marin’s GMR books?
    please

    Benedetto

    p.s.: Against 1…e6 and …d5 goes for Catalan? what else?

    please

  104. Jacob Aagaard
    March 17th, 2010 at 10:07 | #104

    Marin does not go into 1.d4 openings except in some marginal cases. But no, we do not release contents before 2-4 weeks before publication.

  105. Ametanoitos
    March 17th, 2010 at 17:42 | #105

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4
    c5 9. Bb2 Qb6 10. Qb3 Nc6 11. d5 Na5 12. Qxb6 axb6 13. Nbd2
    The most natural. What does the Na5 doing?
    13…Rd8 14. Rab1!
    White wants to play e4 after which he will have for sure the advantage
    14…Bf5
    15. Rbc1 e6
    (15… b5 16. cxb5 Rxd5 17. Bxf6 and 18.e4. If 14.Rac1 now 14…b5! is strong)
    16. Bxf6 Bxf6 17. e4 Bg4 18. Rfe1
    And White is much better imo. The Na5 is an offside piece and White has a protected passed pawn.

  106. Al
    March 17th, 2010 at 18:53 | #106

    Interesting, do you think 13. …b5 is an improvement?

  107. Axel Müller
    March 17th, 2010 at 23:46 | #107
  108. Axel Müller
    March 18th, 2010 at 12:34 | #108

    Finally! I got my copy too. I have to agree with other comments here: it was worth the wait!

  109. Dan
    March 18th, 2010 at 17:38 | #109

    Amazon.com and BarnesandNoble.com in the U.S. still don’t stock the book. Do you know when it will be available through them?

    Thanks.

  110. Jacob Aagaard
    March 19th, 2010 at 10:14 | #110

    2 months maybe, maybe a bit less. That is the way it is when you buy discount.

  111. Ametanoitos
    March 21st, 2010 at 01:37 | #111

    @Al: Yes, it seems that 13…b5 is an improvement but after simple play like 14.cxb5 Rd8 15.Rac1 b6 16.Rfd1 Nxd5 17.Bxg7 Kxg7 18.Ne5 Bb7 19.a4! white seems to have an annoyinng little advantage, maybe more. Maybe Mr Aagaard could provide a simpler solution but it is a hard thing to ask from a man who has so much job to do and he is always kind to answer trivial questions in this foroum.

  112. Al
    March 21st, 2010 at 10:52 | #112

    Yes, I like that position but what about Be6 instead of Bb7. That was what I looked at earlier. I’m considering some stuff with h4 at the moment.

  113. Al
    March 21st, 2010 at 11:59 | #113

    There’s another omission which is strange to me because it’s the most natural and best move. I really don’t understand how Avrukh couldn’t consider it… even engines claim it’s best… although I found it on my own by accident. I went to the book thinking I’d made a move order mistake or some such thing after going through the game after f6.

    1. d4 e6 2. c4 Bb4+ 3. Bd2 Bxd2+ 4. Qxd2 Nf6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. g3 d5 7. Bg2 Nbd7 8.O-O c6 9. Ne5 Nxe5 10. dxe5 Nd7 11. f4 f6! This is a refutation of Ne5 as far as I see it. It’s not that Ne5 is better for Black, it’s just that it’s now clear that Ne5 is not even close to being as good as the other moves and White has no advantage. Anyway, it’s not a critical line or anything but I hope I won’t find similar surprises in other chapters.

  114. Jacob Aagaard
    March 22nd, 2010 at 10:44 | #114

    I don’t want to be pretentious [:-)], but I think White looks better. The bishop on c8 is poor. I tried a few random moves, me against an engine. After 12.cxd5 exd5 13.e4 Qb6+ 14.Kh1 dxe4 15.e6 Nc5 16.f5 Rd8 17.Qe2 Nd3 18.b3 White is definitely better.

  115. Al
    March 22nd, 2010 at 21:26 | #115

    The engines didn’t even consider cxd5 because they thought exd5 was significantly better for Black (-.25) but I’m very impressed. You’ve come up with a very nice idea and my attempts to vary with 13. …dxe4 etc. don’t seem to help. White has much easier play and I agree that he’s better. As a bonus, the position is sharp, interesting and with a lot of initiative for White. I’ll have to look into f4 more but this looks extremely promising. I’m starting to think Black should go for cxd5 but then, he’s accepting he’s just worse. Thanks a lot! I wish I didn’t cross out f4 to replace it with Rc1 in the book… lol. I wonder if you’ll come up with such magic in that Nc6 Grunfeld position.

  116. Al
    March 23rd, 2010 at 01:08 | #116

    The best I can find for Black is:

    1. d4 e6 2. c4 Bb4+ 3. Bd2 Bxd2+ 4. Qxd2 Nf6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. g3 d5 7. Bg2 Nbd7 8.
    O-O c6 9. Ne5 Nxe5 10. dxe5 Nd7 11. f4 f6 12. cxd5 exd5 13. e4 Qb6+ 14. Kh1
    fxe5 15. exd5 exf4 16. Nc3 Ne5 but White’s still got a more pleasant position. 🙂

  117. Al
    March 23rd, 2010 at 02:13 | #117

    This line is a landmine! Here’s an example, lol:

    1. d4 e6 2. c4 Bb4+ 3. Bd2 Bxd2+ 4. Qxd2 Nf6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. g3 d5 7. Bg2 Nbd7 8.
    O-O c6 9. Ne5 Nxe5 10. dxe5 Nd7 11. f4 f6 12. cxd5 exd5 13. e4 Qb6+ 14. Kh1
    fxe5 15. exd5 exf4 16. Nc3 fxg3 17. Rae1 Qc5 18. Rxf8+ Nxf8 19. Ne4 Qe7 20.
    Nxg3 Qd8 21. Nh5 Bg4 22. Nxg7 Qd7 23. Re5 Ng6 24. Nh5

    This is sharper than most of my Najdorfs!

  118. Jacob Aagaard
    March 23rd, 2010 at 08:17 | #118

    I am sorry that I have not gotten back to you on the grunfeld, finishing the last two books have been murder. Can you please e-mail me your various lines and I will send you a reply.

  119. Ametanoitos
    March 23rd, 2010 at 08:40 | #119

    Al, isn’t this a Catalan with Bb4+ and Bxd2? White is better and he doesn’t need to play 9.Ne5 for example 9.Qc2 b6 10.Nbd2 Bb7 11.e4 is better for White and i have the pleasant experience of an OTB win in this variation.

    Mr Aagaard, it would be nice of you if you could find time to look at the Grunf lines posted above and answer in this blog, not a private email because lot a people are interested on this. Thanks!

  120. Al
    March 23rd, 2010 at 11:31 | #120

    Yes Ametanoitos, Qc2 is an alternative. However, Ne5 is the move in Vol. 2 and that’s why I was analyzing it.

  121. Al
    March 26th, 2010 at 20:35 | #121

    This is the best I’ve got: [Event “?”]

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. b3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O dxc4 8. bxc4
    c5 9. Bb2 Qb6 10. Qb3 Nc6 11. d5 Na5 12. Qxb6 axb6 13. Nfd2 Rd8 14. Nc3 Ne8 15.
    Rfc1 Nc6 16. a3 Nd4 17. Ra2

  122. Ametanoitos
    March 27th, 2010 at 08:36 | #122

    You’ve got? This is your line or mr Aagaard’s?

  123. Al
    March 27th, 2010 at 12:07 | #123

    Mr. Aagaard recommended Nc3 and I expanded the line.

  124. Ponting is a Legend
    March 28th, 2010 at 00:23 | #124

    Jacob Aagaard :
    I am sorry that I have not gotten back to you on the grunfeld, finishing the last two books have been murder. Can you please e-mail me your various lines and I will send you a reply.

    Which two books were finished?

  125. Jacob Aagaard
    March 28th, 2010 at 09:58 | #125

    Cutting Edge and Alterman Gambit Guide

  1. No trackbacks yet.

 Limit your comments to