Recently a book, written by Timoshenko on the Sveshnikov Sicilian, was published in Russia. From all we know, it is a decent book by a real expert on the opening. We do not want to publish it in English, as we have our own book by Kotronias, which is really excellent.
But Russian Chess House decided that this Timoshenko book would fit in well with their version of the Grandmaster Repertoire series, where they have previously published some of our QC books. To do this, they took a version of the cover we had given them for a different book, and then their cover artist lifted the chessboard photo off our book on the Sveshnikov Sicilian and used it on their own cover.
Their thinking was: this will cause no damage to Quality Chess and be good for Russian Chess House.
Our thinking is that:
a) They did not ask us, which is a big transgression. And we would have said no.
b) It does reflect on Quality Chess, as people will naturally tie this book to our brand. This is called ‘trading off’.
If we wanted to do it, we could license our brand in Russia and elsewhere, but it also means that some people will hold us responsible for the quality of the Timoshenko book and if it is not good, they will think worse of our books. This might not be a case with this book, we don’t know for sure to be honest, but clearly this is a choice we want to make!
Similarly, we believe in Russian Chess House’s series there is a book by Scherbakov on ‘The Triangle System’ that looks like a Quality Chess book, but is nothing to do with us.
We have talked to Russian Chess House and they are apologetic. Things have been sorted out.
We share this with you for a few reasons:
a) We want you to know that this book has nothing to do with us and will not be published by us.
b) Please think about the idea of a victimless crime. There is not really any such thing. Respect copyright, especially ours!
“But Russian Chess House decided that this Timoshenko book would fit in well with their version of the Grandmaster Repertoire series, where they have previously published some of our QC books. To do this, they took a version of the cover we had given them for a different book, and then their cover artist lifted the chessboard photo off our book on the Sveshnikov Sicilian and used it on their own cover.”
So you had some agreement with them after all…
Strange, firstly I thought that this was pure fraud, but now I don’t see nothing wrong!?
@LE BRUIT QUI COURT
If you don’t see anything wrong with this, maybe it would be a good idea to learn something about copyrights…
@Ray
They had some agreement, but we don’t know about what. To translate it into Russian? Russians didn’t fall out of the sky with this issue, otherwise it could be easily persecuted at the court of law, don’t you think Ray?
@LE BRUIT QUI COURT
Aha. You don’t know what there was, but you know there’s nothing wrong.
Impressive knowledge.
I do not think the internal discussions between us and Russian Chess House is the business of anyone else. What I can say is that we did not know that this book was published and that we are certain that RCH will not publish any other books in a way that pretends that they are in this series, besides the two they have published.
I don’t speak Russian.
Also I was just browsing the publisher’s website, but…
http://www.chessm.com/zaschita-tarrasha-tom-4/
http://www.chessm.com/kak-igrat-protiv-sicilianskoj-zaschity-tom-pyatyj/
Arent there some more upcoming books with certain similarities?
Seems like laziness on their part i.e. not willing to make their own cover. I’m also sceptical about being able to hold any Russian based business to account either.
> If we wanted to do it, we could license our brand in Russia and elsewhere
Good luck for licensing anything in Russia. Glad you ahd this sorted out with them. Make contact, then make business 🙂
@just asking:
The first link you gave is just the Tarrasch book by Nikolaos Ntirlis and Jacob Aagaard. They’ve used different colors for the cover than the original (more reminiscent to Avrukh’s book on the Slav) and it’s nr. 4 instead of the original 10 by their counting. Apart from this I assume/I’m hoping they publish it with agreement of QC since Jacob wrote something along these lines.
The second link is basically “Experts on the Anti-Sicilian” which is not part of GM rep at QC. Strangely enough the russian title “How to play agains the Sicilian” is already quite missleading and more reminiscent to “Experts vs. the Sicilian”. But they do give Avrukh, Aagaard, Bauer, Nielsen und andere as authors on the cover so they clearly mean the former.
sorry for the german slip an some spelling errors.
Anyway “und andere” was meant to be “and others” 😉
That being said english is very good to express things to the point. It’s way harder imho to translate “Experts on the Anti-Sicilians” into other languages so that it is similarly short and suitable as a title. Some languages though have picked it up, like “Anti-Sizilianer” in german, but it still sounds strange to me in german (german is my native language).
The concept of the word creation “Anti-Sicilian” implying a sideline against the Sicilian Defense for White is ingenious for type setters 😉
technically the (Russian Timo) book is primarily about the Chelyabinsk variation of which, to my limited knowledge, no QC book has ever adequately covered if at all including Kotronias.
@ Steven S:
I thought the Chelyabisnk is just a fancy name for the main line Sveshnikov, probably invented by people who didn’t want to give Sveshnikov the credit for his opening. Maybe you’re referring to the Novosibirsk variation (with …Bg7)?
What book is this Triangle system by Russian Chess House ? I never heard of this book, which one is it that are talking about in this blog post ?
The link at wikipedia explain the different names:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence#Sveshnikov_Variation:_4…Nf6_5.Nc3_e5
“Sveshnikov Variation: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5
The Sveshnikov Variation was pioneered by Evgeny Sveshnikov and Gennadi Timoshchenko in the 1970s. Before their efforts, the variation was called the Lasker–Pelikan Variation. Emanuel Lasker played it once in his world championship match against Carl Schlechter, and Jorge Pelikan played it a few times in the 1950s, but Sveshnikov’s treatment of the variation was the key to its revitalization.”
“An alternative plan is to play 10…Bg7 followed by …Ne7 to immediately trade off White’s powerful knight; this line is known as the Novosibirsk Variation.”
@Jeg taper partiet men vinner krigen
Scherbakov. I am certain it is the same book which was published by Everyman, but maybe someone can tell me if I am wrong 🙂
@Jacob Aagaard
I looked for that book, but could not find it on Russian Chess House website, or anywhere. Maybe I am tryping it wrong in Russian though .
@Jeg taper partiet men vinner krigen
Couldn’t find it either.
There is Avrukh (1, 2 and 11 on d4 side lines), Tarrasch, Experts on Anti-Sicilian plus that Chelyabisnk book. That’s it as far as I can see.
@Ray
It is not. It IS a sort of Russian Hedgehog unique to the Sicilian. It in itself has only mild connections to the Sveshnikov and does not necessarily have the same strategic goals in mind in as much as most Open and semi-open Sicilians aim for quick aggression.
@Steven S.
Actually ok it is one of the main lines in the Svesh but, and this is critical, it is a much more positional approach than as tactical as other moves on move 8 like Be6 (the Bird Variation), which allows the a3-knight to return to life with 9.Nc4. Again white also has to somewhat cooperate for Chelyabinsk to show up. I just think of it as a quieter approach (for a Sicilian)
@ Steven S.
I’m a bit confused to be honest. Can you tell me which move(s) characterise the Chelyabinsk?
Quite a mysterious secret line.
To make it short: Evgeni Sveshnikov and Gennadi Timoshchenko are both from Chelyabinsk, so the Sveshnikov used to be called the Chelyabinsk in Russia.
Names of variations are always tricky 😉
Just wanted to add that the whole Sveshnikov complex was formerly known as Lasker-Pelikan. Maybe Chelyabinsk/Sveshnikov was introduced first for 8…b5 only. But nowadays at least regarding Sveshnikov we probably mean the whole complex, but have the modern treatment with …b5 in mind. I think this statement from Steven:
“about the Chelyabinsk variation of which, to my limited knowledge, no QC book has ever adequately covered if at all including Kotronias.”
simply doesn’t stand, which you can easily lookup via the excerpt available at QC.
I’m also a bit confused about:
“Again white also has to somewhat cooperate for Chelyabinsk to show up.”
White has to cooperate in chosing the Open Sicilian?!
@Reyk
Reyk perhaps you need further illumination. As I stated or implied, – There are dozens of variations that only have a name after move 10 in chess. If White plays any other move prior to reaching this exact line before move 10, or perhaps Black even then it is called something else in general. As white has to play these exact moves to get Chelyabinsk variation of Sveshnikov, then yes,…white has to cooperate for Black to get these precise moves in. Perhaps a similar position will arise from a different move order,…perhaps not. Chelyabinsk is a subset variation within the Svesh and should NOT under any terms be thought of as synonymous. In Russia the Chelyabinsk is thought of as a quiet, extremely solid hedgehog system of the Sicilian. Obviously, the Sveshnikov itself can be many things especially sharp and violent besides quiet and solid or anywhere in between.
@Steven S.
Maybe you should offer some moves to the main tabiya of the Chelyabinsk line as you would define it. Personally I always thought it was 8…b5, which was the main new invention by those two Chelyabinsk guys.
@Steven S. Thanks for the illumination.
I think C.L. is about to write a book about that specific line over the the next weekend.
It will be called “The Russian Hedgehog – Move by Move”.
An idea to consider is to have them use another look. i.e. keep them away from the GM Rep. look.
Everytime I see one of the Russian Chess House books which mimic GM rep. I think how it looks like a cheap ‘knock-off’ which devaules the GM Rep series. Your look and their logo. I see the risk, but don’t understand the benefit.