Home > Publishing Schedule > The Queen’s Indian Defence – excerpt

The Queen’s Indian Defence – excerpt

The second in our trio of new books currently printing is The Queen’s Indian Defence by GM Michael Roiz. This is the companion volume to The Nimzo-Indian Defence (note the clever way we varied the two books’ colour scheme). The new book covers the QID (obviously) but after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6, in addition to 3.Nf3 b6, it also covers 3.g3 (the Catalan) and weird 3rd moves by White. So together the two books create a complete Black repertoire after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6.

We will announce a publication date very soon, but for now there is an excerpt giving away a whole chapter of the Petrosian System.

Categories: Publishing Schedule Tags:
  1. Siddhartha Gautama
    October 29th, 2018 at 11:21 | #1

    So if i am not mistaken, the closed catalan is the weapon of choice against 4 g3 Ba6 5 b3 and against 3 g3 Catalan move order right?
    I like it <3

  2. Andrew Greet
    October 29th, 2018 at 11:28 | #2

    @Siddhartha Gautama

    Your terminology is strange, as the Queen’s Indian main line of 4.g3 Ba6 5.b3 is a different opening from the Catalan and the two sections of the book do not transpose to each other.
    In both sections of the book, Black plays …Bb4+ and …d5 at an early stage, so they have those elements in common. But I repeat, they are not the same thing at all.

  3. Siddhartha Gautama
    October 29th, 2018 at 11:39 | #3

    With closed Catalan i mean that in both cases Black chooses an setup with d5, c6 and b6?
    e.g. 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 Be7 5. Bg2 d5 6. Nf3 c6 7. O-O O-O 8. Qc2
    b6

  4. Andrew Greet
    October 29th, 2018 at 11:50 | #4

    @Siddhartha Gautama

    Roiz does not recommend an early …c6 in the QID line, so there is no overlap between the two parts of the book.

  5. Siddhartha Gautama
    October 29th, 2018 at 12:07 | #5

    hmm, sorry to say this, but the excerpt is very very minimalistic and as a potentially customer I have to solve a puzzle to get the moves for the various main lines 🙁

    All i want to know is which set-up GM Roiz chooses against 3 g3 move order and against 4 g3 Ba6 5 b3 move order.

    Can you please tell me the moves?

  6. Andrew Greet
    October 29th, 2018 at 12:20 | #6

    @Siddhartha Gautama

    That’s a fair point. A while ago we decided that every excerpt of a new opening book should have an abridged version of the variation index to include in the excerpt, to solve exactly this type of problem – but somehow we forgot to do it this time. See the GM 2A excerpt for an example of what I mean: http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/GM2A-KingsIndianandGrunfeld-excerpt.pdf

    We are working on the abridged QID index right now. It won’t take long, and as soon as it’s finished we will update the excerpt to include it.

  7. Siddhartha Gautama
    October 29th, 2018 at 12:27 | #7

    thank you very much 😀

  8. Andrew Greet
    October 29th, 2018 at 12:49 | #8

    Modified excerpt is now online. Chapters 14/15 have the details you are looking for.

  9. boerni
    October 29th, 2018 at 16:22 | #9

    Will we have 7…bxc5 in chapter 10? Thanks in advance. 🙂

  10. Andrew Greet
    October 29th, 2018 at 16:57 | #10

    @boerni
    Yes.

  11. October 29th, 2018 at 17:36 | #11

    @Andrew Greet

    Andrew you mention this is the second in a trio of books at the printer….is the third book the Tiamanov by any chance?

    Thanks

  12. Andrew Greet
    October 29th, 2018 at 17:58 | #12

    @Michael
    No. There is another ‘special surprise’ book which we will announce shortly.

  13. James2
    October 29th, 2018 at 19:21 | #13

    @Andrew Greet
    Hi Andrew,

    This looks like it is going to be a super book. Thank you for the abridged index addition too. I can’t wait until publication day.

    James

  14. Paul H
    October 29th, 2018 at 20:26 | #14

    @Andrew Greet
    Presumably the Anand book in the catalogue as a segue to the world championship match.

  15. James2
    October 29th, 2018 at 20:45 | #15

    @Andrew Greet
    Hopefully Negi 5!!!

  16. James2
    October 29th, 2018 at 21:55 | #16

    Also, the first thing the Nimzo Indian cover reminded me of was the packaging of Refresher sweets (blue pack, yellow oval, red and green writing). Still can’t look at it without thinking that…

    James

  17. James2
    October 29th, 2018 at 22:57 | #17

    I was watching an Chessbase India video on YouTube with Shah (I think that was his name) going through Quality Chess books on a stall at a tournament in India about a week ago.

    I noticed he showed a paperback copy of ‘Under the Surface’ available to buy on the stall. On your shop section I think only the hardback is listed for sale. When will the paperback be released in the UK?

    Thank you.

    James

  18. Leon Trotsky
    October 30th, 2018 at 03:29 | #18

    Catalan portion especially interesting with 4…Ab4 5. Ad2 Ae7 line. Would he recommend developing bishop to b7 or a6 in the main line ¿

    I like modern move order with 3. g3 Ab4+ avoiding any sort of gambit lines like with 3…d5 4. Cf3 Ab4+ 5. Cbd2..

  19. Andrew Greet
    October 30th, 2018 at 09:42 | #19

    @Leon Trotsky
    Regarding the b7/a6 question, there’s a bit of both. In general I would say he prefers the more active development on a6, but in certain lines he prefers b7 when there are specific reasons for doing do. See the finished book for more details.

  20. Franck steenbekkers
    October 30th, 2018 at 09:47 | #20

    I think the big surprise is the New avrukh. ..Am I right

  21. Andrew Greet
    October 30th, 2018 at 09:54 | #21

    @Franck steenbekkers

    No.
    Nobody has guessed right, which isn’t surprising as I’m pretty sure we haven’t announced this book anywhere.

  22. Paul H
    October 30th, 2018 at 12:04 | #22

    @Andrew Greet
    Don’t keep us in suspense then!

  23. Michael
    October 30th, 2018 at 13:15 | #23

    @Andrew Greet

    sadist 😉

  24. Bebbe
    October 30th, 2018 at 13:17 | #24

    @Andrew Greet

    A book on the Leningrad dutch or the classical Sicilian?

  25. Ray
    October 30th, 2018 at 13:20 | #25

    Or maybe a book on Manus Carlsen, or the upcoming World Championship match.

  26. Ray
    October 30th, 2018 at 13:20 | #26

    Sorry, I meant Magnus of course 🙂

  27. Tygrysek
    October 30th, 2018 at 13:32 | #27

    No, no, guys… after working with Gelfand on his books, the QC gusy have finally decided to publish the Razuvaev/Murakhvieri classic on Runbinstein:)

  28. Andrew Greet
    October 30th, 2018 at 14:10 | #28

    The title is “We’ll announce it when we’re ready”, authored by B. Patient.

  29. RYV
    October 30th, 2018 at 14:59 | #29

    @Andrew Greet
    can you explain why some books are anounced months in advance and why other’s are so secret ?

    is it just a commercial war with other chess book companies, or ??

  30. John Shaw
    October 30th, 2018 at 15:44 | #30

    RYV :
    @Andrew Greet
    can you explain why some books are anounced months in advance and why other’s are so secret ?
    is it just a commercial war with other chess book companies, or ??

    It’s not a commercial war. Announcing everything months in advance is almost certainly the smart thing to do commercially. But as a company we tend to focus on creating books, not marketing (there is no Quality Chess marketing department). So instead of secrecy, it’s more a case of us finishing a book, then remembering we need to announce the existence of the book.

  31. RYV
    October 30th, 2018 at 17:33 | #31

    @John Shaw

    sorry but i cant Believe that that books are not announced just because you ( QCteam) forgot to fill the coming soon section.

  32. John Shaw
    October 30th, 2018 at 17:42 | #32

    RYV :
    @John Shaw
    sorry but i cant Believe that that books are not announced just because you ( QCteam) forgot to fill the coming soon section.

    Believe what you like, but it does not change the reality of the way we work (which I know and you don’t). We were also delayed in announcing the Kramnik book by not having the cover finished – but again, the cover was only delayed because we were head-down working on books.

  33. Leon Trotsky
    October 30th, 2018 at 18:36 | #33

    Looks like 28.11 for QID. Does that mean 21.11 for Forward Chess release ¿

  34. RYV
    October 30th, 2018 at 23:04 | #34

    @John Shaw
    what a joke !

    Kramnik’s book and Afek’s book ( and many other?) are announced just few weeks before public market just because the cover was not finished (?!), or because too much work on other book (?!)….
    at the same time, gelfand volume 3 , or geller’s book are announced almost 1 year in advance without a title!

    Every Week, on every post, someone is asking about the coming publications . And you ( QCteam) take time to respond that “in a near futur… ready to announce…will upgrade the Schedule…). You could easely have taken time to respond ” coming soon Afek’s book on endgame studies, Kramnik chess carrier , ???”

    so again my question is ” what is the Reason to keep secrecy on certain book and let other be announced long before publication ?”
    I will, accept that you say it is confidential because of ….. but saying ” we have too much work to tell you what we are working on ” is not a serious answer as it will take less than 10 lines or 10 minutes.

    no offense, just my position.

  35. RYV
    October 30th, 2018 at 23:17 | #35

    John Shaw :
    …..because we were head-down working on books.

    By the way, could you tell us what are the books you are working on ” head-down”
    thx in advance.

  36. James2
    October 30th, 2018 at 23:21 | #36

    @RYV
    I don’t really see the need for such a belligerent post RYV.

    I would imagine this forum is here so the public can be updated by the company on whatever it wants to update us on, and for the public to discuss whatever topics are raised on the forum.

    Asking the company to justify what it is doing seems inappropriate. If you don’t like anything, just don’t use the forum, surely?

    James

  37. RYV
    October 30th, 2018 at 23:35 | #37

    @James2
    it is not belligèrent … English isnt my native language.

    1-i was asking a question.
    2-i got a reply that does not satisfied me
    3-i explain why i desagree with the respond
    4-i ask for new informations

    are you saying we are here just to applause on QC positions ?

  38. Ray
    October 31st, 2018 at 07:06 | #38

    @ RYV

    I guess it’s more about the tone of your comments, but I guess the QC guys are not made of sugar (see e.g. the discussion on the Swiss system last week 🙂 ).

  39. James2
    October 31st, 2018 at 10:19 | #39

    @RYV
    Sorry RYV, I didn’t realise that English wasn’t your first language. That might explain why I perceived the tone as I did.

    I like the sugar comment from Ray. It made me chuckle.

    James

  40. John Shaw
    October 31st, 2018 at 10:30 | #40

    RYV :
    @John Shaw
    so again my question is ” what is the Reason to keep secrecy on certain book and let other be announced long before publication ?”
    I will, accept that you say it is confidential because of ….. but saying ” we have too much work to tell you what we are working on ” is not a serious answer as it will take less than 10 lines or 10 minutes.
    no offense, just my position.

    No offence taken, but there’s nothing confidential being kept secret about our ‘Coming Soon’ section, no exciting conspiracies. As noted in the ‘Vladimir Kramnik’ thread, we did announce the Kramnik book in our catalogue and leaflets. It just never made it to our ‘Coming Soon’ page until yesterday. If we were trying to keep the book a secret, revealing it months ago in our catalogue and 15,000 leaflets would be A Bad Idea.

    Here’s a link to the catalogue: http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/2018-QualityChess-catalog.pdf

    You will see many books that we are working on that are not yet in our ‘Coming Soon’ section.

    In reply to a different question above: the paperback versions of ‘Under the Surface’ and ‘Small Steps to Giant Improvement’ will be available from November 14.

  41. RYV
    October 31st, 2018 at 10:58 | #41

    thx
    i wasnt aware of the qc-catalog pages
    … nice to see you are not confined in the dungeon anymore !

  42. Patrick
    October 31st, 2018 at 16:16 | #42

    @John Shaw

    If you are open to suggestions and “constructive” criticism, I will say that there does appear to be one flaw with this site.

    The “catalog” and “excepts” are all on the main page (www.qualitychess.co.uk). There is no easy way to get to the home page from the blog without outright re-typing the URL.

    The “home” link (the thing that looks like a house next to “Authors In Action”, “Forward Chess”, etc), have you thought about making that link go to the Quality Chess home page rather than the Forum Home Page, which can also be reached by clicking home in the breadcrumbs (just to the right of the Green Arrow that points East)?

    Since the life of the site is this forum, and this is what people likely have in their favorites, possibly a link to the home page so that people can get to the catalog and excerpts might lead to fewer cases of the “I wasn’t aware of the qc-catalog pages” cases and fewer abrasive comments on the Forum.

    Just a thought.

  43. Patrick
    October 31st, 2018 at 16:18 | #43

    Slight correction to the previous comment.

    I shouldn’t say that there is no link to the home page. I should say that IF there is one, it’s not in an obvious spot that would be easy to find and easy to get to. So if it does exist, it should probably be relocated.

  44. Andrew Greet
    October 31st, 2018 at 16:38 | #44

    @Patrick

    The link to the homepage is on the right-hand side of the blog page. (“Shop and book list”)
    Thanks for the comment though, and we will look into other possible ways of doing it.

  45. Paul H
    October 31st, 2018 at 20:03 | #45

    @Andrew Greet
    It used to link from a banner at the top (this was several years ago), but link on right is not too tricky to find.

  46. Leon Trotsky
    November 1st, 2018 at 06:33 | #46

    It is usually one week before paper publication that this book would be out on Forward Chess¿

  47. An Ordinary Chessplayer
    November 1st, 2018 at 13:19 | #47

    I overlooked this “Shop and book list” link, and like Patrick thought there was no way to the main site. Now that I know where the link is, I will be using it! For those times when the comments heat up, or for when I have been away on vacation, would it be possible to have an “All Comments” page with a link to it? Thanks.

  48. Stigma
    November 1st, 2018 at 23:02 | #48

    Speaking of the Quality Chess catalouge, I notice a cover picture of Vishy Anand in there too. Has this book been announced? Is it a regular game collection, a biography or something else?

    Anand is one of my favorite players in modern chess. I admire universal players with a tendency towards active, attacking play.

  49. Stigma
    November 1st, 2018 at 23:13 | #49

    Fwiw I never noticed this “Shop and book list” link either, and always found it a bit strange that there’s no prominent, unmissable link to the Quality Chess homepage on this blog. I would expect to find one at or near the top of the blog page.

    It was never enough of an issue for me personally to complain, but a more visible link would make a lot of business sense for QC.

  50. RYV
    November 2nd, 2018 at 17:27 | #50

    Sicilian books: TP shot first with the Najdorf variation, QC has to reply asap with the Taimanov variation ! is this one (almost) ready or …delayed to 2019 ?

  51. Cowe
    November 2nd, 2018 at 19:01 | #51

    @RYV
    Ready to be delayed, for sure

  52. Thomas
    November 2nd, 2018 at 23:08 | #52

    RYV :
    Sicilian books: TP shot first with the Najdorf variation, QC has to reply asap with the Taimanov variation ! is this one (almost) ready or …delayed to 2019 ?

    You can get many books on the Taimanov from many publishers.
    A good book on the classical would be a real gem.

  53. Tarun
    November 3rd, 2018 at 19:24 | #53

    @Thomas
    Agreed.
    Really Classical Sicilian would be a gem

  54. RYV
    November 3rd, 2018 at 19:31 | #54

    @Thomas
    I think the quality of a GM repertoire serie on the taimanov isnt on the market.
    So far i am using ” the taimanov bible”” ( also from tp) but i really want to see what Pavlidis has to say. Also from the move order as i prefer 2.. e6 as 2..Nc6
    anyway, as for the open game it is Always a good thing to use and compare books from many authors

    agree that a book on the classical would fill the gap. Sure QC team is looking for someone to write about (?!)

  55. November 3rd, 2018 at 21:46 | #55

    @RYV

    I haven’t played the Taimanov for a few years now simply because imo white seems to be doing reasonably well against it…..was looking to see if Pavlidis can breath some new life into it from black’s prospective before giving it another go.

  56. Tarun
    November 4th, 2018 at 07:48 | #56

    I think best author for classical Sicilian is Mihail Marin because he recorded dvd for chessbase about classical Sicilian

  57. middlewave
    November 4th, 2018 at 08:38 | #57

    @Andrew Greet
    I am a daily visitor to this blog and had never noticed that link myself either; although I admit I would have realized it exists if I had looked more carefully.
    I think the simplest solution would be a big logo in the header of the blog, on the right side or something!

  58. Ray
    November 4th, 2018 at 08:39 | #58

    Can anyone explain me what’s so great about the Classical Sicilian from black’s point of view? I don’t get it to be honest.

  59. RYV
    November 4th, 2018 at 09:30 | #59

    @Michael
    which lines are problematic for black ?

  60. RYV
    November 4th, 2018 at 09:45 | #60

    @Ray
    tipical sicilian play. black is just Moving pawns while white is playing for a pieces attack :

    ..c5,.. cxd4, ..d6, ..e6,.. a6,..b5 sometimes ..h6. and THE developing move Qc7. Despite being far behind in developement black is ok.(!?)

  61. Pinpon
    November 4th, 2018 at 16:33 | #61

    @ Jacob : Is “ A matter of technique “ a new version of the 2004 German book or sthg totally different ?

  62. RYV
    November 4th, 2018 at 19:20 | #62

    Back to QI
    from the index of variations, i see 4 chapters on the petrossian variation ( chapter5,6,7,8) where white plays an early 4.a3 to avoid pinning the c3 knight with ..Bb4 like it happend in the Nimzo. But chapter4 deals with 4.Nc3 Bb7 meaning 4..Bb4 isnt the strongest reaction . Does it mean that 4.a3 is a waste of time or an inprecise move that can be played later ?

  63. Lars
    November 4th, 2018 at 21:13 | #63

    When can we expect the release of Avrukh 2B?

  64. Leon Trotsky
    November 4th, 2018 at 22:33 | #64

    @Ray
    Klassikal is underrated Sicilian choice that many think is better or easier for White, but if studied well can be a good choice for Black despite reputation. The lack of resources in Klassikal does not help its reputation if no one talks about her. People maybe think, «since no one writes about Klassikal, she must be bad». Another choice like this for Black is Scheveningen with 5…e6 move order.

    I think Kalashnikow Sicilian also had this reputation until the emergence of Black books few years ago that changed that opinion. Recently Accelerated Dragon probably more popular too in same manner.

  65. Leon Trotsky
    November 4th, 2018 at 22:35 | #65

    I hope QID released on Forward Chess 21 Novembre. Curious on if Roïz recommends the …Aa6 setup against Avrukh’s lines or …Ab7. That line is a tough one in my experience.

  66. Bebbe
    November 4th, 2018 at 22:57 | #66

    @Ray

    The classical Sicilian is great because:

    1. The only really testing variation is the Richter-Rauzer

    2. It is better than its reputation

    3. Gives black excellent winning chances

    4. The Kozul variation is very difficult to play for both White and black. Thus the player with the most experience will have the advantage.

    5. Almost no forced draws

  67. Andrew Greet
    November 5th, 2018 at 12:40 | #67

    RYV :
    Back to QI
    from the index of variations, i see 4 chapters on the petrossian variation ( chapter5,6,7,8) where white plays an early 4.a3 to avoid pinning the c3 knight with ..Bb4 like it happend in the Nimzo. But chapter4 deals with 4.Nc3 Bb7 meaning 4..Bb4 isnt the strongest reaction . Does it mean that 4.a3 is a waste of time or an inprecise move that can be played later ?

    No, 4.a3 is not inaccurate. It’s just a matter of which options White wishes to allow. After 4.Nc3, it’s mostly a matter of taste whether Black prefers 4…Bb7 or 4…Bb4. Similarly, after 4.a3, then 4…Ba6 is a serious alternative to 4…Bb7. In my own QID book, I recommended 4…Bb4 and 4…Ba6 respectively. Roiz prefers 4…Bb7 against both.

    After 4.Nc3 Bb7, I don’t think White has anything better than 5.a3. And after 4.a3 Bb7, he definitely doesn’t have anything better than 5.Nc3. So his choice on move 4 comes down to which of Black’s alternatives he is happier to allow. Hope that makes sense.

  68. Patrick
    November 5th, 2018 at 15:04 | #68

    RYV :Back to QIfrom the index of variations, i see 4 chapters on the petrossian variation ( chapter5,6,7,8) where white plays an early 4.a3 to avoid pinning the c3 knight with ..Bb4 like it happend in the Nimzo. But chapter4 deals with 4.Nc3 Bb7 meaning 4..Bb4 isnt the strongest reaction . Does it mean that 4.a3 is a waste of time or an inprecise move that can be played later ?

    Just because one author chooses to cover 4.Nc3 Bb7 doesn’t automatically mean that 4…Bb4 isn’t the strongest reaction. If it did, you would have to burn either Playing the French or the first two books of the Grandmaster Repertoire on the French since clearly 3…Nf6 and 3…Bb4 can’t both be the “best move”.

    Point being, the author either personally prefers 4…Bb7 over 4…Bb4, or else maybe he chose that line if it has less theory than 4…Bb4, or if in his Nimzo book (which I don’t own), if he chose 4…c5 or 4…O-O instead of 4…b6 against 4.Nf3, then he chose 4…Bb7 because 4…Bb4 would conflict with the Nimzo Repertoire.

  69. Patrick
    November 5th, 2018 at 15:12 | #69

    Ray :Can anyone explain me what’s so great about the Classical Sicilian from black’s point of view? I don’t get it to be honest.

    Probably just Classical Sicilian advocates tooting their horn. Najdorf advocates would say the same thing about the Najdorf Sicilian. Dragon advocates would say the same thing about the Dragon Sicilian.

    It’s just people being stupid! I play 1…e6 and 1…e5 (Petroff vs 2.Nf3). Does that make those moves best? No, and that’s why I don’t go tooting my horn about them.

    1…e5, 1…c5, 1…e6, and 1…c6 are all respectable against 1.e4, and whichever one of those four leads to positions that make the most sense to you is the one you should play.

    The other 16 moves are either vastly inferior (1…d5, 1…d6, 1…g6, 1…Nf6, 1…Nc6), borderline cr*p (1…b6, 1…a6) or complete utter garbage, namely the nine not listed.

  70. Tim S
    November 5th, 2018 at 15:40 | #70

    Ray :
    Can anyone explain me what’s so great about the Classical Sicilian from black’s point of view? I don’t get it to be honest.

    I think the Classical Sicilian comments are mostly due to there not having been a book on it for a long time. However, the question has already been addressed by members of the QC team on the forum, so it gets a bit tiring to read it time and again. I imagine it’s hard to find a good author who wants to write a book where White is objectively better, when there are other openings they can write about where that isn’t the case.

  71. Ray
    November 5th, 2018 at 17:18 | #71

    @Tim S
    I agree. Even if the ‘only’ really testing variation against it is the Rauzer, I don’t need more than one refutation :-). I think Negi made quite a convincing case for white. On the other hand, if there is room for a GM Rep book on the Pirc, I think it’s fair to claim that the Classical Sicilian should also be covered. But first the Elephant Gambit 🙂 .

  72. Thomas
    November 5th, 2018 at 19:57 | #72

    In 2018 we saw Stocek’s crushing win against Wei Yi, we saw Carlsen having no problems against Anand, or succesful performances by Demchenko against mostly weaker opponents.
    Adhiban, Dubov , Bacrot or Li Chao also played the Classical.
    Maybe it’s not that bad.

  73. RYV
    November 5th, 2018 at 19:58 | #73

    Ok Roiz choose Bb7 instead of Bb4. Does he give an explanation in the book ? If it is because he think the Bb4 line is not as good as the Bb7 line and does he give the line(s) that cause problems to black ?
    If it is a “mater of taste” and that both line are of equal value, i found it a little frustrated because then we have only a “half book” about the QI missing the 4.Nc3 Bb4 line. This is a problem that i have found in many recent books. The author reject rather an arbitrary way a whole part of the openning just because of personnal preference.
    Dont you think that as long as the lines are approximately of equal value , all lines should be covered in an openning book?

  74. RYV
    November 5th, 2018 at 20:05 | #74

    not many games at top level with the classical sicilian because…. not many games at top level with 1.e4
    at lower level, that is mostly in open tournaments i think black prefer shaper play with dragons,kalash., or even more unbalanced openning ( pirc, alekhine, scandinavian…)

  75. Andrew Greet
    November 5th, 2018 at 21:59 | #75

    RYV :
    Dont you think that as long as the lines are approximately of equal value , all lines should be covered in an openning book?

    Absolutely not. I don’t want to be too blunt, but you do understand the concept of a repertoire book, don’t you?

  76. RYV
    November 6th, 2018 at 06:04 | #76

    @Andrew Greet
    can you please develop and explain about the concept of a repertoire book?

  77. Jo Pi
    November 6th, 2018 at 09:36 | #77

    @RYV
    They make a selection.
    If you would write a repertoire book about 1.e4 you don’t cover 1.d4, 1.c4 or 1.Nf3 even though the moves might be of approximately equal value?

  78. Andrew Greet
    November 6th, 2018 at 09:44 | #78

    @RYV

    It means the author doesn’t attempt to cover the entire opening, but instead provides a repertoire (meaning a set of recommendations in that opening) for one side. In its purest form, this would involve one recommendation against every plausible option for the opponent. By focusing on a narrower area, the author can provide greater analytical detail.
    Another way of explaining it is to say that if Roiz had covered 4.Nc3 Bb4, 4.a3 Ba6, and 4.g3 Bb7, in addition to the lines he recommended, then the book would have become much too large – or to keep it a sensible size, the analysis would have had to be much less detailed. We would never take such an approach; the name of our company is Quality Chess – not Quantity Chess!

  79. Ray
    November 6th, 2018 at 12:10 | #79

    @RYV
    Excuse me? Not many games on top level with 1.e4?! You must be kidding 🙂

  80. Ray
    November 6th, 2018 at 12:12 | #80

    @Thomas
    Carlsen likes slightly offbeat surprise weapons. He has also played the Ponziani if I remember correctly. But I agree the Classical Sicilian is playable of course.

  81. Ray
    November 6th, 2018 at 12:14 | #81

    @Andrew Greet
    I think that’s not entirely true – Shaw’s book on the King’s Gambit is not a repertoire book and yet provides a lot of detail. But it almost killed him 🙂 .

  82. Andrew Greet
    November 6th, 2018 at 12:32 | #82

    @Ray
    That book grew to a ridiculous size. We published it anyway, but decided afterwards that we mustn’t let this sort of thing happen again. We have mostly succeeded, with the odd exception such as the first Playing 1.e4 volume. Clearly having Shaw as an author is dangerous for our printing bills!

  83. Patrick
    November 6th, 2018 at 15:34 | #83

    RYV :Ok Roiz choose Bb7 instead of Bb4. Does he give an explanation in the book ? If it is because he think the Bb4 line is not as good as the Bb7 line and does he give the line(s) that cause problems to black ?If it is a “mater of taste” and that both line are of equal value, i found it a little frustrated because then we have only a “half book” about the QI missing the 4.Nc3 Bb4 line. This is a problem that i have found in many recent books. The author reject rather an arbitrary way a whole part of the openning just because of personnal preference.Dont you think that as long as the lines are approximately of equal value , all lines should be covered in an openning book?

    That’s the difference between a REPERTOIRE book and a complete coverage book, which with the amount of theory out there today, is virtually impossible. Supposedly, New In Chess claims that their recent book completely covers the English Opening objectively, but otherwise, the last time you would routinely see complete coverage books would be in the 90s with those 320-page database dumps by John Nunn, many times co-authored with another writer.

    A Repertoire book is written for one side and the author covers a specific set of lines, not the entirety of the opening.

  84. Patrick
    November 6th, 2018 at 15:39 | #84

    Andrew Greet :@Ray That book grew to a ridiculous size. We published it anyway, but decided afterwards that we mustn’t let this sort of thing happen again. We have mostly succeeded, with the odd exception such as the first Playing 1.e4 volume. Clearly having Shaw as an author is dangerous for our printing bills!

    There are a few “non-Shaw” books from you guys that got overly large. Not sure what your cutoff is between deeming something too big or not, but I’d say over 600 pages is a bit much. That would qualify books such as:

    The first of the 5 King’s Indian Books – the one on the Fianchetto Variation. Wasn’t that something like 720 pages?

    Grandmaster Repertoire 2 (first edition, before the A and B breakup), which was I believe 1.d4 and not 1…d5 from Black. That was by Avrukh, right?

  85. Benjamin Fitch
    November 6th, 2018 at 17:16 | #85

    Personally, I’ve never found a book to be “too large”. (Is the dictionary “too large”? ) It’s like a pizza; you can save some for later. For correspondence chess, where you use books as a reference instead of relying on memorization, there’s definitely no such thing as too large. I wouldn’t object to nine 720-page volumes on the English Opening for use in correspondence chess. There’s the price, of course, and shelf space, but look at what the budget and space requirements are for some other sports. What’s the use of a nice, short book that doesn’t “have the space” cover a certain interesting sideline that has plenty of existing theory and that your opponent just happened to choose in one of your current correspondence games? The thoroughness of books by Shaw, Kotronias, and Avrukh etc. is what I think of when I think of Quality Chess.

  86. The Lurker
    November 6th, 2018 at 17:38 | #86

    Andrew Greet :

    RYV :
    Dont you think that as long as the lines are approximately of equal value , all lines should be covered in an openning book?

    Absolutely not. I don’t want to be too blunt, but you do understand the concept of a repertoire book, don’t you?

    In RYV’s defense, an opening book doesn’t *have* to be a repertoire book. They usually are nowadays, it seems, but there are opening books that take a more encyclopedic approach. Some people prefer breadth over depth.

  87. Andrew Greet
    November 6th, 2018 at 17:56 | #87

    @Patrick
    Yes, Kotronias’s first KID volume was a monster, and that was after we made him trim some material! We learned from it and managed to keep the remaining volumes at a more sensible size. And yes, all GM 1.d4 books are by Avrukh. Again, we learned from the size of GM 2 (especially considering the natural expansion of theory) and managed to get the updated volumes (1A, 1B etc) down to a more sensible scale.

    @Benjamin Fitch
    Of course, for the customer there is no such thing as ‘too large’, as you get a wealth of quality content for not much more money than a normal-sized book. But for the publisher,
    the added production costs of extra editing/proofreading time, printing bills and shipping costs (due to heavier books and bulkier shipments with fewer books fitting into a box) really start to hurt when the books become so massive.

  88. Andrew Greet
    November 6th, 2018 at 18:59 | #88

    In RYV’s defense, an opening book doesn’t *have* to be a repertoire book. They usually are nowadays, it seems, but there are opening books that take a more encyclopedic approach. Some people prefer breadth over depth.

    It’s true that a book doesn’t *have* to be a repertoire book, but the title of “Grandmaster Repertoire – The Queen’s Indian” makes it pretty clear which approach the author is taking.

  89. The Lurker
    November 6th, 2018 at 20:50 | #89

    @Andrew Greet
    True enough, the title gives away that it’s a repertoire. But RYV just gave away that he’s not a native speaker of English.

    I would sometimes prefer a more old-fashioned A1b2 approach to opening books myself. It allows me to pick my favorite path, instead of having to buy yet another book if I don’t like the one path set out by the author.

    I know the word “Quality” is right in the name of QC, but quality doesn’t necessarily mean always aiming for grandmaster level players as customers. One can aim at lower level customers, and still do a quality job. One just has to hit the target one is aiming for.

  90. RYV
    November 6th, 2018 at 21:27 | #90

    well, the argument about the size/weight of the book is not of major concern. As long as there are good Reasons to fill pages ( complex position, lots of reference games, many variations of interest, deep analysis…) it is Always positive to the reader and the editor. And if it turn too big for a single book from a pratical point of view, there is no problem to split in two (+) volumes .
    My understanding of the principle of ” repertoire” from white or black point of view is very close to yours. You should propose at least one line (hopefully correct) against any of your opponent potential move. And i agree that you cannot analyse in depth all of your own possibilities… but i think it is highly instructive to have a discussion about the various choices you have to face. For example, if you can play A)..Ne4 B)..Bd6 or C)..h6 ( all of them being playable) and you decide for variation C and analyse it for 100 pages and 5 chapters. I think you should also spend some pages to explain why you dislike or discard A & B.

    Just writing Something like ” variation A and B are playable but this book will focus only on variation C” seems to me there is Something missing. I dont ask for a complete study of all 3 variations but having a few pages making clear why C and not A/B or giving references for other work on A/B are welcome.

    Anyway, QC books are great ans i am Always looking for new ones!

  91. Thomas
    November 6th, 2018 at 21:31 | #91

    RYV :
    well, the argument about the size/weight of the book is not of major concern. As long as there are good Reasons to fill pages ( complex position, lots of reference games, many variations of interest, deep analysis…) it is Always positive to the reader and the editor. And if it turn too big for a single book from a pratical point of view, there is no problem to split in two (+) volumes .

    You definitely shouldn’t run a business.

  92. RYV
    November 6th, 2018 at 21:39 | #92

    @Thomas
    why ?
    two books = double price

  93. Ray
    November 7th, 2018 at 06:49 | #93

    Imo the ‘complete’ approach to opening books doesn’t make much sense nowadays. Sure, you can easily fill 9 volumes on just about any opening, but it’s so easy nowadays to fill in the blanks ‘yourself’ with the help of an engine. I think it’s much more useful to give a solid ‘roadmap’ with a thorough decription of the typical plans and reasons certain moves are more or less strong. For me, the QC books hit the right balance. I really fail to see the use of a 9 volume tome for correspondence players. I would think they woul rely on their own computer analysis.

  94. Andrew Greet
    November 7th, 2018 at 10:22 | #94

    We have learned over the years that no matter how good the book, you can never please everyone. We generally favour the repertoire approach for opening books: we do it well, and our sales figures indicate that customers are mostly interested in this type of book. (There are some exceptions, such as the King’s Gambit which has sold well, but this was an exceptional book containing a huge amount of information at a modest price.)

    In certain situations, there is something to be said for an author explaining why he favoured move A instead of move B. Avrukh’s newer 1.d4 books are a good example, as he often says something about why he rejected an option from the original GM 1 or GM 2 in favour of a different line in the newer book, such as volume 2B which I am working on now. But when there are two or more serious options early in the opening, and the author just has to choose either the one he plays himself or the one he personally prefers, I don’t see how it adds much value to fill valuable pages discussing the alternative(s).

  95. Paul H
    November 7th, 2018 at 12:01 | #95

    @Andrew Greet
    Are there any possibilities of an Andrew Greet QC book at some point, or are you too busy editing these days?

  96. Andrew Greet
    November 7th, 2018 at 15:16 | #96

    @Paul H
    I wouldn’t rule it out completely, but don’t expect any book authored by me in the near future.

  97. Robert R
    November 7th, 2018 at 16:55 | #97

    A nice touch to QC repertoire books would be to include lists (for private study), of games arranged by endgame themes. Culling games for ending and middle game themes before memorizing opening moves was recommended in Excelling at Chess. Books structured in this fashion, or dedicated entirely to the themes, would be amazingly amazing. But lists would work too.

  98. TD
    November 7th, 2018 at 17:04 | #98

    @Andrew Greet
    A new, improved and expanded edition of your excellent book “Starting Out: The Accelerated Dragon” !

  99. Andrew Greet
    November 7th, 2018 at 17:24 | #99

    @Robert R
    Perhaps for certain openings this could work well. A good example is the Berlin Defence; if I remember correctly, John Cox did discuss some thematic endgames before jumping in to the opening theory. Nikos’s QGD was another example where the subject matter lent itself to a discussion of themes and pawn structures before the theory. So we have already done this to some extent, when the author and subject material favour such an approach.

    @TD
    If and when a book by me happens, it won’t be on the Acc. Dragon. Not that it’s a bad opening, but I haven’t played it in years.

  100. Benjamin Fitch
    November 7th, 2018 at 17:49 | #100

    @Ray As high as the engines’ ratings might be, I still don’t find it feasible to trust them completely in openings analysis or, certainly, to *understand* their choices compared with having the guidance of a super-strong and experienced human with good writing and organizing skills.

    BTW, I actually love good repertoire books and don’t necessarily prefer “complete” openings books, but within a repertoire book I really appreciate the thoroughness of a Kotronias or Shaw.

  101. Siddhartha Gautama
    November 7th, 2018 at 18:48 | #101

    Speaking about the GM Cox Berlin Book, is it from an theoretically viewpoint stlil viable? If no, is there an update book in the far future possible?

  102. RYV
    November 7th, 2018 at 20:13 | #102

    Andrew Greet :
    ..and the author just has to choose.., I don’t see how it adds much value to fill valuable pages discussing the alternative(s).

    i think you are wrong as ( for me) it is the essential point.

    a repertoire book is a serie of recommendation about the line to play.
    each time there is a choice, the author makes a decision and give a recommendation to follow a particular line.
    the crucial point is not what decision he takes but why he takes that decision.
    And the Reason why he makes a recommendation cannot be taken without discussing alternative moves. a choice given without the objective argument is of relative value as for me it feels like a random decision. ( it can be good or it can be not so good)
    that is my way and i will not blindly follow advices given without a motivated explanation ( true for chess and true for life).

  103. Ray
    November 8th, 2018 at 07:51 | #103

    @RYV
    I think you are looking at this too ‘scientifically’. As a practical chess player I only need 1 good line. If the analysis of that line is convincing for me, I don’t necessarily need to know how it compares to other lines. There might be lines out there that are objectively better, but so what?

  104. Andrew Greet
    November 8th, 2018 at 10:05 | #104

    @RYV
    As I see it, there are two main categories of situation where the author chooses one move and rejects one or more alternatives:

    Category 1: Several moves into an opening variation, there is a clear, demonstrable problem with one move and a specific reason for favouring the move being recommended.

    Category 2: Early in the opening, there are two or more tried-and-tested options which are equally playable, and the choice comes down to subjective preference.

    Isn’t it obvious that it’s useful when the author provides details of why he rejected the inferior move in Category 1, but that in Category 2 it’s impossible to prove that either move is superior, so it’s pointless to discuss the rejected move in detail?

  105. Andrew Greet
    November 8th, 2018 at 10:11 | #105

    Since this question was originally raised in post #73 with regard to the choice of 4…Bb7 rather than 4…Bb4 in the Queen’s Indian, I will quote the comment given by Roiz after 4.Nc3:

    “This move invites 4…Bb4 with a Nimzo/Queen’s Indian hybrid, but we will stick to the ‘pure’ QID alternative. We may, however, consider …Bb4 in the near future, depending on how White proceeds.”

    No further analysis is needed, and he did (sort of) give a reason that this was the ‘pure’ QID option. Now that I have read it again, I see that as the editor I could have mentioned the additional point that the companion Nimzo-Indian book already recommended meeting 4.Nf3 with 4…c5 (rather than 4…b6), so 4…Bb4 in the QID line would be inconsistent.

  106. JB
    November 8th, 2018 at 12:39 | #106

    Slightly off topic but though I feel I “should” get this to understand other structures than my usual qgd/slav defence to d4 but do I really need any more opening books? I’m hanging on for a good line against the Spanish from negi but after that I feel I’m done for my club level world and I’ll never need any new wrinkles in theory in the future now QC and other sources have given me a bombproof great repertoire for both white and black. Still think improvement books will still be relevant but as far as openings probably not though I’m happy for you (QC staff or not) to convince me otherwise. Thanks

  107. Andrew Greet
    November 8th, 2018 at 13:32 | #107

    @JB
    We’re pleased to have fulfilled all or most of your repertoire needs! If you are happy with your repertoire for both sides then it certainly seems a good plan to focus on improving other parts of your game for the time being. If there comes a time when you want to add something new to your repertoire, or you just happen to find some future book interesting or inspiring (think Elephant Gambit!), then that’s the time to think about making a new purchase.

  108. RYV
    November 8th, 2018 at 13:51 | #108

    ” the choice comes down to subjective preference.”
    this does not implied that the choice can’t be discuss or explain. Subjective preference means that from the elements that enters people decision, the author decides on optionA; while using the same input elements someone else decision will come to option B. So i think it is interresting to have access to the author basic reflexion. A simple example to illustrate : option A gives you a scattered pawn structure with the bishop pair, OptionB maintain your fluent pawn structure at the cost of the bishop pair. You might choose option A because your preference is goes to B’s pair and i will choose option B because structure is my major concern. None of options A or B are better so These are recomendations based on subjective preference but it is still worth knowing what drives the preference.

  109. RYV
    November 8th, 2018 at 14:08 | #109

    ‘Early in the opening,”
    I dont really understand why the fact that it happend on move 6 or on move 26 will change Something. As long as it is relevant to the topic of the opening, you should deal with it whatever on move number…( unless you specialise on the carabeian sub-line of th MVL line of the poisonned variation of the Najdorf type of the sicilian defence;))

  110. Andrew Greet
    November 8th, 2018 at 14:41 | #110

    If there’s a choice between two options with massively different strategic implications, then absolutely, I would expect the author to say something about the choice. But if we are talking about something like the difference between 4…Bb7 and 4…Ba6 in the Queen’s Indian, or White choosing between 5.Bf4 and 5.Bg5 in the Queen’s Gambit Declined, I would expect the readers to understand that both are playable but the author has a personal preference for whatever has been covered in the book.

    By the way, this discussion has deviated quite a long way from your original post where you were complaining that 4.Nc3 Bb4 had not been analysed by Roiz, and I explained that this is not something that could reasonably be expected in a repertoire book.

    Anyway, I’ve explained as best as I can how we determine what should or should not be included in a repertoire book. If you still don’t accept it then we can agree to differ.

  111. RYV
    November 8th, 2018 at 14:50 | #111

    QI
    my point is that when white choses Nf3 instead of Nc3 in the first few moves. It is mostly to avoid facing the Nimzo-indian. Black decide for the QI with 3..b6. and after white’s 4.Nc3 i am surprise that he position has change so much (?!) that Bb4 isnt no more the first choice.
    Then i learned that this position is no more referenced as QI but as Nimzo-QI-hybrid. Is there Something planed about a GM rep on Nimzo-QI-hybrid ( and maybe Bogo-indian)to complete the serie?
    ( it is a constructive talk so no offense on you and most respect on roiz work)

  112. Andrew Greet
    November 8th, 2018 at 15:00 | #112

    RYV :
    QI
    Is there Something planed about a GM rep on Nimzo-QI-hybrid ( and maybe Bogo-indian)to complete the serie?

    We have no such book in the works at the moment. If you particularly interested in the Nimzo-QID hybrid, I covered it pretty well in “Play the Queen’s Indian”, published by Everyman. It’s a few years old but most of the recommendations have held up quite well, as far as I know.

  113. RYV
    November 8th, 2018 at 15:18 | #113

    thanks a lot- I will look at

    It is funny that you argue the 4..Bb4 isnt cover in Roiz’s GM-Queen’s Indian defence because it is a Nimzo-QI-Hybrid and not a “pure”QI line and at the same time the line is deeply covered in your book titled ‘play the queen’s indian”

    “life without contradiction isnt real life” Confucius (?)

  114. Andrew Greet
    November 8th, 2018 at 16:51 | #114

    I know you’re mostly joking so I don’t take this too seriously – but still, it wasn’t really a contradiction because the remark about 4…Bb7 being ‘pure’ QID was Roiz’s comment – I was merely quoting it to let people know what he said about it. 4…Bb4 is a completely viable interpretation of the QID which happened to be my personal favourite when I wrote my book.

  115. RYV
    November 8th, 2018 at 18:27 | #115

    ECO codes for the position after 4..Bb4 & Bb7 only mention “E12 Queen’s indian” or “E21 Nimzo-indian”

    Nimzo-QI-Hybrid does not appear anywhere in ECO. Is this name from an other chess classification system, or database or common usage due to move order ?

  116. Andrew Greet
    November 9th, 2018 at 10:12 | #116

    I don’t really care about ECO codes: they were invented decades ago and would be quite different if they were based on today’s knowledge. But anyway, I think I saw this variation referred to as the Nimzo-QI hybrid in some previous book, and I continue to use it as it seems the most apt way of describing Black’s set-up.

  117. RYV
    November 9th, 2018 at 15:11 | #117

    there is a new book on QI in preparation at CS. From the table of content 4.Nc3 is being met by ..Bb4 ( “main road”). The move Bb7 being played only in the Petrossian variation. Maybe i should ask them why they Don’t analyse 4..Bb7 (LOL!).
    do you know if their recomendations on other lines are the same as Roiz’s book ?

  118. Hard Truther
    November 9th, 2018 at 23:39 | #118

    ECO codes are vital for database use.

  119. Andrew Greet
    November 12th, 2018 at 10:40 | #119

    @RYV
    I assume you mean the Chess Stars one. Obviously I haven’t seen any more than the contents page but it’s a surprising choice for a repertoire book, as the author is effectively asking the reader to learn two systems instead of one. In you are meeting 4.a3 with 4…Bb7 anyway, then it makes more sense to meet 4.Nc3 with 4…Bb7, as White has nothing better than 5.a3. I’m sure it will be a good book overall, and maybe there will be some explanation of why he has chosen these apparently mismatched lines.

  120. Thomas
    November 12th, 2018 at 13:07 | #120

    Andrew Greet :
    In you are meeting 4.a3 with 4…Bb7 anyway, then it makes more sense to meet 4.Nc3 with 4…Bb7, as White has nothing better than 5.a3.

    Maybe White could try 5.Bg5.

  121. Andrew Greet
    November 12th, 2018 at 13:34 | #121

    Sure, 5.Bg5 is a move, but not a dangerous one. From Black’s perspective, learning to deal with 5.Bg5 and other options (after 4.Nc3 Bb7) is a piece of cake compared with the complexities of 4.Nc3 Bb4.

  122. hasan
    November 12th, 2018 at 16:48 | #122

    When the book of the Queen indian will be on sale in the EU

  123. Jacob Aagaard
    November 12th, 2018 at 17:12 | #123

    Published 28th November. Forward Chess 21st November.

  124. James2
    November 13th, 2018 at 00:14 | #124

    Hi Jacob/Andrew,

    While this might not be the correct thread for this, presumably Avrukh 2B is not going to be released in 2018 for my Christmas list is it (given that we’ve heard next to nothing about it over the last few months)? If this is the case, hopefully an Easter (April) release next year?

    Thank you.

    James

  125. Andrew Greet
    November 13th, 2018 at 10:10 | #125

    @James2
    I have some good news for you: I am editing the book now. The author still needs to finish a few things, mostly just some missing lines that he forgot to analyse. What I have seen so far looks excellent. It won’t quite be published in time for Christmas but we are definitely looking at early in 2019.

  126. November 13th, 2018 at 17:00 | #126

    @Andrew Greet

    Hi Andrew,

    Do you have similar good news for us on the Taimanov?

    Cheers
    Michael.

  127. Pinpon
    November 13th, 2018 at 17:40 | #127

    @Pinpon
    Ok , it is a secret 🙂

  128. Andrew Greet
    November 13th, 2018 at 18:05 | #128

    @Michael
    Taimanov is also underway, with John editing. Again, it won’t be out in time for Christmas but we hope it won’t be too long afterwards.

  129. James2
    November 13th, 2018 at 18:19 | #129

    @Andrew Greet
    Great stuff!! Thank you Andrew!

  130. RYV
    November 13th, 2018 at 18:20 | #130

    Can you describe and explain the editing process ?

  131. Andrew Greet
    November 13th, 2018 at 18:54 | #131

    @RYV
    I could if I really wanted to, but I have better things to do with my life.

  132. RYV
    November 13th, 2018 at 19:27 | #132

    Ok.
    Do you use beta readers during editing process or is it only QCteam internal work?

  133. November 14th, 2018 at 05:37 | #133

    @Andrew Greet

    Thanks Andrew,

    Looking forward to it…

    Cheers
    Michael.

  134. John Shaw
    November 14th, 2018 at 10:45 | #134

    RYV :
    Ok.
    Do you use beta readers during editing process or is it only QCteam internal work?

    We very occasionally ask an outsider to read through a book, but usually we prefer to keep everything in-house.

  135. RYV
    November 14th, 2018 at 19:59 | #135

    Andrew Greet :
    @Michael
    Taimanov is also underway, with John editing. Again, it won’t be out in time for Christmas but we hope it won’t be too long afterwards.

    you are editing opening book’s from white and from black perspective. How do you deal with critical lines that should be covered from both side? for exemple, with this taimanov book ( black ‘s viewpoint) what’s happened to Negi’s or your(JS) recomendation as white ?

  136. RYV
    November 14th, 2018 at 20:09 | #136

    the Taimanov GM rep was my most awaited book for this year. I hope it is Worth the delay;
    Is there a special chapter (or more!) about move order between Nc6, e6, Qc7, a6 ?

  137. Alex
    November 25th, 2018 at 01:01 | #137

    I want to use this but my concern for the Nimzo/QID complexes was always about white avoiding them by starting 1. Nf3, going 1. c4, maybe 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 etc. Maybe there can be a 3rd book for handling those in a way consistent with the rest of the repertoire.

  138. Alex
    November 25th, 2018 at 01:02 | #138

    I want to use this but my concern for the Nimzo/QID complexes was always about white avoiding them by starting 1. Nf3, going 1. c4, maybe 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 etc. Maybe there can be a 3rd book for handling those in a way consistent with the rest of the repertoire.

  139. Patrick
    November 27th, 2018 at 16:24 | #139

    I have a specific question about Roiz’s two books.

    In Moskalenko’s book “The Even More Flexible French”, there are NUMEROUS references to pages or chapters in “The Wonderful Winawer”, a book he wrote 6 years earlier that even if you don’t play the Winawer, you can get lost with what is going on in “The Even More Flexible French” due to the numerous references if you don’t also own The Wonderful Winawer (I do own both).

    Are Roiz’s books the same way? Does he make a bunch of references to the QID book in his NID book and vice versa? Or can they be read independently?

    I ask because I mainly play 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 as Black right now, and have looked recently at some older resources on the Nimzo-Indian, and was wondering if it would be useful to get the book on the Nimzo-Indian, but NOT the book on the Queen’s Indian, or if there were a bunch of cross-references? I find the exchange QGD with Nge2 lines annoying, and was looking at shifting to 2…Nf6 and the Nimzo-Indian against 3.Nc3, but still playing 3…d5 against 3.Nf3.

    Would it be useful to get just his Nimzo book? Or are there a bunch of references to the QID book that would make one useless without the other?

    Thanks.

  140. Andrew Greet
    November 27th, 2018 at 17:17 | #140

    Alex :
    I want to use this but my concern for the Nimzo/QID complexes was always about white avoiding them by starting 1. Nf3, going 1. c4, maybe 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 etc. Maybe there can be a 3rd book for handling those in a way consistent with the rest of the repertoire.

    No matter what you play against 1.d4, you will always have to figure out a suitable antidote to those options by White, and the Nimzo/QID is no different in that regard.

    We already have two excellent books covering those lines: Avrukh’s GM 11 handles all 1.d4 lines without c2-c4 extremely well from Black’s perspective; and Mikhalevski’s GM 19 is a great resource for dealing with 1.c4 and 1.Nf3, plus all other alternatives to 1.e4 and 1.d4. GM 19 has one line I can think of where Mikhalevski allows a QID transposition to a different line from Roiz’s repertoire, so you would still have to do a bit of independent work – but that aside, these two books contain practically everything you need to know to deal with the lines you mentioned.

  141. Andrew Greet
    November 27th, 2018 at 17:23 | #141

    @Patrick

    Even though the books are intended to provide a complete repertoire after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6, they can be used completely independently of each other. So if you just want to play the Nimzo but not the QID, you will be absolutely fine with the Nimzo book.

  142. James2
    November 29th, 2018 at 11:24 | #142

    My copy of Roiz’s book is in the post as I type! I’m looking forward to this one as Roiz is a great author who can explain what is going on tremendously well.

    James

  143. James2
    November 29th, 2018 at 11:33 | #143

    I forgot to add, is there any news on Negi 5 at all? I’m thinking this won’t be in our hands until June/July next year….

    James

  144. Jacob Aagaard
    November 29th, 2018 at 13:12 | #144

    @James2
    I am hoping to have it out in the spring

  145. James2
    November 29th, 2018 at 15:01 | #145

    @Jacob Aagaard
    Great Jacob, thank you. That should be another one to look forward to.

    James

  146. Arkadishj
    November 30th, 2018 at 04:33 | #146

    Could someone tell me what Negi’s book 5 is about?
    Maybe against 1…e5? If so, it would be wonderful.

  147. James2
    November 30th, 2018 at 07:53 | #147

    @Arkadishj
    Everything else not covered apart from 1 e4 e5 (which will be in book 6). Therefore I think this means everything not covered as yet with an ECO code from B00 to B09 (or whatever Pirc line is chosen).

    1 e4 v 1 xx, d5, Nf6, g6, d6.

    James

  148. RYV
    November 30th, 2018 at 21:22 | #148

    about the coming Taimanov Sicilian GMrep .

    Will you discuss about the early move order with the Kan m.o. ( 2..e6 & 4..a6) the classic Taimanov(2..e6 & 4..Nc6), the Paulsen (?) & the “serbian” (2..Nc6 & 4..Qc7) ?

    As the book seems to be still on the way, one chapter will be a nice add to figure out the possibles transpositions & benefits of each move order. As for example, the serbian move order cuts any b4 gambit but does not avoid the Rossolimo, the Kan m.o. avoid early Nxc6 by white and so on.
    Starting the book only after the position in cover picture without getting a look at the above moves would miss something ( in my opinion)

  149. James2
    November 30th, 2018 at 23:41 | #149

    I have a quick question regarding using Mikhalevski (Beating Unusual Openings) together with Roiz QID.

    Mikhalevski gives 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 g3 b6 3 Bg2 Bb7 4 0-0 e6 and now if white does not play a KIA approach of 5 d3 and plays 5 c4 (p413 by transposition) Mikhalevski gives 5 Be7. If white nw plays 6 d4, then this is not the line given by Roiz and Mikhlavski only mentions it is a transposition to QID with nothing else. If 5 d4 is played here then a choice is given by Mikhalevski (p389) of either 5..c5 with a Hedgehog (not covered in the book as pointed out by the author) or 5 Be7 when 6 c4 leads to the same QID not analysed in Roiz above.

    Am I missing something here or is this a gap?

    Thank you very much.

    James

  150. John A Johnson
    December 1st, 2018 at 02:44 | #150

    I have only looked at the first two chapters but I really like what I have read/studied so far. I will have to dig out Mikhalevski and look at the line James2 mentions.

  151. Steve
    December 2nd, 2018 at 11:41 | #151

    The Mikhalevski book is also incompatible with Avrukh’s Gruenfeld repertoire, in the sense that it allows white to transpose into the Fianchetto variation without …, c6. I don’t really mind, but I wonder how these repertoire decisions are made? Presumably each author chooses the lines they like without regard to transpositions being suitable for other GMR books.

  152. Cowe
    December 3rd, 2018 at 09:24 | #152

    @James2
    re 1.e4 d6, I think Negi has already addressed the Philidor mainline in an earlier book. Just 15-20 pages but utterly brilliant, and probably the reason why many players dropped the Philidor as “potato masher” in favour of …g6 Spanish or the like. White is spoilt for choice against the Philidor as Shaw also gave sensible lines with slow kingside expansion, burt reading Negi makes one really want to see the Philidor on the board 🙂

  153. Andrew Greet
    December 3rd, 2018 at 10:28 | #153

    @James2
    @Steve

    You are not missing anything James; in fact, if you scroll up to reply #140 on this thread, this ‘gap’ is what I was referring to.
    Steve’s guess about how the decisions are made is more or less accurate. Of course we think of these things in advance, so in the case of the recent Roiz book, we explained the situation with Mikhalevski and said it would be convenient if the QID repertoire could meet 4.g3 with 4…Bb7. However, Roiz explained that he preferred to recommend 4…Ba6 and we respected his wish. The authors work independently of each other and I think we handled it in the right way.

  154. Andrew Greet
    December 3rd, 2018 at 10:40 | #154

    For anyone wanting to follow both Mikhalevski and Roiz, I have a few possible solutions to this move order:
    1) Just play Mikhalevski’s stuff anyway, as you’ll probably find that most players prefer to postpone d2-d4 for a while longer. So just learn some basic lines in the …Bb7 QID, just in case.
    2) If you’re not comfortable with that, switch to a different line such as 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 e6 followed by …d5.
    3) Consider meeting 1.Nf3 with 1…d5, as long as you have something ready against 2.d4 followed by c4.
    I have tried all three of these approaches and mostly favour option 3 nowadays, but do whatever makes the most sense for you, and always consider the repertoire habits of the opponent as well.

  155. James2
    December 3rd, 2018 at 12:23 | #155

    This is great Andrew. Thank you for your kind suggestions.

    James

  156. An Ordinary Chessplayer
    December 3rd, 2018 at 19:06 | #156

    Further on to Andrew Greet’s 3 options, what I would choose might vary depending on my white repertoire.
    1) If I play 1.d4 as white, and specifically 4.g3 against the QID, option 1 is attractive, because I need to know those lines anyway. And an opponent who “tricks” me this way might be surprised to find that I know how to play this variation as well.
    2) If I play 1.e4 as white, then option 2 leads to a narrower range of position types than option 3. Or if I play 1.c4 as white, then option 2 is likely closer to my white repertoire.
    3) If I am a generic 1.d4 player (compared to option 1), then I should be comfortable after 1.Nf3 d5 if white plays some reversed Indian. And against 2.d4+3.c4, option 3 gives me the widest range of classical black responses. For example, 2.d4 Nf6 3.c4 e6 is just the same as option 2. I have to know those from the white side already, and could even pick and choose based on the player across from me.

  157. Mateus
    December 8th, 2018 at 15:57 | #157

    The books of Roiz (“The Queens Indian Defense”) and Mikhalevshki (“Beating Minor Openings”) have no transposition relation?

  158. Andrew Greet
    December 10th, 2018 at 09:57 | #158

    @Mateus
    These are two excellent books, written independently of each other, so when Mikhalevski offers a transposition to the Queen’s Indian it will not necessarily be to a line which Roiz recommends.

  159. Thomas
    December 11th, 2018 at 21:54 | #159

    Roiz, Solozhenkin, Chetverik – three books in one month. Who’s next?
    Couldn’t one of those have written about something different?

  160. RYV
    December 12th, 2018 at 07:26 | #160

    @Thomas
    dont you know about market rules ?
    when there is a gap somewhere, all etidors try to get first on the free spot..trying to make money.

  161. Ray
    December 12th, 2018 at 07:28 | #161

    @RYV
    … by giving them away for free 🙂

  162. RYV
    December 12th, 2018 at 14:21 | #162

    ??troll

  163. RYV
    December 12th, 2018 at 18:47 | #163

    Hello all
    I am looking for a (preferably good!) book on the Ruy Lopez Chigorin. Both variations with d3 or d4.
    what would you recommend ? ( why?)

  164. Thomas
    December 13th, 2018 at 05:27 | #164

    I have a book by Leonard Barden “Ruy Lopez”. Quite good.

  165. Ray
    December 13th, 2018 at 06:52 | #165

    @RYV
    Sokolov just recently wrote a book called the ‘Chigorin Bible’. I haven’t seen it yet, but it must be ineteresting.

  166. Ray
    December 13th, 2018 at 06:58 | #166

    @RYV
    PS: judging from the excerpt it doesn’t cover variations with d3. But it does have 170 pages of introduction on white’s and black’s strategy. The remaining 200 pages are theory – it doesn’t seem like a reperoire book but rather a ‘complete’ treatment.

  167. RYV
    December 13th, 2018 at 11:55 | #167

    the d3 line important as it appear regulary from the italian opening.
    Does the book from Marin cover those lines ?

  168. Andrew Greet
    December 13th, 2018 at 12:14 | #168

    @RYV
    Yes, Marin’s book has a chapter devoted to d3 lines.

  169. RYV
    December 14th, 2018 at 19:47 | #169

    @Andrew Greet
    is it possible to have the table of variation or some kind of complete index about the book?
    Is it still up to date ? I know the d3 variation is not fearfull for black but maybe there are new plans/games that are important. thx

  170. RYV
    December 14th, 2018 at 19:49 | #170

    Ray :
    @RYV
    PS: judging from the excerpt it doesn’t cover variations with d3. But it does have 170 pages of introduction on white’s and black’s strategy. The remaining 200 pages are theory – it doesn’t seem like a reperoire book but rather a ‘complete’ treatment.

    Ray :
    @RYV
    Sokolov just recently wrote a book called the ‘Chigorin Bible’. I haven’t seen it yet, but it must be ineteresting.

    thx
    might be a good alternative or complement to marin’s book. i will have a look

  171. Jacob Aagaard
    December 15th, 2018 at 09:03 | #171

    @RYV
    I will ask John to have a look.

    Yes, the Pirc book is still up to date. This opening is not suffering from a lot of novelties in a short space of time.

  172. RYV
    December 15th, 2018 at 10:25 | #172

    Hi Jacob
    I was asking about Marin’s book on the Ruy Lopez from 2008..not the recent GMrep Pirc.
    thx

  173. Jacob Aagaard
    December 15th, 2018 at 11:00 | #173

    @RYV
    Hahaha. Sorry. I think things have happened, but it had a lot of explanations in it that you will still find useful and the lines are overall sound.

  174. Ray
    December 18th, 2018 at 17:40 | #174

    Hot news: QC are “too late” with a book on the Leningrad Dutch: Chess Evolution just published a two-volume Dutch repertoire based on the Leningrad with 7…c6. It is written by Karolyi, who seems to become a new Lakdawala, judging from the number of books he produced last year 🙂 .

  175. john.johnson
    December 19th, 2018 at 11:54 | #175

    I think comparing those two authors is apples and oranges to be kind.

  176. Ray
    December 19th, 2018 at 14:14 | #176

    @john.johnson
    Of course, just kidding.

  177. Hard Truther
    December 19th, 2018 at 15:07 | #177

    Comparing apples to oranges makes more sense than most people people seem to realize.

    The idea that only identical things can be compared is silly. The whole point is to compare and CONTRAST things. That is how we find out what is similar and what is different.

    TO WIT: Apples and oranges are both: Round; yield juice, grow on trees, have seeds, have skin, contain sugars, etc.

    A REAL comparison shows there are many similarities and that the cliche saying of comparing “apples and oranges’ as method of critique on people that compare things that seem dissimilar is rather lame and borders on the stupid.

    ANYTHING TWO THINGS CAN BE COMPARED

  178. Thomas
    December 19th, 2018 at 16:17 | #178

    Hard Truther :
    ANYTHING TWO THINGS CAN BE COMPARED

    Nothing compares to Ivanchuk!

  179. Ray
    December 19th, 2018 at 16:35 | #179

    @Hard Truther
    I can’t argue with that, Hard Truther.

  180. Vadux
    December 19th, 2018 at 17:10 | #180

    It is a pity Roiz doesnt consider 11. Lc1 in the Catalan.
    This is Marin´s idea.

  181. Andrew Greet
    December 19th, 2018 at 17:15 | #181

    @Vadux
    Could you be more specific please? It’s hard to comment when it’s not clear which variation you’re talking about, or even which piece L stands for.

  182. barkis
    December 19th, 2018 at 17:32 | #182

    He probably means L = Bishop.

    He maybe just misthought there. But it is odd how many people write in English but give the moves in their own language. Writing letters like ‘A’ and ‘P’ and such.

  183. Patrick
    December 19th, 2018 at 17:59 | #183

    @barkis

    I have seen so many different notations that I’m surprised FIDE hasn’t come up with a standard.

    I’ve seen K = King, D = Queen, L = Bishop, S = Knight, T = Rook.

    I’ve seen the same thing with C for Knight instead of S

    I’ve seen A be used for a piece (don’t recall which).

    Maybe FIDE should go to a standard of Coordinate Notation. Consistent across all languages.

    No more 1. d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4.

    Instead, it’s now 1. 4244 7866 2. 3244 5756 3. 2133 6824

    Would solve all problems. Start writing books this way too!

  184. Patrick
    December 19th, 2018 at 18:01 | #184

    LOL – And already I mess it up. White’s second move should be 3234, not 3244.

  185. RYV
    December 19th, 2018 at 19:17 | #185

    when there is a single possible exchange just write ” x ”
    example after 1.e4 d5 2.x means e4 x d5 !

  186. barkis
    December 19th, 2018 at 19:23 | #186

    Another thing I wonder about is how people that dont write with latin letters say ‘abcdefgh’. If they dont have the letters in what language do they say them? Do russians say them in german or what?
    And what if their language dont have the sounds at all? Russian dont have an ‘h’. Georgian dont have an ‘f’. How do they say it?

  187. Vadux
    December 19th, 2018 at 21:43 | #187

    I am talking about the main line Roiz gives in the Catalan.
    After 9.Td1 b6 10. b3 La6 he only gives 11.a4 and by transposition 11.Lf4
    but not 11.Lc1 which is very interesting.

  188. An Ordinary Chessplayer
    December 20th, 2018 at 04:12 | #188

    @Patrick – I suppose you are joking. Of course FIDE has come up with a standard. It is called Algebraic Notation. See Appendix C – https://www.fide.com/fide/handbook.html?id=171&view=article . The system you recommended is the standard for the ICCF and predates FIDE, so naturally they knew all about it.

  189. middlewave
    December 20th, 2018 at 09:16 | #189

    @Vadux
    …and I would like to add that this recommendation of Marin’s appears in his Catalan opening database at Modern Chess, if Andrew wants to track it down.

  190. Andrew Greet
    December 20th, 2018 at 13:04 | #190

    Okay, at least we have the position now. It’s hard to keep track of every repertoire on the market so I hope you can all forgive us for overlooking Marin’s Catalan product. I had a quick look at 11.Bc1 with a database and engine, and 11…Rc8 12.Bb2 c5 13.Nc3 Bb7 looks like natural play although there are some tactics. Alternatively, 12…Ne4 was used by Zhigalko to draw with Ding Liren, so that could be worth checking if you are open to the idea of a Stonewall. Finally, 12…Re8 looks a solid option to avoid the sharp tactics of …c5. I don’t have time to analyse it fully but that should give you enough ideas to make your own choice.

  191. Patrick
    December 20th, 2018 at 16:31 | #191

    @An Ordinary Chessplayer

    Maybe “semi-joking”, but also semi-serious.

    Yes, I’m well aware of FIDE’s rule of Algebraic Notation. However, notice it says that players can use the letter that are native to their language (it appears as though Vadux must be of Dutch descent – didn’t know which language the K – D – L – ETC system came from).

    So if you have an English-speaking director, and he sees this score sheet, it’s more complicated for him to follow.

    The ICCF notation is languageless. It doesn’t matter if you speak English, Spanish, Portuguese, French, Greek, or Jibberish, all Non-Computer Geek numerical topics (like Money, Age, IQ, etc) use a Base-10 counting system, and whether you say Three, Tres, III, or whatever other language, the number that looks like an eight with it’s left side bitten off will always look like this: 3

    So Coordinate Notation would actually be the best standard so that when a Dutch player comes to the United States or a French player goes to Russia, the notation on all sheets would be the same. Instead of Nf3 on one, Cf3 on another, and Sf3 on yet another, they would all say 7163.

  192. RYV
    December 20th, 2018 at 16:59 | #192

    with electronic chessboard, notation will soon become unnecessary.

  193. The Lurker
    December 20th, 2018 at 19:48 | #193

    Maybe QC could update their blog software to somehow allow figurine notation? That would certainly make it easier for people to communicate. Just a thought…

  194. barkis
    December 20th, 2018 at 21:43 | #194

    K D L S T (B) is the abbreviation used in German and Swedish.

    (the B is for the pawn)

    I dont speak Dutch but im pretty sure they use a P for the Knight.

  195. An Ordinary Chessplayer
    December 21st, 2018 at 02:22 | #195

    @The Lurker – QC is way ahead of you. e.g. 1.d4 ♞f6 2.c4 e6 3.♞f3 b6 4.g3 ♝a6 5.♛c2 etc. But I’m a little fuzzy on this word “easier” that you used.

  196. Ray
    December 21st, 2018 at 08:05 | #196

    @barkis
    That’s correct, the “P” stands for “Paard” (= Dutch for Horse). But I don’t see any problem if everyone just uses the english notation – I guess English is the lingua franca of chess (and pretty much anything else) anyway. Only the French will possibly have a problem with that.

  197. Thomas
    December 21st, 2018 at 11:03 | #197

    Honestly – does anyone really have a problem with that?

  198. Ray
    December 21st, 2018 at 12:20 | #198

    @Thomas
    Well, Patrick seems to have a problem with it, since he is suggesting the much more comfortable system with coordinates: 1.5254 5758 2.7163 2836 3.4745, with a good position for black.

  199. Ray
    December 21st, 2018 at 12:21 | #199

    Of course I meant 1… 5755 rather than 5758!

  200. JB
    December 21st, 2018 at 12:46 | #200

    Oh I love reading my books in coordinate notation…
    eg https://www.amazon.co.uk/Most-Amazing-Chess-Moves-Time/dp/1901983293

    What was everyone’s favourite?
    23…3373!
    or
    47..6583!
    Classic moves everyone will instantly recognise…..

  201. An Ordinary Chessplayer
    December 21st, 2018 at 13:15 | #201

    @Ray – It took me a minute to comprehend. 🙂

  202. The Lurker
    December 21st, 2018 at 17:26 | #202

    An Ordinary Chessplayer :
    @The Lurker – QC is way ahead of you. e.g. 1.d4 ♞f6 2.c4 e6 3.♞f3 b6 4.g3 ♝a6 5.♛c2 etc. But I’m a little fuzzy on this word “easier” that you used.

    Hmmm… OK, so maybe I should say that the blog software could “facilitate” figurine notation, rather than “allow” it. For example, there could be figurine buttons near the text entry area, that automatically insert a figurine into the text entry area when clicked. Then we could all easily use figurine notation, instead of mixing notations. Seems “easier” to me. Your mileage may vary.

  203. The Lurker
    December 21st, 2018 at 17:30 | #203

    Ray :
    @Thomas
    Well, Patrick seems to have a problem with it…

    Vadux also seems to have a problem with it, since he continues to use Dutch (?) notation. Figurine notation is culturally neutral.

  204. RYV
    December 21st, 2018 at 19:13 | #204

    the numerical matrix notation ( 3355) doesnt solve all. For example, we still need Letters or symbol for pawn promotion.

  205. Benjamin Fitch
    December 22nd, 2018 at 00:46 | #205

    Pawn promotion in numeric notation is a fifth digit (“1” for queen, “2” for rook, “3” for bishop, and “4” for knight).

  206. Franck Steenbekkers
    December 24th, 2018 at 21:35 | #206

    is there some news about a update of the Najdorf book or do you have to contract a author

  207. KevHun
    December 25th, 2018 at 10:20 | #207

    Do you have an update on the Taimanov book? Really looking forward to it.
    Oh yes…Merry Xmas to QC.

  208. Vittal
    December 26th, 2018 at 09:08 | #208

    Do we have any upcoming books by Yusupov…

  209. Frank
    December 29th, 2018 at 21:22 | #209

    In keeping with the tradition of asking about other upcoming books in unrelated posts: do you think the book on Geller’s greatest games would be seen in 2019? Just because his games are so great!

    Have a good new year and keep up the excellent work.

  210. Patrick
    January 2nd, 2019 at 15:44 | #210

    Ray :@Thomas Well, Patrick seems to have a problem with it, since he is suggesting the much more comfortable system with coordinates: 1.5254 5758 2.7163 2836 3.4745, with a good position for black.

    Your move 3 is a move for Black with no White move.

    Maybe we should all just compromise and split the notation evenly.

    Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation:

    1.5254 P-K4 2.Nf3 2836 3.B-N5 a6 4.2536 QPxP 5.O-O 6766 6.P-Q4 exd4

    Etc. This way, no reader will feel left out!

  211. Stigma
    January 3rd, 2019 at 15:22 | #211

    Patrick :
    Maybe we should all just compromise and split the notation evenly.
    Ruy Lopez Exchange Variation:
    1.5254 P-K4 2.Nf3 2836 3.B-N5 a6 4.2536 QPxP 5.O-O 6766 6.P-Q4 exd4
    Etc. This way, no reader will feel left out!

    Oh yeah? I don’t see any usage of the German/Scandinavian, Spanish or French piece letters here. And why aren’t the Cyrillic, Chinese, Arabic and Japanese alphabets represented?! How very anglocentric of you 😀

  212. CbT
    January 5th, 2019 at 00:55 | #212

    Hi all.

    This is from a person who conciously writes using the algebraic system with english piece name letters instead of my native ones; indicating I don’t exactly mind algebraic notation as a whole but still.

    I wanted to say that some numerical representation of the moves, besides being a little un-aesthetic, really does not seem like an arbiter’s dream to me. Under pressure, as tend to exist in most relevant situations, having to discern and interpret basically most forms of scoresheet information (conflicts between respective notation, the course of a game, specific sequences etc.) from a series of numbers seems harder compared to what we have now.

    I don’t see the element in numbers scoresheets that would make them easy to process I guess is what I am trying to say.

    Reconstructions would be… hard… put mildly. The minority of cases when the game is paused and players plus arbiter go through it would obviously not be so bad (whichever notation system). As more often happens the arbiter is faced with some situation of varying level of complexity and has to make a relatively fast judgement on something relating relating to a bygone point in the game. Then I see more practicality with also having the names of the pieces included; for sure.

    That being said we humans can at least memorise numbers very well (should we engage this capacity), maybe we can also process them effectively.

    Have a nice night.

  213. The Doctor
    January 6th, 2019 at 13:57 | #213

    Franck Steenbekkers :
    is there some news about a update of the Najdorf book or do you have to contract a author

    Would love to know this too 😕

  214. Patrick
    January 7th, 2019 at 15:13 | #214

    @Stigma

    LOL! Unfortunately, the only French I know is French Fries while the only German I know is German Chocolate Cake!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

 Limit your comments to