Home > GM Repertoire, Publishing Schedule > Pazzwordz, Moving Offize, Going Crasy – and wildly guessing at editing times!

Pazzwordz, Moving Offize, Going Crasy – and wildly guessing at editing times!

As some of you will have noticed – our website has been somewhat broken – making it impossible to buy stuff. Not a great business model. Blame the webmaster and play ignorant is my tactic :-).

On the 30th we will move office from the current location just opposite Glasgow Central to five blocks up the road. The area is nicer, the place is bigger, the building nicer, the price lower and the company owning it gone into administration; causing all sorts of logistical problems!

Obviously we are going nuts – but everything should be on track now. Hope so – I just spent 1000 pounds in IKEA for new office furniture, including a big corner desk for yours truly.

John is working away on the King’s Gambit book. We are now optimistically putting a date on publication, although our confidence in it is low. Too low to put it in the webshop. We don’t think the King’s Gambit is the best way to play after 1.e4 e5, but these days anyone is struggling to find a good way to play. At least we have some interesting stuff to say; new concepts and a good deal of new ideas for both sides. We don’t promise an advantage – but we do promise publication!

The same is the case with the Tarrasch book. We are far – we have completed all analysis. I perform a final check in the writing phase, but that is about it. There are so many new ideas and concepts in this book, that we think it will move the theory forward by years. Chess is far from exhausted.

Finally, here is the wild guess about publication dates for the next few books:

 

Artur Yusupov Chess Evolution 1 26 August/2 September
Nikos/Aagaard GM 10 – The Tarrasch Defence 26 August/2 September
Aagaard, Shaw (editors) Grandmaster versus Amateur 23 September
John Shaw The King’s Gambit 23 September
Suba Positional Chess Sacrifices October
Boris Alterman Alterman Gambit Guide – Black Gambits October
GERMAN Alterman 1 October
GERMAN Alterman 2 October
Martin Weteschnik Chess Tactics from Scratch – UCT 2nd edition October
Lev Psakhis Advanced Chess Tactics October
Ftacnik (Aagaard) GM 6 – 2nd edition December
David Vigorito Play the Semi-Slav 2 December
Artur Yusupov Chess Evolution 1 26 August
Nikos/Aagaard GM 10 – The Tarrasch Defence 26 August
Aagaard, Shaw (editors) Grandmaster versus Amateur 23 September
John Shaw The King’s Gambit 23 September
Suba Positional Chess Sacrifices October
Boris Alterman Alterman Gambit Guide – Black Gambits October
GERMAN Alterman 1 October
GERMAN Alterman 2 October
Martin Weteschnik Chess Tactics from Scratch – UCT 2nd edition October
Lev Psakhis Advanced Chess Tactics October
Artur Yusupov Chess Evolution 1 26 August/2 September
Nikos/Aagaard GM 10 – The Tarrasch Defence 26 August/2 September
Aagaard, Shaw (editors) Grandmaster versus Amateur 23 September
John Shaw The King’s Gambit 23 September
Suba Positional Chess Sacrifices October
Boris Alterman Alterman Gambit Guide – Black Gambits October
GERMAN Alterman 1 October
GERMAN Alterman 2 October
Martin Weteschnik Chess Tactics from Scratch – UCT 2nd edition October
Lev Psakhis Advanced Chess Tactics October
Ftacnik (Aagaard) GM 6 – 2nd edition December
David Vigorito Play the Semi-Slav 2 December
Categories: GM Repertoire, Publishing Schedule Tags:
  1. Alekhine Power
    June 24th, 2011 at 14:51 | #1

    Why on earth you go with the SECOND EDITION of GM 6 – The Sicilian Defence by Lubomir Ftacnik?

    How many new material will be added? Shall you put new chapters on various omissions Ftacnik made?

    Or the Bg5 lines make a big headache for Black – if yes then some annoying blogger was right when he blamed you on not putting the main line Bg5 Najdorf in the book…

  2. Andre
    June 24th, 2011 at 19:07 | #2

    Good to see Semi-Slav 2 can be expected within the next 12 months including the inevitable delay. The first edition is still the opening book I’m using most often.

    I received Experts on the Anti-SI last week. Great book with lots of interesting articles. There are a few things I believe still have room for improvement though. All minor things, I really like the book.
    1. The incorrect diagrams have already been discussed.
    2. I noticed in a couple of places that one side offers material … and no explanation is given as to why the sac happens or, after the other side refused it, why it wasn’t taken. In most cases a short examination reveals what’s going on. But anyway, when material is sacked or fundamental positional concessions made I would really like to have at least a short explanation what’s going on here. Even a simple comment like “Due to white’s huge advantage in development black can’t afford to waste time taking pawns.” would make things easier to understand and increase the confidence that the sac was really examined and not just intuitively adjudged. (I don’t have a specific example from the book. My apologies.)
    3. The table of contents for the 2.c3 Nf6 chapter looks strange. When I checked it, everything was “correct”, but it’s still weird to pretty much ignore the first and last couple of pages. Probably a simple space issue.
    4. I don’t like the paper. It’s too thin and too smooth. I prefer the paper to be a bit thicker and with a rougher surface, as most other chess book publishers use it. Your own Semi-Slav 1 “feels” much better. On the other hand I understand there are certain limitations because your books have to meet space and weight requirements. Layout, stability and print quality are fine.
    5. My copy was slightly damaged. Not enough to decide to send it back, but still a visible damage: the lower edge of the cover got cramped and is now bent upwards by ca. 1 mm.
    That’s probably the retailer’s fault, but anyway, damaged product is not something I generally meet with a lot of tolerance if I buy new for full price. 😉

  3. Johnny
    June 24th, 2011 at 20:25 | #3

    Jacob,

    Chess players are a finicky and nitpicky audience (tough clientele you’ve chosen dude) but i just wanted to say i appreciate all your great work and your creative use of the letter “Z” in this post.

    Thankz. lookin forward to Ze Tarrasch Defenz.

    ps, God forbid there’s a second edition of Ftacnik, it’s exactly what’s wrong with the world today.

  4. Gilchrist is a Legend
    June 25th, 2011 at 04:38 | #4

    I actually quite enjoy the new paper that was used since publication of GM6 last July since the paper makes the books more compact, but that is probably just me. Anyway what happened to GM6 that warranted a new edition? I had a thought that it would be very interesting to cover 6. Be2 e5 and 6. f4 e5 in addition to the 6. Be2 e6 and 6. f4 e6, since it would cover material for all Najdorf players, for both who prefer 6…e5 move orders and the Scheveningen fashion 6…e6 move orders. But this might make the book over 600 pages. 🙂

  5. Alekhine Power
    June 25th, 2011 at 09:06 | #5

    Gilchrist is a Legend has right!

    In the new edition there should be included new chapters on:

    a) 6. Be2 e5
    b) 6. f4 e5

    Majority of us don’t play Scheweningen lines which seems to be toothless with great attacking possibilities for White.

    Currently the best opening book Hiarcs 13 Professional gives after 6. Be2 Najdorf as a mainline …e5 with “!!”, and Rybka 4 book ONLY the …e5 move, which speaks itself about move worth!

    After Najdorf 6. f4 Hiarcs 13 Professional and Rybka 4 book give as mainline ONLY the …e5 move.

    So Jacob please keep in mind all these suggestion cause we don’t expect money-milking in view of slight facelift, but on the contrary we expect real 2nd edition with proposed new chapters, and with all omissions included, covered in your newsletters and written here on the blog by many fans of your books…

  6. nick
    June 25th, 2011 at 09:48 | #6

    About the King’s Gambit book, would there be enough to build a rep for Black, or is it primarily from White’s viewpoint?

    Sorry if Q has already been asked.

  7. Hesam
    June 25th, 2011 at 13:20 | #7

    Alekhine Power :
    Gilchrist is a Legend has right!
    In the new edition there should be included new chapters on:
    a) 6. Be2 e5
    b) 6. f4 e5
    Majority of us don’t play Scheweningen lines which seems to be toothless with great attacking possibilities for White.
    Currently the best opening book Hiarcs 13 Professional gives after 6. Be2 Najdorf as a mainline …e5 with “!!”, and Rybka 4 book ONLY the …e5 move, which speaks itself about move worth!
    After Najdorf 6. f4 Hiarcs 13 Professional and Rybka 4 book give as mainline ONLY the …e5 move.
    So Jacob please keep in mind all these suggestion cause we don’t expect money-milking in view of slight facelift, but on the contrary we expect real 2nd edition with proposed new chapters, and with all omissions included, covered in your newsletters and written here on the blog by many fans of your books…

    So basically QC not only has to publish a book on Najdorf but they should cover the lines you like. Anymore requests by his highness??

    1. If you dislike toothless Scheveningen set ups why did you buy the book in the first place?? The author clearly says in the introduction that he has chosen a Scheveningen set up because that is the set up he likes most.

    2. Also while there are many books on pure Najdorf set ups with … e5 there are very few on Scheveningen set ups (before Ftacnik there was Emms book which was published in 2003!).

    3. Who said the Scheveningen set up was toothless?? You will be hard pressed to find Scheveningen lines that are as dry and drawish as 6. Be2 e5 7. Nb3 Be7 8. Bg5 or 6. Be3 e5 7. Nf3 for example. Also Kasparov facing 6. Be2 chose 6. … e6 27 times as opposed to the 9 times he went for 6. … e5 and everybody knows Kasparov was famous for playing toothless openings, wait that does not sound right.

    4. Why do you need books when you treat engine books as word of God? 6. Be2 e5!! I guess the Hiarcs team must have refuted 6. Be2 altogether.

    Jacob please keep in mind not all your customers are such ingrates.

  8. David
    June 25th, 2011 at 15:32 | #8

    Jacob,

    You know, if the 2nd version had a slightly different move order ie 5…e6 instead of 5…a6, and covered the Keres Attack for a pure Scheveningen set up. That way you could drop 6.Bg5 in the Najdorf.

    I am sure that will please certain people to no end.

  9. mikeel
    June 25th, 2011 at 16:53 | #9

    Publication dates for GM Rep 8 & 9 still the beginning of next month?

  10. Gilchrist is a Legend
    June 25th, 2011 at 20:16 | #10

    If it started with 5…e6, then what would happen to the 6. Be3 e5 and 6. g3 e5 chapters? I thought Scheveningen players played 5…a6 followed by 6…e6 specifically to avoid the Keres Attack.

  11. Jacob Aagaard
    June 27th, 2011 at 09:27 | #11

    Wow, will use about half a day to go through all of this!!

    Andre and Experts first.

    1) Still kicking myself for these incorrect diagrams. We checked the Grunfeld books for incorrect diagrams six times! A free copy of San Luis 2005 to the first person to e-mail me with an incorrect diagram from the book (there is a typo in the contents page of GM8, but we cannot avoid all mistakes – sadly).

    2) The book is 440 pages. We edited a lot of stuff deeply, and added a lot of explanations and such stuff, but to some extend we also have to allow the authors their individuality – or we would be writing the book ourselves – which is not the intention. When you have 10 authors, there will be no consistency.

    3) My choice, my chapter. I will still vouch for it as being userfriendly, even if you find it strange :-).

    4) We have taken a lot of comments on the new paper (G-Print), and they come in slightly more favourable than the “old” paper. If people had thought it sucked, we would have stuck with Multi-Offset as in the past. But the advantages when it comes to posting and packing the books is excessive, to say the least. I prefer G-print, after getting used to it. I see flaws with it, but there are also advantages. I especially like the compact nature of the books. GM1 is almost twice the size of GM6, but they have the same pages and GM6 is easier to browse.

    In the past we have experimented with thicker paper as well, but come to the conclusion that the 80 gram paper is fine. And importantly, as the chess retailers pay for postage both in receiving and sending out the books, they get a better deal.

    Our printer is actually so good that Everyman has used it for some books, plus Mark Bicknell recommended it to some friends of his who have a poetry publishing company. This only pleases us, as we believe that a high quality chess book market will increase interest for all.

    5. Sorry your copy got banged. Could have happened in transit from our warehouse or in the post from whoever you bought it from. If you ever feel a book is too damaged, send it back to where you bought it, and they should replace it, just as they would get a credit from us for it.

  12. Jacob Aagaard
    June 27th, 2011 at 09:35 | #12

    Ftacnik 2nd edition

    Essentially we are running out of the first edition. It was pointed out that a lot of lines were missed. We have put some of those in the newsletter and Colin has further worked on them for Experts. We want to complete this work.

    We will also go through the various lines recommended in the book and see what has happened. For example, see what happened in the Blood Diamond line. Endless new ideas! We have some analysis – they will come in the next newsletter.

    We will update what needs updating, but we are not intending to change the nature of the repertoire. Or to put it mildly: I don’t give a shit about what marks are in the Hiarcs opening book. I don’t say this to insult, but I have to answer the argument :-), and nothing less can really cover what I mean.

    Obviously we want to check the moves and have our own opinion. 6…e5 is a great move – I played 6…e6 myself as well, so I sympathise with the existing repertoire.

    I do have lots of respect that people don’t want to play everything we recommend, but there are lots of sources out there if you want to go a different way than us.

    Finally – GM8 and GM9 are still sent to the shops on Wednesday/Thursday. The physical process from we finish a book is at least three weeks. Very rarely there are strikes or something that can delay things a few days, but otherwise once we push “print” the process cannot be reversed.

  13. John Shaw
    June 27th, 2011 at 11:11 | #13

    nick :
    About the King’s Gambit book, would there be enough to build a rep for Black, or is it primarily from White’s viewpoint?
    Sorry if Q has already been asked.

    Hi Nick,

    The King’s Gambit is a work in progress, so the final contents are not fixed. The idea is to be objective and more towards the complete style rather than a white repertoire book. So there will be enough material to make many repertoires for Black. Creating one effective repertoire for White is the real challenge. I think it can be done, but it will take a little ducking and diving.

  14. Patrick
    June 27th, 2011 at 15:27 | #14

    To all Whiners – GIVE QC A BREAK!

    I agree with Hesam and Aagaard. If you don’t like what they publish here, go elsewhere!

    I have been for quite a while now a 1.c4 and 1.g3 player. I have been looking at adding 1.e4 back into my repertoire (mainly because of a lot of the 1.g3 transpositions, and the studying of Suttles’s games that I’ve been doing).

    That said, Quality Chess has the best 3 books ever published on the English. However, when it comes to the Closed Sicilian, I’m not going to heckle QC and tell them they are wrong for not publishing material on the Closed Sicilian. I go to Everyman, and pick up their book on the Closed Sicilian. Therefore, after 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6, I go thru Cornette’s survey in Experts on the Anti-Sicilian (I’ve always liked the “Modern Grand Prix” lines since a couple of surveys in New In Chess Yearbook back around 2003 or so). After 2…d6 or 2…e6 or 2…g6, I go elsewhere instead of whining and b***hing to QC that my line isn’t covered on the Closed Sicilian with 3.g3.

    It amazes me how many people here complain that their line isn’t covered when a book by Everyman came out within the last few years on the exact same thing, and just as much so how people on Everyman complain about how they want a book so badly published that was published by QC within the last few years.

    Prime Examples:

    1. 6.Be2 e5 in the Najdorf – See The Sharpest Sicilian (Chess Stars), Mastering the Najdorf (GAMBIT – Albeit over 5 years), Starting Out: Sicilian Najdorf (Everyman), just to name a few.
    2. King’s Gambit book requesting Rep for Black – Beating the Open Games (Your Very Own – Quality Chess), Play 1.e4 e5 (Everyman), to name a couple.

    One area where QC clearly beats Everyman is spam control on the forums. Keep up the good work, and keep the spam out!

    Why do people pigeon-hole themselves to 1 publisher? I see the same thing on the Everyman forums, where they refuse to look outside of Everyman it seems.

  15. Jacob Aagaard
    June 27th, 2011 at 17:18 | #15

    I do not agree with the strong tone of this sentiment. It is not what I feel at all. I just reply to everything and not just the things I agree with. And I do so honestly. Often I represent the office more than have an opinion of my own, actually. But we are all pretty much in line with what we are doing.

    And yes, if someone else have done a good book on something, we don’t particularly want to do it ourselves. What is the point?

  16. Seth
    June 27th, 2011 at 17:38 | #16

    Alekhine Power :Why on earth you go with the SECOND EDITION of GM 6 – The Sicilian Defence by Lubomir Ftacnik?
    How many new material will be added? Shall you put new chapters on various omissions Ftacnik made?
    Or the Bg5 lines make a big headache for Black – if yes then some annoying blogger was right when he blamed you on not putting the main line Bg5 Najdorf in the book…

    Oh my head…not again!

  17. James
    June 27th, 2011 at 23:03 | #17

    Jacob, with regards to the 2nd edition of GM6 do you think those who have the first edition would benefit from buying the 2nd edition? I ask because if you say yes, I’ll be buying the 2nd edition. Thanks.

  18. Jacob Aagaard
    June 28th, 2011 at 09:40 | #18

    Hi James,

    I want to stress this point before anything else: I am in no way embarrassed about the first book. Actually I think it was very good in places; for example, it held up well against Khalifman’s book published at the same time.

    Yes for a number of reasons.

    The work we did on the Blood Diamond variation will be heavily expanded. A lot has happened. Clearly some people picked up the line because of the book, and others picked it up because it was exciting, maybe not even knowing about the existance of our book!

    The missing lines will complete the repertoire; many people will find this truly helpful I am sure.

    You can find a lot of this stuff in our updates (which soon will be better organised), but I think having it in an actual book will be preferable to many.

    The main reason is that we will update everything and check lots of analysis again. A lot happens in the Sicilian in 18 months and we hope to reflect this.

  19. AxtImWald
    June 28th, 2011 at 12:00 | #19

    I hope this has not been asked before: will the Tarrasch book include 9…c4 on 9.Bg5 in the Rubinstein main line or is it IQP only? Avrukh stated that 9…c4 is ok for black, which I couldn’t really confirm when I checked this – admittedly with less time available and some slight Elo deficit on my part 😉 On the other hand some IQP lines on 9.Bg5 look quite shaky – what will be in the book?

  20. Patrick
    June 28th, 2011 at 16:07 | #20

    When the King’s Gambit book comes out, can we get that updated every 18th months too?

    I’d love to see a maintained boost in King’s Gambit popularity. I’d quit 1…c5 and 1…g6 all together, stick with just 1…e5 against 1.e4, and take all the free rating points I can get! 🙂

  21. Jacob Aagaard
    June 28th, 2011 at 22:38 | #21

    I have 1.5/2 with the King’s Gambit as a GM. I played it as an IM too and don’t think I lost any or at least many games. Having said this, 2.Nf3 looks like a better move. But the Gambit still has a lot of interesting ideas…

  22. Michael
    June 29th, 2011 at 00:43 | #22

    Jacob, I for one want to say how excited I am about GM6 2nd edition, not only because the theory develops so fast, but the Blood Diamond is my new favorite…against 6.Bg5…never could find a line I really liked, well I love this one, but now white players are paying closer attention to it…so I am so glad you will be covering this in more depth…..YES!!!!!!
    GM6 2nd edition!!!!!!!!
    Thank you Quality Chess!!!!!!!!!!

  23. Gilchrist is a Legend
    June 29th, 2011 at 04:46 | #23

    I also switched to 6…Nbd7 against 6. Bg5 after playing 7…Be7 for a while. The lack of exhaustive analysis in 6…Nbd7 seems to give a lot of opportunities to surprise and outplay opponents.

    Will the cover for GM6 2nd Edition be the same (colours, design, etc.)?

  24. Jacob Aagaard
    June 29th, 2011 at 10:21 | #24

    Did not think about that at all. Probably we should change the cover a little bit :-).

  25. Hesam
    June 29th, 2011 at 11:26 | #25

    I am very happy that there will be a new edition of GM-6. I will definitely buy it. But I am curious will the length of the book stay the same? If there are additions for 6. Be2 and 6. Bg5 Nbd7 plus the newsletter updates then the book is bound to be larger. Will GM-6 still have the 6. Bg5 e6 line as well?

    Speaking of second editions, will there be a second edition of GM-1 anytime soon?

  26. June 29th, 2011 at 13:49 | #26

    I’m little bit concerned about the line 6.Bg5 Nbd7 7.f4 Qc7 8.Qf3 h6 8.Bxf6 Nxf6 9.f5 , white had good results in it recently.

  27. Patrick
    June 29th, 2011 at 15:15 | #27

    Jacob Aagaard :I have 1.5/2 with the King’s Gambit as a GM. I played it as an IM too and don’t think I lost any or at least many games. Having said this, 2.Nf3 looks like a better move. But the Gambit still has a lot of interesting ideas…

    Jacob, I will grant you that you are playing GMs and I’m playing Experts, but hey, I’ll take the boost from Expert to Master playing the Black side of the King’s Gambit. Oddly enough, I used to play the lines with 3…g5, and if White avoids the piece sacrifice (i.e. 4.h4 g4 5.Ne5), I’d play the 5…Nf6 line. My results were shaky at best.

    Then, before Marin’s book, and even Davies’ book on Play 1.e4 e5, was ever published, I took up 2…Bc5, and I think I may have lost once in what was a won position because of time trouble. Otherwise, I’ve got mostly wins, a few draws, and while most of those wins were won in the endgame, I do have a 13-move win against a 2100 (netting at least a piece as I seem to recall) and an 11-move checkmate against an 1850.

    I wish I remembered the moves to the 11-move checkmate, but I recall it involving an early f5, I think on move 4 (I think maybe the line 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 d6 4.c3 f5), and he plays something along the lines of d4, dxc5, Bc4, Qb3, and takes the Knight on g8, while I take on e4 and f3, get in Qe7, f2, and f5-f4-f3, and am allowed Qe2# with the White King on f1 after giving up the Knight on g8. I think he also advanced g3 or something (possibly after my …f4, then g3 f3), where Bh3 was also a problem for White.

    In my neck of the woods, I actually don’t know of any masters that play the King’s Gambit as White. Where I am, while the Ruy Lopez is clearly played at every tournament you go to, the opening with all the hype where I am seems to be the Scotch (4.Nxd4) and the Scotch Gambit (4.Bc4), which often will transpose to the Two Knights Defense or Max Lange Attack.

    So even if there is no coverage at all on 2…Bc5, just getting everyone to play the King’s Gambit at the Expert level will push me to Master! 🙂

    Being realistic, at 36 with a job and a kid (which may become 2 kids eventually), I’ll never be a GM, but Master is a realistic goal for me, and facing more King’s Gambits will get me there, though I did win last night in a Berlin.

  28. Jacob Aagaard
    June 30th, 2011 at 08:31 | #28

    My win was mating a 2450 IM in the 2…Bc5 variation in 23 moves…

  29. Jesse Gersenson
    June 30th, 2011 at 09:09 | #29

    [pgn][Event "Landsholdsklassen"][Site "Hillerod"][Date "2010.03.30"][Round "4"][White "Aagaard Madsen, Jacob"][Black "Antonsen, Mikkel Djernaes"][Result "1-0"][WhiteElo "2535"][BlackElo "2442"][ECO "C30"][EventDate "2010.03.27"][PlyCount "45"][EventType "tourn"][EventRounds "1"][EventCountry "DEN"][SourceDate "2010.03.24"]1.e4 e5 2.f4 Bc5 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Nc6 6.d3 Bg4 7.Na4 O-O 8.Nxc5 dxc5 9.O-O Qd6 10.Qd2 Bxf3 11.gxf3 Rad8 12.Kh1 Nh5 13.fxe5 Nxe5 14.Qg5 Nxc4 15.Qxh5 Ne5 16.f4 Nc6 17.f5 Rfe8 18.Rf3 h6 19.Bf4 Qf6 20.Rg1 Kh7 21.Rfg3 Rg8 22.Rg6 fxg6 23.fxg6+ 1-0[/pgn]

  30. Patrick
    June 30th, 2011 at 15:26 | #30

    Jacob,

    Nice manhandling of Antonsen. Interesting 10.Qd2 idea and recapturing on f3 with the pawn instead of the rook, avoiding ideas by Black involving …Nd4 and …Ng4 (after 10.Qe1 that is). That said, not totally sure what I would play here, but in addition to 11…Rad8, I’d likely have 11…Nd4 as a candidate as well.

    I don’t typically get this kind of position because I usually follow the more solid line for Black, given as an alternative by Davies, namely 7…Bb6. Against you, you’d probably maul me as well, but against immature experts that play the King’s Gambit because they want some romantic attack where the game is one and done in under 30 moves, solidity usually leads to them going overboard.

    The last time I ever played the King’s Gambit as White, I actually won. The Queens were traded before move 10, and almost everything else was traded by move 30 or so, and I won what I seem to recall was a minor piece ending with the significantly better pawn structure and control of the center, and all told the game was about 50 to 60 moves, but even that was a good 5 years ago or so.

    If Black doesn’t cooperate, White can’t win with a “romantic attack” like he could in the 19th century. He’d have to play a slow, methodical game to win, using his small advantages instead, like the extra central pawn after …Bxf3 gxf3 and a trade on e5. Not saying Black is better and refutes the King’s Gambit, but it requires a level of maturity by White, something that you or Shaw or any other 2500+ player would have that players at my level don’t have. 🙂

  31. Antonius
    July 1st, 2011 at 07:48 | #31

    After 10, Qd2 Bxf3 11. gxf3 Marin considers 11… exf4 as best, followed by good analisys.

  32. Jacob Aagaard
    July 1st, 2011 at 21:01 | #32

    We have sort of successfully moved into the new office. It is spacious and pleasant. However, IKEA tricked us by not selling us two minor parts needed to construct my desk. So, tomorrow I am going to IKEA to get the second spare part. Grrrr.

    Newsletter will be out next week. If you have not signed up, do it now.

  33. Munroe
    July 1st, 2011 at 23:43 | #33

    @Jacob Aagaard

    Oh Jacob…. Good luck with all that flat-pack. I know how much fun it can be!

  34. J.A. Topfke
    July 2nd, 2011 at 14:16 | #34

    It was a tough decision, leafing through the office supply magazines and wondering, “What kind of office furniture defines me as a person?” Unfortunately for Jacob, he chose a desk with a few screws loose.

  35. July 3rd, 2011 at 12:47 | #35

    KG declined Bc5 lines basically busted as far as I can make out. Played hundreds of games in the line.
    Qd2! busts the Marin/Davies lines, other stuff just good for white. See John Emms old rep book for a starting point. Then either think, or switch on yer pc. Both maybe.
    Happy to pick up a good few hundred easy pounds in the last round of a lucrative open in Kobe some years back in this line.

  36. Player
    July 3rd, 2011 at 14:47 | #36

    Karpov’s Strategic Wins 2: London Chess Centre 20.99+delivery, bookdepository 15.27+free delivery. Cutting Edge 2: LCC: 19.99+delivery, bookdepo 13.82+free deli
    Why such price’ disparities exist?

  37. Patrick
    July 3rd, 2011 at 17:32 | #37

    @Player

    Different merchants, different prices. That’s their choice. Some use the strategy of “higher price means I need less sales to make my desired profit”. Others use the strategy of “lower price means people will come to me, I’ll have far more sales, and max my profits that way”. Of course, it’s all about finding that fine medium.

    We have a similar scenario in the United States. May I compare USCF Sales, Chess Cafe, and Amazon.

    USCF Sales – Items tend to be shipped there about a week to 2 weeks after publication. 99% of their items are Cover Price. More you spend, the higher the shipping cost. Usually you get a “free” item if you spend $100 or more. Free item varies from week to week. Cost of the free item is typically in the $10 to $20 range. Many “subscriptions” available via other sites are not available here.

    Chess Cafe – Items tend to be shipping to their store in about the same amount of time as USCF. Almost every item is $4 to $6 less than the manufactured suggested retail price (cover price). Excluding subscriptions and bulk items, all shipping for purchases over $75 in the United States excluding Alaska and Hawaii get free shipping. Supports foreign orders, but then shipping is not free.

    Amazon – Most items are a good 1/3 to 1/2 off the cover price. However, with everything else that Amazon deals with, it’s harder for them to keep up with what’s out of stock as quickly, so I’ve heard of people having orders delayed by 6 weeks. It also takes a good month from publication date to get it to their shop. So while a book is available at the other 2 sites in mid-June, it may be mid-July before Amazon gets it.

    So like your scenario, it all depends on merchant strategy.

    – USCF counts on “member loyalty” (i.e. USCF members shopping at their own store) and the random “Free” item, with an occasional 5% or 10% off sale, to stay in business.

    – Chess Cafe counts on Free Shipping and discounting almost every item to maintain business.

    – Amazon counts on the severe discounts to get customers at the cost of shipping time.

    My personal choice out of the 3 has always been Chess Cafe. I’d rather deal with a merchant that specializes in what I’m buying, but at the same time, a random book that you are possibly having trouble selling that week isn’t enough to motivate me to buy items at full price, and pay huge shipping costs.

    I know at least 1 person that regularly shops USCF Sales, and another that will only shop Amazon, and will wait the month.

    So the choice is yours. Compare merchants, and see which one works best for your interests.

  38. Franck Steenbekkers
    July 3rd, 2011 at 21:02 | #38

    Today i got my kopies of the two GI books. The Quality is good.
    Sadly one of the recommend variations is killed today in my own town in the game
    Giri Swinkels (Dutch Championship) 15 g3!! was prepared till end by Giri and is very very strong.
    What is your opinion about 15 g3!!

  39. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 4th, 2011 at 08:04 | #39

    Franck Steenbekkers :
    Today i got my kopies of the two GI books. The Quality is good.
    Sadly one of the recommend variations is killed today in my own town in the game
    Giri Swinkels (Dutch Championship) 15 g3!! was prepared till end by Giri and is very very strong.
    What is your opinion about 15 g3!!

    When and where did you order from and how long did the shipping take? Are you from Nijmegen?

  40. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 4th, 2011 at 09:25 | #40

    You are lucky to get your books already 🙂 but I believe today is the day QC ship the websales of GM8/9 😀

  41. Alekhine Power
    July 4th, 2011 at 10:13 | #41

    Giri,Anish – Swinkels,Robin [D97]
    NK 2011 Boxtel (7), 03.07.2011

    1.d4 Nf6
    2.c4 g6
    3.Nc3 d5
    4.Nf3 Bg7
    5.Qb3 dxc4
    6.Qxc4 0–0
    7.e4 Nc6
    8.Be2 Bg4
    9.d5 Na5
    10.Qb4 Bxf3
    11.Bxf3 c6
    12.0–0 Qb6
    13.Qa4 Nd7
    14.Rd1 Rfd8

    15.g3 PROBLEM MOVE??? Rac8

    16.Bg4 Nc5
    17.Qc2 e6
    18.Bg5 Re8
    19.Na4 Nxa4
    20.Qxa4 cxd5
    21.exd5 Nc4
    22.dxe6 fxe6
    23.Rac1 Ne5
    24.Be3 1–0

  42. Franck Steenbekkers
    July 4th, 2011 at 10:52 | #42

    I live in Boxtel (the Netherlands) and i got my kopies from chessshop de beste zet (www.debestezet.nl)

    15 g3 is prepararation of Giri with his second and giri things that after g3 the variation is nt playable for black.

  43. Jacob Aagaard
    July 4th, 2011 at 12:50 | #43

    We will have to look at this 15.g3 carefully of course. This really would be very bad news for us :-), but what can we do.

    Bookdepository can offer you cheaper prices, but do they actually have the books? They get hold of them later and aim to make a small profit on them. Eventually these companies that demand that we use middlemen will outcompete the minor chess specialists, I fear, and then we will have to charge unrealistic prices for our books – on the cover only…

    But from a chess specialist if you want to buy chess books in five years also.

  44. Daniel
    July 4th, 2011 at 15:59 | #44

    You forgot Chess4less, the American branch of the London Chess Center. They usually get everything in first and is where I will most probably be buying Avrukh’s Gruenfeld books.

  45. Jacob Aagaard
    July 4th, 2011 at 16:50 | #45

    They all get the books at the same time, actually. With all, I mean Chess specialists.

  46. Cri
    July 4th, 2011 at 17:50 | #46

    Mr Aagaard I haven’t really understood if the new GM6 will be a revised edition consisting of the the old book+updates+missing stuff, or if there will be new repertoire choiches (in addition or instead of the old ones).

    Thx in advance.

  47. Michael Nielsen
    July 4th, 2011 at 18:40 | #47

    I might have missed it, but when will the Grandmaster Battle Manual be out? Last update, it was scheduled before GM8 & 9, but those 2 books are out now. My last order include all these 3 books, so i guess i have to wait untill GM Battle Manual is out, before they are shipped?

  48. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 4th, 2011 at 19:54 | #48

    Were the websales of GM8/GM9 shipped today?

  49. Jacob Aagaard
    July 4th, 2011 at 19:57 | #49

    We sent a lot of books out today; but there was a limit to how many we could do.

    GM6 2nd edition will be a revised edition, with some minor changes, but also some new stuff. We just want to get it right this time around.

  50. James
    July 4th, 2011 at 22:17 | #50

    Jacob, can I ask a slightly off-topic question and hypothetical question? If the Grunfeld was your main defence against 1.d4, and you could only have 1 other defence against d4, what would you choose? Thanks.

    Still waiting on my 2 copies of the Grunfeld to arrive, hopefully will get them tomorrow.

  51. mikeel
    July 5th, 2011 at 06:12 | #51

    I will note the 15 g3 novelty–perhaps when I get the two Gruenfeld books, more ideas for White will appear. Perhaps Avrukh can post an update online.

  52. Jacob Aagaard
    July 5th, 2011 at 10:53 | #52

    I have asked Boris to have a look when he can.

    I probably would mix up the Grunfeld with the KID, using Vigorito’s books.

  53. volde
    July 5th, 2011 at 10:54 | #53

    Hi,
    I live In India and want to order Grunfeld by avruk vol 1 & 2..Can anyone suggest from where should i buy?so that i get the books as early as possible?Does QC ship to any bookshop in India or Asia?

  54. Antonius
    July 5th, 2011 at 11:54 | #54

    I’ve ordered both Gruenfeld books from “Le due Torri” since friday, but I’m still waiting to receive them!
    I’m very eager to check Boris work, considering the outstanding quality of his books!
    Bad news about this strong novelty, but indeed it’s unavoidable, especially in an heavy theoretical opening like the Gruenfeld, so we users should check continuously about novelties and new ideas to keep up.

    I would like to ask Jacob about both those tactics books coming in October, and if I should wait for UCT 2nd ed., or if I could just buy the 1st ed.
    And what about Lev Psakhis work? How it will be structured and will it be worth for let’s say a 2300 player? 🙂
    Have a nice day!

  55. Jacob Aagaard
    July 5th, 2011 at 12:46 | #55

    Le Due Torri should have the books, but I cannot guarantee that they have not run out :-).

    UCT – It really depends. The first edition is great, the second will be even greater :-).

    Psakhis book will be good for players over 2000 I should think.

  56. Jacob Aagaard
    July 5th, 2011 at 12:47 | #56

    But I really think these rating barriers are ridiculous. Any reasonable person can understand everything in chess – doing it is the hard task!

  57. Michael Nielsen
    July 5th, 2011 at 13:32 | #57

    When will GM Battle Manual be out?

    In the last update, is was schedules for the middle of june, but that date is passed.

  58. Antonius
    July 5th, 2011 at 14:19 | #58

    Thanks Jacob for you quick answers!
    Yeah I know, it sounds easy that way! I was just asking ’cause I want to work more on tactics, patterns, attacking chess so I’m interested in those coming books.

    I’m already working on openings playing correspondence chess (ICCF) and I must say those repertoire books, if used well are bullet proof!
    In this manner I got on endings too, if the game reach that phase of the game; if I remember correctly you already told us you’re not gonna produce much in that sector of chess, being it well covered by previous literature.

    Do you mind signaling some good books on endings? I’ve already got Dvoretsky works, maybe I should study something specific on rook endings, which I think are very important in pratical play.

  59. Tomtidom
    July 5th, 2011 at 15:58 | #59

    Michael Nielsen :
    When will GM Battle Manual be out?
    In the last update, is was schedules for the middle of june, but that date is passed.

    The “Battle Manual” is already out. I bought it from Niggemann in Germany.

  60. Patrick
    July 5th, 2011 at 16:59 | #60

    For those of you in the United States asking when things would be out, I can tell you that ChessCafe.com has the following titles from Quality:

    GM Repertoire 8 – Both hard and paperback – Added 7/3
    GM Repertoire 9 – Both hard and paperback – Added 7/3
    Tactimania – Added 7/4
    Grandmaster Battle Manual – Both hard and paperback – Added 7/4

  61. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 5th, 2011 at 20:11 | #61

    Patrick :
    For those of you in the United States asking when things would be out, I can tell you that ChessCafe.com has the following titles from Quality:
    GM Repertoire 8 – Both hard and paperback – Added 7/3
    GM Repertoire 9 – Both hard and paperback – Added 7/3
    Tactimania – Added 7/4
    Grandmaster Battle Manual – Both hard and paperback – Added 7/4

    Cheers Patrick, although according to my e-mail my two hardbacks of GM8 and GM9 were posted from QC’s warehouse. For my next order of QC books (assuming I am not yet in England), I will remember ChessCafe 🙂

  62. Jacob Aagaard
    July 5th, 2011 at 21:09 | #62

    Being caught up I realised today some books had not been moved out of the coming soon folder. This has been corrected.

    I prefer the following two endgame books to all others, Dvoretsky’s Endgame Manual and Excelling at Technical Chess. I am not sure the latter is still in print.

  63. mikeel
    July 5th, 2011 at 22:19 | #63

    Just ordered the two books today from Chess cafe.

  64. Antonius
    July 6th, 2011 at 11:18 | #64

    @Jacob Aagaard
    Indeed I got your book and if my memory serves me right it was more about strategy of endgame than technique; I was just planning to restudy it.
    By the way I just received both Gruenfeld books! 🙂

  65. James
    July 6th, 2011 at 13:01 | #65

    Just got mine too. I predict a resurgence of the Grunfeld at club level play.

  66. Jacob Aagaard
    July 6th, 2011 at 14:56 | #66

    Dvoretsky’s book is about theoretical endgames, my book is about how to play endgames in general. Obviously it is built a lot on Mark’s previous works, as was Shereshevsky’s books.

  67. Patrick
    July 6th, 2011 at 15:25 | #67

    James :Just got mine too. I predict a resurgence of the Grunfeld at club level play.

    James, I find it funny that you say that. I don’t see myself jumping on the Grunfeld bandwagon, and luckily enough, I don’t have to face it as I would play 1.e4, 1.c4, or 1.g3 before I’d play 1.d4.

    That said, with Avrukh’s books on d4 along with Wojo’s Weapons, I have seen a huge spike in the Fianchetto Variation played against me in the King’s Indian Defense, and I’ve won every over the board game where I’ve faced the Fianchetto since that spike, and drew my only correspondnece game, my only loss in the KID this year coming against the Gligoric Variation, but given that spike I have faced, I’ll bet you’re right that there will be a spike in Grunfelds for those that do play 1.d4 as White.

    I wonder if it will cause a spike in Anti-Grunfelds as well. I know the book doesn’t cover that line, but I wouldn’t be surprised if those that truly take up the Grunfeld start looking at 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 d5 as well.

  68. Jacob Aagaard
    July 7th, 2011 at 11:01 | #68

    1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 c6!

  69. Antonius
    July 7th, 2011 at 11:30 | #69

    Indeed, we now need to cover 1. c4 and 1. Nf3 !!
    Not easy to implement a Gruenfeld setep in both cases! ( I still think they could have been covered in the repertoire 🙂 )
    And by the way: 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3! and if u want to stay in Gruenfeld like positions you’re forced to play 2. …d5, which has indipendent value of course.

  70. Patrick
    July 7th, 2011 at 14:53 | #70

    Antonius :Indeed, we now need to cover 1. c4 and 1. Nf3 !!Not easy to implement a Gruenfeld setep in both cases! ( I still think they could have been covered in the repertoire )And by the way: 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3! and if u want to stay in Gruenfeld like positions you’re forced to play 2. …d5, which has indipendent value of course.

    What I find funny is a couple of the older books saying things like (and I’m paraphrasing) “If Black wants any chance at transposing to a Grunfeld, then he has to play this” after the move 2…d5.

    The truth of the matter is, you aren’t getting a Grunfeld! Look at the repertoire series Opening for White according to Kramnik, with 1.Nf3. Look at Marin’s repertoire with 1.c4. Ask any player that plays 1.c4 or 1.Nf3 what QP openings they are willing to transpose to.

    There is a reason why there are specific lines called the “Anti-Grunfeld” and “Anti-Nimzo-Indian”. They are most typically the two specific Queen Pawn openings that White is specifically out to avoid when they play 1.c4 or 1.Nf3 instead of 1.d4. The Kramnik Repertoire transposes to the QGD, QGA, KID, but avoids the Nimzo-Indian and Grunfeld. The Marin repertoire, while he offers a pure English repertoire, even mentions that White should transpose to a KID if he wants an advantage, and mentions lines to transpose to a Catalan, though also says that the Reti lines are just as good for White. Notice, though, how he points out that in the transposition to the KID, via 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O, only then does he advocate 5.d4, and points out that it specifically avoids the Grunfeld, and goes into a Fianchetto KID without allowing the Fianchetto Grunfeld, something you must do if you play 1.d4, 2.c4, and 3.g3 against the King’s Indian.

    So in reality, don’t play to expect a Grunfeld against 1.c4 or 1.Nf3. Against 1.c4, if you like symmetrical lines, play 1…c5, if you want an agressive game as Black, play 1…e5, if you are willing to play a King’s Indian, play 1…Nf6. If you want a QGD or Slav setup, and are willing to face a Reti, play 1…c6 or 1…e6. I you specifically like the Anti-Grunfeld, and always have, then play 1…Nf6 and 2…d5, but don’t play it ever to expect a Grunfeld from White. You may get one out of maybe every 1000 times you face 1.c4 or 1.Nf3.

    I should also say that I speak as someone that played, as White, 1.c4 100% Exclusively from late April 2010 to early June 2011 except for 1 game against someone I have played numerous times where I threw 1.b4 at him.

  71. Patrick
    July 7th, 2011 at 15:13 | #71

    Normally I don’t double-post, but I also must say that I do find it humorous how some people think that by playing a “setup” that is the same as their normal opening that their game would be the same.

    The Anti-Grunfeld is NOTHING like the Grunfeld if you ask me. A perfect case in point, go to the following site (it’s safe, it’s the main website of the State Chess Association for South Carolina, no spyware or spam):

    http://www.scchess.org/database/ctutor.htm

    And go to Game 878. I was actually on the losing side of an Anti-Grunfeld. There are plenty of mistakes by Black, though it was the only game I lost, and went 4-1 that tournament back in 2003.

    Most Grunfeld players I know don’t like early Queen trades. Being one that also plays the Berlin, I have no objection to it. So an Anti-Grunfeld repertoire for a Grunfeld player, in some ways, almost seems silly!

  72. Antonius
    July 7th, 2011 at 17:51 | #72

    Patrick :
    Normally I don’t double-post, but I also must say that I do find it humorous how some people think that by playing a “setup” that is the same as their normal opening that their game would be the same.
    The Anti-Grunfeld is NOTHING like the Grunfeld if you ask me. A perfect case in point, go to the following site (it’s safe, it’s the main website of the State Chess Association for South Carolina, no spyware or spam):
    http://www.scchess.org/database/ctutor.htm
    And go to Game 878. I was actually on the losing side of an Anti-Grunfeld. There are plenty of mistakes by Black, though it was the only game I lost, and went 4-1 that tournament back in 2003.
    Most Grunfeld players I know don’t like early Queen trades. Being one that also plays the Berlin, I have no objection to it. So an Anti-Grunfeld repertoire for a Grunfeld player, in some ways, almost seems silly!

    You are perfectly right!
    It’s better to prepare something else against 1.c4 and 1.Nf3, cause you’re not going to get a Gruenfeld against those, if we’re talking aroung 2300-2400 Elo or less.

  73. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 7th, 2011 at 20:12 | #73

    I think the purpose for the anti-Grünfeld repertoire is to provide Grünfeld players with a playable position without having to learn a completely new opening like the King’s Indian, similarly to how Sicilian players need to know how to answer anti-Sicilians, despite 2. c3, Rossolimo/Moscow, etc. being very similar to the Najdorf, Taimanov, Kan, etc. A GM Repertoire book would definitely be helpful, especially since I get anti-Grünfelds and other systems like Torre, Trompowsky, Colle, London, etc. in more than half my 1. d4 games, similar to the anti-Sicilians in being in more than half of my 1. e4 games for some reason…

  74. Patrick
    July 8th, 2011 at 03:42 | #74

    Gilchrist,

    I don’t think you get the point. You don’t have to learn how to play the King’s Indian. The Anti-Sicilians and the Anti-Grunfeld are like apples and oranges. You can’t play the Sicilian without being willing to play the Anti-Sicilians. You can play the Grunfeld, and not play the Anti-Grunfeld.

    If you want to compare apples to apples, the Anti-Sicilians are to the Open Sicilian as the Trompowsky, Torre, or London is to the Grunfeld. The Anti-Grunfeld is not even a Queen Pawn opening. It’s a line of the English. Sicilian players must also know what to do against the English.

    I don’t know if you actually looked at the game mentioned above, but it will show that there is no similarity between the Anti-Grunfeld and the Grunfeld, and so putting an Anti-Grunfeld line in the repertoire of a Grunfeld book is silly. Some Grunfeld players may actually LIKE the anti-Grunfeld. Most probably wouldn’t in reality.

    To tell you the god-honest truth, agressive players with Black who truly like to play the Grunfeld against 1.d4 should probably be playing 1…e5 against 1.c4, as it gives them the attacking chances they’d be looking for, like they do in a Grunfeld. The Anti-Grunfeld is more often than not a VERY positional game.

    Some openings should be re-named only because the names mislead players.

    The King’s Indian Attack should not be named as such. The only thing that’s the same as the King’s Indian Defense is the fianchetto. In the KIA, white USUALLY plays for h4, in the KID, Black USUALLY plays for …f5. The f-pawn rarely advances to f4 in the KIA, and the h-pawn only goes to h5 in the KID well after the f- and g- pawns have already advanced.

    The Anti-Grunfeld and Anti-Nimzo-Indian really fall in that category too because there truly is zero similarity other than possibly how the DSB is developed.

  75. Antonius
    July 8th, 2011 at 08:34 | #75

    Just noticed Cox is coming out with a Black repertoire book on QGD (he covered Lasker, Tartakover, exchange variation, early deviations and Catalan too).
    I was just wondering, considering his excellent work with the Berlin, why he didn’t write this book for QC in the GM Rep series?!

  76. John Shaw
    July 8th, 2011 at 10:51 | #76

    Antonius :
    Just noticed Cox is coming out with a Black repertoire book on QGD (he covered Lasker, Tartakover, exchange variation, early deviations and Catalan too).
    I was just wondering, considering his excellent work with the Berlin, why he didn’t write this book for QC in the GM Rep series?!

    Hi Antonius,

    We enjoyed working with John Cox and were delighted with his Berlin book, but he usually decides to write for Everyman. I think John is an old friend of Byron Jacobs of Everyman, so he prefers to work with him. The only reason we got the Berlin book, I believe, was that Everyman didn’t think a book solely on the Berlin would sell well.

  77. Antonius
    July 8th, 2011 at 12:26 | #77

    Oh I understand!
    I just hope his book will be on par with the “GM repertoire” type, with deep analysis, but I’m not sure about that. 🙂

  78. Patrick
    July 8th, 2011 at 15:03 | #78

    Antonius,

    I have the book on the Berlin. With his ability to write, I don’t think you’ll have a problem. Just just write off a book simply because it’s Everyman.

    Vigorito’s 2 books on the King’s Indian are EXCELLENT, and they are Everyman.

    The only problem with Everyman is they don’t manage their Website well. Way too much spam on their message boards, and instead of eliminating the spam, they eliminate the people that question why the spam isn’t removed. The administrators of the message board on their Website have some loose screws in their head, but their books aren’t all bad. There are some, but one should easily be able to pick those out.

    Look at the reputation of the author, not who the publishing company is. Cox, Marin, Vigorito, Soltis (Middlegame books), etc, equate to good authors. Bad authors? Uhm, Eric Schiller, Soltis (Opening books), etc.

    Some other authors are kinda on the fence. Some of their books are ok. Some aren’t so hot. Ones like Angus Dunnington or Neil McDonald fit in this category. For example, McDonand’s books on the French are excellent (especially Mastering the French with the Read and Play Method), but I don’t rate his book on the Leningrad Dutch very highly.

    Don’t ever judge a book by the publisher. Everyman USED TO BE bad about specific page counts, and many cases of “I would go into more detail about this, but the page limitation has kept me from doing this” was a commonplace in Everyman books back around 2000 to 2002 (when literally every book was either 144 or 160 pages), but they’ve cleaned up their act in that department.

    I’m sure Cox can write a good book regardless of who the publishing company is. I have yet to see a lemon by him.

  79. Patrick
    July 8th, 2011 at 15:05 | #79

    Ugh, I wish one could edit on this site. 2nd line, should be “Don’t just write off …” instead of “Just just …”.

  80. Antonius
    July 8th, 2011 at 15:41 | #80

    Of course you’re right again, and I can’t really have doubts about Cox, considering his good past works, and I didn’t want to bash anyone.
    This one is a different book, more about theory (not like Berlin), and coupled with “Dealing with 1.d4 deviations” should grant a complete and very solid repertoire against 1.d4, which I intend to vary with Gruenfeld when inclined (especially OTB).

  81. Jacob Aagaard
    July 8th, 2011 at 16:22 | #81

    Patrick makes a logical but flawed case. Just for once I will speak out on this issue.

    I rate our random books higher than Everyman’s. There are choices of authors and also the quality of the editing. We have had some very bad manuscripts in, and put out highly praised books from them.

  82. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 8th, 2011 at 20:04 | #82

    If I remember correctly Avrukh is supposed to write a book that consists of repertoires for all players facing 1. d4 without 2. c4. But would it cover the anti-Grünfeld lines?

  83. Jacob Aagaard
    July 8th, 2011 at 20:08 | #83

    No, it would be 1.d4 without c4, as you mention. By the way, the Anti-Grunfeld lines you all talk about are also referred to as the English, hehehe.

  84. Patrick
    July 8th, 2011 at 20:19 | #84

    Jacob,

    If I understand what you are saying correctly, yes, there is a difference in who the editors are. So you could argue that difference, along with font size, formatting, etc.

    That said, I’ve seen errors by Everyman, I’ve seen errors by Quality Chess, I’ve seen errors by Batsford, I’ve seen errors by all of them in my 16 years thus far of buying and reading chess books (or in some cases, browsing and ultimately rejecting). The only publishing company I don’t trust is Cardoza.

    However, even with these minor errors (i.e. I found 1 diagram error in Experts on the Anti-Sicilians, and a case where the last line of notes to White’s 5th move 5.d5, and Black’s actual 5th move, 5…Ne7, were printed on the same line, overlapping, in Everyman’s Play the Ponziani), you can tell that the effort was put in to the editing portion of the book. Nobody is going to be 100% perfect with every book ever written.

    However, I wrote the following review on August 21st, 2001 (and can still be found at http://www.amazon.com) for the book “Standard Chess Openings” (the first edition) by Eric Schiller. I never bought the book. I spent about 30 minutes to an hour going thru it at a book store, and never seen a worse editing job ever pertaining to any publication, whether that be a book, newspaper, magazine, you name it, than I have with this book. Yeah, I’ve given other books bad reviews before because the plot stunk (i.e. Bentley Little’s “The Return”, a Horror novel), but just talking editing, this book is the worst ever!

    Here’s what I said about it (and notice 8 of 11 found the review helpful):

    8 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
    (1.0 out of 5 stars) Bad Analysis, Baad Speling, The Grammar Bad!!, August 21, 2001

    Well, I think you get the point from the heading of this review.

    First of all…the analysis is terrible. For example, in the game between Ivanchuk and Shirov in the section on the Semi-Slav defense, he gives 23…d4!! as such an excellent move…it’s a BLUNDER!!! Black loses 12 moves later with no way to improve his moves. Matthew Sadler in his book on the semi-slav (Game 1) even points out it’s a blunder. Let’s see now…Sadler is in the top 50 in the world, Schiller is a United States National Master (The United States is WEAK compared to other countries, and I come from the USA). I think with White winning, no ?’s by either side after move 23, and Sadler being much higher ranked…I’d trust him over schiller.

    Spelling Issues: I don’t think I need to dive into the “horible mispelings dat dis buuk iz ful of, as the othur revues alrady writen wil point dis out”.

    Grammar Issues: Also all you have do is read introduction to already see grammar really really bad.

    Finally, what do you call a dumb statement like “some lines I cover more simply because I know them better” in an introduction to a book for what is obviously a beginner? Does this mean that if Schiller say, knows the Torre Attack, but doesn’t know the Trompowsky Attack, he basically would just make up junk as he goes along?

    What is this author trying to do to the chess world? It seems to me that he figures he’s obviously not good enough to write a real book that an expert would read, so let’s just sucker the beginners into buying his books…they’ll fall for buying his junk, waste their money, and will Schiller care…heck no!!! He’s got all the money in the world now.

    DON’T BUY THIS BOOK!!!!!!!

  85. James
    July 8th, 2011 at 20:46 | #85

    I don’t want to advertise Everyman products, but there are 2 books which I’ve found very useful: Fighting the anti-King’s Indians by Yelena Dembo and Beating Unsual Chess Openings by Richard Pallister. They both filled in a lot of holes in my repertoire, specifically what to play against the English. That said, they’re both quite old now (3-4 yrs) and I’m looking forward to Avrukh’s d4 deviations book, whenever that comes out.

  86. Ametanoitos
    July 9th, 2011 at 07:25 | #86

    To tell you truth i expected much more from Everyman’s recent King’s Indian and QGD books. Probably because of the authors’ names: Cox and Vigorito. I can give all the details if you like (specific lines etc) but the general picture is that their analysis in some very very critical positions is very shallow! I imagine that this has to do with the philoshophy of each publication house. Everyman doesn’t bother as they have as target the typical-average club player but i’d never imagine that QC would have such issues! Just see QC’s recent openings books! They don’t fear to go for critical analysis which is deeper than everyone else. You could find this kind of analysis only in Informator books probably a decade back but not in regular opening books. This is what i like about QC but that is my personal taste.

  87. Jacob Aagaard
    July 9th, 2011 at 11:13 | #87

    I did not say that Everyman was a bad publisher and you will never be able to quote me on this. I worked for Byron for five glorious years and have nothing but the deepest respect for him as a person.

    I think Everyman has done more to re-invent themselves than all the other publishers after we upped our game in late 2008.

    I don’t like everything they do, but we are certainly not without flaws either. Example: We looked through the diagrams in GM8 many many times, and yesterday Keti found an extra bishop on page 76…

    What I was saying is that we do spend more time on both the chess and the editing of the language than they do. And possibly we are better at it too :-).

  88. Tomtidom
    July 9th, 2011 at 17:13 | #88

    Ametanoitos :
    To tell you truth i expected much more from Everyman’s recent King’s Indian and QGD books. Probably because of the authors’ names: Cox and Vigorito. I can give all the details if you like (specific lines etc) but the general picture is that their analysis in some very very critical positions is very shallow!

    Hi Ametanoitos,

    I would be quite interested to hear in which lines in the 2 KID-books by Vigorito you think the analysis to be “shallow”. But perhaps that is not the right place here. Maybe on chesspub?!

  89. Ametanoitos
    July 10th, 2011 at 00:09 | #89

    One example that comes to my mind is the chapter on the “strategic” variations of the Saemisch. I wanted to help a GM friend for a tournament of his in Italy when i looked at these chapters and i found out that he misses simple transpositional possibilities and in some critical lines he just gives a game reference. My friend decided at the last moment to play the Tarrasch btw and got a draw with Black with the number 2 of the tournament!

    Other stuff that i didn’t like is the “blind” quotation of other sources, such as “…and now Nunn gives this” without more analysis. I don’t understand if this is Nunn’s opinion only or the author’s too. Also he gives some novelties followed by a move or two! Come on! Again in the Saemisch chapter he says that a certain line is proven to be in White’s favour slightly and he gives a novelty without an assesment and without analysis and he just says that Black should try this at the conclusion of the chapter!

    I like Vigorito and i have his books. I also have many books on the KID. His books offered me nothing new at all. They would be usefull if i didn’t have the relevant bibliography as he essentially brings it all in his books. Some minor corrections on Bologan’s analysis, a good novelty in the Gligoric system (where other moves are also OK for Black) and that is all! Good books, not great at all. What i like about QC is that they want their books not to be only good, but they want them excellent!

    I can discuss about Vigorito’s books with more details in chesspub but not now. I am in the Army and i don’t have these books together with me.

  90. Jacob Aagaard
    July 10th, 2011 at 07:30 | #90

    Clearly I rate Dave’s books on the KID higher than this last contribution. I think it is important to point out that he is my second! Nikos, now when your book is coming out soon, you cannot hide behind a handle anymore; please use your real name…

    But you are allowed to have your opinions of course. I know you had them before we started to work together too, and they are not just loyalty.

  91. Ametanoitos
    July 10th, 2011 at 09:47 | #91

    Probably i have such a strong opinion about those KID books because, as i said, i like Vigorito’s books very much and i expected something more. For example his Semi-Slav book offers more refreshing material and his Nimzo book is surprizingly even today great (and i really cannot think of another opening book so old that is so relevant today). Probably it has to do with the fact that KID is a much more difficult project. But i don’t want to be misunderstood, my personal taste for an opening book is that this book should gather all the relevant material available and move the theory forward. Vigorito succeeded in both, that’s why his book is good. I could give it a 7,5/10 which obviously a fine score. His other books for QC were around 8,5 though. My opinion of course, i just wanted more because he could. And probably because i don’t like at all his choice for the Saemisch i was a bit harsh.

    Anyway, i think that everybody (or “almost” everybody) knows that i am Nikos Ntirlis, the co-author of GM10: The Tarrasch Defence, i have stated it before here on this blog, but you’re right i should use my real name from now on.

    Lastly, i also wanted to say about the “Everyman issue” that i have in my library more books form Everyman that i have from QC and i’m still buying from them of course. Some of their books i love, some i hate, this is life. I just see a different philoshophy from QC that is obvious to everybody. This doesn’t mean that this philoshophy is “worse” or “better”, it just means that it is different and different people like it more or less. For example, i saw the PDFs for their new Slav book. The idea of question-answer and its implementation in the book is something i don’t like at all. If the book has material that i like, i’ll buy it and i predict that they’ll be many who will love this question-answer thing and that will help them to play the opening better than just reading lines. Different people, different taste. Because i don’t like it, it doesn’t mean that it is bad. I only judge the actual chess content.

  92. Jacob Aagaard
    July 10th, 2011 at 14:00 | #92

    You are absolutely entitled to have your views and express them here. I just wanted it to be clear to everyone who you were, so no one would suspect that somehow this was the views of QC “planted” or some other conspiracy nonsense, for which the Internet is well designed.

  93. Tomtidom
    July 10th, 2011 at 14:35 | #93

    Nikos, of course you are entitled to have your own opinion. But above you wrote about the books in question “the general picture is that their analysis in some very very critical positions is very shallow!”. Calling a work very shallow sounds like a very hard criticism to me. Probably we both know there are authors out there whose work is indeed usually “very shallow” but here this is way over the top in my view. To my mind a shallow work is just useless.

    There have been more or less serious omissions or flaws in some books by QC too, as they know perfectly themselves. I consider the KID-books by Vigorito among the best Everyman has ever released (granted I don´t know their whole program!) and they would fit nicely into the QC-program as well. And surely they would be somewhat different than but not necessarily better.

    I´m more in line with your last statement which is much more balanced and objective and so probably nearer to the truth.

    If you can find the time it would be nice to see the concrete lines which you consider to be problematic. That way the author may adress them in the promised updates to the books.

    Thank you in advance.

  94. Ametanoitos
    July 10th, 2011 at 15:46 | #94

    See for example chapter 16 (Saemisch) were the author says at the start of the chapter that Black seems to have some difficulties and says that he probably needs to play 10…Bd7 instead of 10…e5. After 10…e5 he gives 9 “heavy” pages of analysis and the general conclusion is that White remains (even slightly) better. What does he give after 10..Bd7? Just a few rows of analysis with the most important being 11.Nb3 Ra8 12.O-O-O a5 when he just stops! Also in chapter 19, in the 9.Rc1 variation he misses some critical (to me) sidelines and in page 341 he gives a Kaufman’s recommendation without an assesment. The whole chapter in fact looks chaotic and to me it seems that the author doesn’t really understand what is going on and doesn’t know what to recommend. I say it again, this is MY impression. For example he gives a move by Black and 4 White replies and after he gives another move by Black he gives 3 White replies when there are some other moves that seem critical also and are similar to the treatment to other lines previously examined! Chaos, i know, but it took me 3 days to try to understand what is going on and i was unhappy that the author didn’t helped me. Usually Vigorito helps!

    Also, in chapter 1, page 16 he gives the idea of the Ukranian IM Averkin with f3+Nd3+b4+a4+Ba3 but he doesn’t even consider the main idea that White plays g4! when Black threatens …g4 himself. Extremelly difficult position to analyse (PC doesn’t help at all) and a very rare idea, i know, but otherwise Black is simply better and also Golubev had examined this idea in his book (to play g4), so Vigorito missed it. Chapter 6, page 106 he says: “The only other sensible continuation really is 12…fxe4” (instead of 12…c6), where i really wanted him to analyse the neat idea of 12…Rb8!? (Nataf’s if i recall correctly) which is sensible enough and probably OK for Black. I also remember now of page 30,line b11 where he says “unclear” (he stops too early!) and in line b12 too much stuff is missing! I think that also in page 32 i had recommended something else in chesspub i don’t remember now (sorry for that!) and i had received some piece of analysis from a German friend that claimed better chances for White. Vigorito doesn’t examine those ideas i had seen in my email. In page 48 (the 13.g4 line) i had some analysis a couple of years back (a joined work with a chesspub friend. I can give his name if he hasn’t got any problem) that improves White’s play (if i remember it was 15.Be3 or 15.Ng2 and Be3 after that? This line gives White a small edge and you can see it for yourslef if you analyse it with an engine for some time and use some common sense (for example take th King at the other side of the board at the correct moment!). Sorry again that i cannot find the details now but you wanted me to say more concrete stuff and this is what i really can find now because i am away from my notes at home. Also the Army service really affects memory!

    Anyway, in Saemisch i am a bit harsh as i said because i don’t like at all this system for Black and in the classical it is very easy to miss hidden ideas in many lines. To me for example the Classical Be3+g4 line, the Averkin system and the Rc1-Saemisch are very critical systems where White fights for an advantage. There Vigorito’s analysis is shallow to my eyes because i had used time in the past to analyse those positions and my personal analysis was deeper and created many unanswered questions. The same goes for the Nb5 sac in the Classical, even though i think that he had something in his online update on this? Anyway,i don’t claim that the whole book is shallow. Obviously it is not. Just like me the author wanted to investigate deeper the lines that he thought that are more critical. Different people have different experiences and opinions. I just wanted to see answers to many questions i had and to see analysis that improve on my personal analysis. Both didn’t happen.

    People who know me, know that i say my opinion without fearing that someone would believe that it is part of some “conspiracy”. Yes, mistakes cannot be avoided. I learnt it the “hard way” when i wanted my analysis for the Tarrasch book to be error-free but i always received an email from Jacob where he had spoted an error or an omission to the file i had just sent to him. I am sure that before our book is out we will spot some of them and unfortunately we’ll do it also after the book is printed. At least i think that we are quite sure that these errors or omissions will not be critical. The KID project is much harder and respect from me to the author that put all this amount of work to his book.

    Also about other Everyman’s book that don’t analyse critical positions too much, i thik that i am not mistaken in this also. But this doesn’t mean, as i said, that these books are not good. That is just a different philoshophy. And “my shallow” is not “shallow” to other people, i can understand that and to be honest sometimes i forget it! So, yes probably sometimes i am a bit harsh on my judgment but at least it is my sincere opinion.

  95. C Moss
    July 10th, 2011 at 20:21 | #95

    Much seems to be made about the depth of analysis between various chess publishing companies. Yet, this seems to overlook a very important point. Some – Everyman – appears to have a large scope of published works, while QC clearly tries – or appears clearly to try – to have depth in each of the publications it produces. When one looks for the King’s Indian Attack, and finds at Everyman a text, that does not automatically mean poor work product. Nor, when one looks at QC and does not find a text solely covering the King’s Indian Attack, that QC lacks in something. Each house presents to the public works that are actually a breath ahead of what was available – dare I say it – forty years ago when I first looked for texts on chess. So, to each his own, enjoy what you enjoy, and remember what these books are for – to bring to the reader something new, enjoyable, and helpful.

  96. Jacob Aagaard
    July 10th, 2011 at 22:13 | #96

    I am afraid someone is going to be as thorough to our Tarrasch book as you have been to Dave’s books! I have not found a book that could not be picked apart like this, Marin and Avrukh’s books as well. And these books had heavy impact on top play! It just shows to me that ALL chess players will have holes in their repertoires like that…

  97. James
    July 11th, 2011 at 01:22 | #97

    Robert Kikkert for ChessVibes gave “The Safest Grunfeld” quite a critical review a few days ago: http://www.chessvibes.com/reviews/review-the-safest-grunfeld/

  98. dvigorito
    July 11th, 2011 at 01:47 | #98

    I guess I have to respond. I do find it a little odd that an unknown player who has his first book coming out soon (while while riding on the coattails of a GM) is slinging arrows my way on the QCB blog of all places. Of course everyone is entitled to their opinion, however. I could have easily listed a dozen glaring errors in Bologan’s KID book but honestly I figured that doing so would reflect more on me than it would on him. Of course he is much stronger than I am, but that is besides the point. many will remember Tiviakov’s scathing review of Eddie Dearing’s Dragon book and how that worked out…

    Ok, some comments – although I do not intend to get into a pissing contest here.

    “i didn’t like is the “blind” quotation of other sources, such as “…and now Nunn gives this” without more analysis. I don’t understand if this is Nunn’s opinion only or the author’s too”

    To me this is very obvious. I am crediting Nunn with the analysis. If I disagreed, I’d say so. Very often an author will say “Nunn gives this” or according to Nunn” as a way of crediting someone else’s analysis (although many do nto even do this). If you are left scratching your head, you probably do not read many English language chess books, as it’s common vernacular.

    “Also he gives some novelties followed by a move or two!” So? Often you can make some suggestion but you cannot analyze everything. originally this was supposed to be a single 272 page volume, but we can see how that worked out. A good example of this is Semkov’s Four Pawns Attack book. There are many (equal/unclear) positions you could analyse for hours in many directions with no conclusion. That is fine – it is original analysis and the author can share his ideas that he has looked at. Until something gets some practical test, there is not point in trying to work thing out to mate.

    “i don’t like at all his choice for the Saemisch”.

    That is fine. Many won’t. Perhaps 6…c5 is the best move, but there are a great many other books that cover that. As I explained in the Introduction, I decided to give a different line that is fun to play and which has not been analysed much in the last couple of decades. I have yet to find a repertoire book where I like every line in th ebook (and this includes my own books!). To criticize this choice seems silly to me. It’s like saying the Grunfeld is better than the King’s Indian so the book is bad.

    I mention a line with 11.Nb3 Ra8 12.O-O-O a5 and stop. it’s an novel offhand novel idea; the play is not forcing, and there are zero examples. I think it’s ok to mention some ideas that are well off the beaten track as an area that someone may want to investigate. Essentially I cover the main line of 9.h4 h5 but recommend Black take a better look at 9…e5 and 9…b5 (which I do). The 9.Rc1 line is dangerous, but there is a lot of scope for original play. Kaufman mentions some moves without analysis (I think Ng3 somewhere) but I am expected to work things out to mate. 🙂

    “His books offered me nothing new at all.”

    Well, they are 700+ pages combined with literally hundreds of new suggestions (Everyman does not use the “N”, though I quite like the idea personally), but when you are an unrated famous trainer, there is probably not much for me to teach you!

    It’s funny, my favourite thing about these books was that I offered multple lines for Black in the Exchange, which I thought was of significant practical importance. There is also the fact that there is more analysis of the 9.Ne1 MdP, the Saemisch Panno, the g3 Panno, and the Averbakh line than there probably is in all other sources combined…

    I actually think these two volumes are the best work I’ve ever done – but that’s just my humble opinion. 🙂 When I get back to PTSS2 my critic and I will be coworkers!

  99. Antonius
    July 11th, 2011 at 12:03 | #99

    To me it looks like very deep, probably at the level of QC GM rep series.
    I feel the same with Cox coming book.
    I must conclude that Everyman is adjusting his target (at least on some degree) to compete against QC standard.
    Still I think formatting and paper are not on the level, but analisys are, and I must trust both Vigorito and Cox, considering their previous works.

    More competition, more quality! GOOD!

  100. Jacob Aagaard
    July 11th, 2011 at 12:06 | #100

    This Kikkert review is quite interesting. However, towards the end he committs a quite common failing, putting up one criteria for what a good chess book is, and then coming after Avrukh for not writing in that style. This does not make sense to me. Avrukh writes like he thinks, so do Schandorff and I. And we publish books with all these different styles, and with pleasure.

  101. dvigorito
    July 11th, 2011 at 12:33 | #101

    Jacob, I noticed that too – Kikkert seems to criticize Avrukh for not writing like Marin!

  102. Jacob Aagaard
    July 11th, 2011 at 12:40 | #102

    Thank you for backing me up Dave. Especially after this weekend :-). I personally thought your KID books looked pretty sassy, but there you go. My second says no! Good the same, as I am under contractual obligation to play the Tarrasch :-).

    Btw. Avrukh annotated the Giri game for the newsletter, which I guess will come out next week, when we have Internet again!

  103. Gerry
    July 11th, 2011 at 14:03 | #103

    Jacob,

    My books (GM8, GM9 and Anti Sicilian) arrived today, and (not unexpectedly) I am very pleased with what I saw so far.

    To bring this discussion back to where it started:

    Other publishers do have good books as well. Yes, they do. And not so good ones…

    I am reading and buying chess books for more than 25 years now. But this purchase I received today is the first one in all these years I did without having had the books physically in my hands first. (Yes, I did read the pdf, though…) There is no publisher other than QC that I would do so. And I was not a tiny bit of disappointed.

    This is the difference. It must be the selection of authors, the clear task to come up with quality, and probably a lot of editing to get the manuscripts right. The result is an audience that does appreciate the quality.

    By the way, I do not expect a repertoire book to always cover me, even if this is the plan of an author. I have used lots of Vigoritos Semi-Slav material for my own games, but not all. Same for Marin, and already with Exp vs Sic. One cannot expect that a proposed repertoire is always complete and that all chapters are to anyones taste. But all your books have helped me a great deal.

    Keep on the good work.
    Gerry

  104. Jacob Aagaard
    July 11th, 2011 at 14:45 | #104

    Thank you Gerry. This is what I want to achieve with what we do.

    Obviously, I have not once been fully satisfied with a book we have done. But we are getting closer I think…

  105. Patrick
    July 11th, 2011 at 16:43 | #105

    James (#85) – I own the Dembo book. The best book out there on how to beat White’s garbage lines. Don’t own Palliser’s, but I have a couple others of his. Good writer.

    Ametanoitos (#86/89/91) – Vigorito’s books are the best two out there right now on the King’s Indian Defense. Many of the critical lines that you will see time in and time out, like the Classical with Be3, he goes into such detail, that I’ve probably spent about 50 hours just going thru the first 75 pages of the book (basically 9.Ne1). He explains a lot better than John Nunn’s books from the mid-90s do, which to me is a database dump (complete, not shallow, but no explanation), and shallow analysis better describes a lot of other KID books, but not Vigorito’s. It’s also organized really well, something that can’t be said about some other books, like Andrew Martin’s book from 2004, which is just a clutter of games if you ask me. Take the Bayonet. In Game 1 of that chapter, he makes 9…c6 sound like it’s this great new idea. He then doesn’t mention it. Then in like, game 12 or so, hey, 9…c6 is this great new idea! That level of organization gets a big fat COME ON, MAN!

    Jacob (#96) – Every book will always have holes. The trick is, instead of complaining about it here or some other message board, do like I did. Marin’s book on the Anti-Slav (the 2nd of the 3 English books) is missing the line 1.c4 c6 2.g3 d5 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Bg2 a6. He gives many other lines for Black, but not 4…a6, which I can easily see an …a6 Slav player playing, and I have faced it myself. All I did was sent in a request to ChessPublishing.com, along with a Question I had on From’s Gambit, and got great ideas from Nigel Davies in the Flank Openings section (I think it was the May update of this year).

    David Vigorito (#98/101) – I own your book on the Semi-Slav, though I pretty much quit playing 1…d5 againt 1.d4. I have both your books on the King’s Indian, which are what I mainly use now along with Dembo’s Anti-King’s Indian book for my repertoire against 1.d4. When and if Quality Chess comes out with their GM Repertoire on the KID that they talked about, I’ll get that as well, and pick and choose between lines. Personally, I have never liked the 6…c5 lines (even if they are sound) in the Saemisch. In the past, I’ve played the Panno, and for a while, I was doing the panno setup against 6.Nge2 and 6.Bg5, and against 6.Be3, I was playing 6…e5 with the Queen Sac line that Bronstein was known for. So if Quality Chess comes out with theirs, while I might go with a few lines in their books, I think you have a safe lock on the Saemisch from my perspective.

    I also check your article each month on ChessPublishing (granted, not the only section – 7 of the 12 fit my current repertoire). Keep up the good work!

    Speaking of Cox (mentioned in the posts from this weekend), I wonder what Ametanoitos has to say about Cox’s book on the Berlin Wall. Books like this one, where the first 150 pages or so isn’t even opening theory, or ones like Sveshnikov’s first of the 2 on the Advance French, where the entire book is basically middlegame analysis and problems, 2nd book giving the “opening theory”, are excellent for non-GMs like myself.

  106. Tomtidom
    July 11th, 2011 at 17:32 | #106

    I only want to add that I´m glad the Panno has been covered against the Saemisch instead of the overanalysed 6… c5 and I´m looking forward to try it in practice. Keep up with the good work!

  107. dvigorito
    July 11th, 2011 at 17:45 | #107

    I like this Patrick fellow…

  108. Ametanoitos
    July 11th, 2011 at 20:16 | #108

    Mr Vigorito,

    You write: “I guess I have to respond. I do find it a little odd that an unknown player who has his first book coming out soon (while while riding on the coattails of a GM) is slinging arrows my way on the QCB blog of all places.”

    I am deeply sorry that i made that impression to you. This is not what characterizes as a person (people like Jacob, who know a bit about me can tell if this is so) and this was not my intention! Probably you didn’t read the good things i wrote in this blog about you, so your statement about “all places” is a bit unfair to me. but at the end it is my fault that i didn’t expressed really what i was thinking with the correct way. English is not my natural language but this is not an excuse. I agree that your books are the best that have ever been written for the KID. But i think that objectively they could have been at least a bit better. I am willing to share with you the exact lines where i think that possible improvements could be made. Your books that i have in my library are filled with my notes back home. Indeed i am not well known (not famous at all as you said, but probably you didn’t mean that) but i have worked with some known players (among them some GMs), even though i haven’t made it known to the public. I am not unrated, but it is a fact that i am low-rated, at least compared with many of my students and players i have worked with. So, i have my analysis and i have formed my opinions about many lines and some people ask from me this analysis and opinions. I really feel bad that i sound too harsh on you (i remember the Tiviakov Vs Dearing issue and indeed although Tiviakov maybe was right he showed to the public a very cruel face), so the least i can do to make things better is to share with you some specific lines i disagree with your book.

    Also, i think that i did the same mistake as Kikkert in some places. I criticized as wrong something that i would make it different myself. In my online articles and my lessons i use extensively analysis from other people, but i always try to make it clear that one’s recommendation is (or isn’t) my recommendation also for specific reasons that i always give.
    This is how i work but of course this doesn’t mean that it is the only correct way.

    Anyway, my original statement was that Everyman has a different philoshophy than QC (as i understand it), not worse, just different, and this is obvious in some of Everyman’s books were the lines are not covered as deeply as a QC book does. Vigorito’s KID books was not the right example for that, it is true.

  109. Ametanoitos
    July 11th, 2011 at 20:24 | #109

    Oh, i forgot to answer to Patrick’s question about Cox’s Berlin book. I still think that this book was fantastic, still not perfect but a fantastic work. The concept about teaching exact material distributions made a huge inpact on me. I still analyse Berlin games of the top players and i see mistakes in their games that wouldn’t have been made if the had read that book!

  110. dvigorito
    July 11th, 2011 at 20:37 | #110

    hi Nikos
    I understand your intention was not to cause offense. sometimes the ‘translation to English’ does not come across so well however.

    “your statement about “all places” is a bit unfair to me”.
    I think you do not understand this phrase. It does not mean you critized me “in all places”. Essentially it means, “of all of the different places you could post these comments, the QCB blog is a strange choice” I mean this because this blog is not so general (compared to chesspub, for example) – this forum is generally going to discuss QCB books.

    “i think that objectively they could have been at least a bit better”
    well, this is true about every single chess book ever written, so…

    I think it is clear that Everyman’s catalogue tries to reach a broader audience, as does Gambit’s. So they will have some Starting Outs and some “IM Repertoire” (hehe) books like the KID books. Quality Chess does not have any “easy guide” or “chess explained”, and that is fine. I love QCB’s books but the other publishers clearly met some players’ needs too. As John Shaw once told me, “there is room for everyone”. 🙂

  111. Patrick
    July 11th, 2011 at 21:13 | #111

    David,

    Following your “IM Repertoire” joke, I’ll scout a 1200 player from the club I play at, and Jacob, You, Myself, and the 1200 player can all write on 1.e4, GM Repertoire, IM Repertoire, Expert Repertoire, and Beginner’s Repertoire. Notice how all the lines below work their way downward from Main Line to cheesy lines. Below would be the lines given for 1…e5, Sicilian, French, Caro-Kann, and Pirc/Modern):

    GM Repertoire – Ruy Lopez, Open Sicilian, 3.Nc3, 3.Nc3, Austrian Attack
    IM Repertoire – Scotch, Rossolimo, Tarrasch, Advance, Classical
    Expert Repertoire – Ponziani, Closed, Advance, Fantasy, 150 Attack
    Beginners Repertoire – King’s Indian Attack, King’s Indian Attack, King’s Indian Attack, King’s Indian Attack, King’s Indian Attack

    All right, everyone knows their assignment! Let’s get started now! LOL!

  112. Jacob Aagaard
    July 12th, 2011 at 11:29 | #112

    I think Schandorff’s Playing the Queen’s Gambit would fit quite well to the IM-Repertoire series :-). Not because it is not good, it is, but because it is a bit more accessible and a good deal more compact.

    Regarding the Starting Out series; I think most of the books were just standard theory books under a different name. The same with Gambit’s series. Essentially they just decided to cover everything superficially and filled it up with fluff they had taken from the Dummy’s books. I don’t think they fulfilled what could have been done with this series very well. Maybe one day we will do something along those lines :-).

  113. Mike Houser
    July 12th, 2011 at 12:26 | #113

    Jacob: I am anxiously awaiting the Grandmaster Repertoire volumes on the Grunfeld and KID. I was just wondering, are there any plans for a GM Rep French or Pirc? Regarding the French, I saw something that included a combination French, Caro Kann and Philidor, but was hoping for a French only GM Rep book? Will we be in luck? Great job. These books are phenomenal and easily the best thing going in the field.

  114. Frankfurter Bub
    July 12th, 2011 at 14:10 | #114

    At a book stand I just bought Kotronias Grandmaster Battle Manual. The book looks great. And if not already exists in chess-speak “Hübneresque Analysis” after going through the comments of game 1 one could be inclined to create “Kotroniaskios Analysis” 🙂
    By the way: Flear’s book looks great, very neatly made. But first I have to work through Kotronias and Shaw

  115. GID player
    July 12th, 2011 at 14:35 | #115

    Jacob Aagaard : I have not found a book that could not be picked apart like this […] It just shows to me that ALL chess players will have holes in their repertoires …

    One might add that, in a way, chess books can even be TOO comprehensive. For example: In GM8 Avrukh spends half a page on the sideline 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Qc2. Fair enough, one might say, as, according to the databases, 3.Qc2 has indeed been tried in a number of games, and Avrukh’s books are meant to arm the black player against (almost) everything White may throw at his beloved opening. Still, I was a little surprised, because I have been playing the Grünfeld for years now, and as far as I remember, I have never ever encountered the move 3.Qc2, not even in what must be thousands of blitz games. Now Avrukh mentions it in his book and – lo and behold! – some White players for sure will pick it up just to annoy us Grünfeld players (who are adviced to play a King’s Indian after 3. Qc2), even if “objectively” the line may not be very good for White … go figure!
    But then, of course, the Grünfeld player who actually DOES encounter 3.Qc2 certainly will be happy to find some advice in Avrukh’s book – only to have to wait for years to encounter 3.Qc2 for a second time. Having forgotten the advice by then, he will have to consult the book again … 😉 So yes, there are no perfect chess books.

  116. Patrick
    July 12th, 2011 at 16:59 | #116

    Mike Houser, the French/Caro-Kann/Philador is for White (GM Rep, 1.e4 – Delayed)

    Jacob, in terms of the Starting Out and Chess Explained series (I’m assuming that’s the Gambit series you were referring to), in actuality, I think the “Chess Explained” series should be the one labelled “Starting Out”.

    When another person was talking about “Shallow” analysis, Chess Explained fits that bill. Some openings, like the Taimanov Sicilian, you can get away with that, but others, like the Queen’s Gambit Declined, you really can’t.

    As for the “Starting Out” series, my view is a little different than yours. I think it’s the most inconsistent series of them all. Some are SUPER SHALLOW (i.e. Starting Out: The Sicilian), some are SUPER DEEP (i.e. Starting Out: The Scandinavian), some are REALLY GOOD for what they cover (i.e. Starting Out: Closed Sicilian), and some are COMPLETE GARBAGE (i.e. Starting Out: The French – Still to this day the worst of the worst of the worst of all the Starting Out books).

    So in truth, the title is misleading. Starting Out: The Sicilian should truly be a “Starting Out” book, but that can’t be said about the subsequent books in the Starting Out series on the Najdorf, Dragon, Scheveningen, Classical, Closed, or c3 Sicilian books in the same series, which are far more in depth than Start Out: The Sicilian, but not as in depth as say, the GM Repertoire series.

    They should be titled something more like “The Najdorf for the Intermediate Player”. Not as basic and shallow as SO: The Sicilian, not as in depth as GM Rep the Sicilian. The GM Rep books are excellent, but I don’t think they are appropriate for say, a 1600 player. That’s where the “Starting Out” series may become more useful. Once you hit 2000, then hit the GM Rep books.

    For those that are looking for which starting out books are good vs bad, I can at least tell you about the ones that I own, and whether they are good or bad (stars based on 5 best, 1 worst)

    Starting Out: The French – Again, worst book in all of the Starting Out series (1 Star)
    Starting Out: The Scotch – Decent for someone learning the Scotch for the first time, but this isn’t the end all, be all of the Scotch, and you will need to invest in other books for deeper study. (3 Stars)
    Starting Out: The Alekhine – Rate the same as the Scotch, see above (3 Stars)
    Starting Out: The Dragon – Better than the French book, but I still think the coverage could have been better. Andrew Martin does better with his videos than he does his books. At least it’s not herendously organized like his King’s Indian Battle Plans book is. (2 Stars)
    Starting Out: The Scandinavian – An EXCELLENT book for anyone looking to take up the Scandinavian. Read this first, then if you want to go for 3…Qa5, get Bauer’s book from Quality Chess (5 Stars)
    Starting Out: The Dutch – I rate this about the same as the Dragon book. It’s nothing like the French book, but the analysis seems to be full of holes. (2 Stars)
    Starting Out: The Queen’s Indian – This is another one of the better ones. You could probably get away with just reading this book, along with a Nimzo book, and be able to fight anybody up to about 2300. (4 Stars)
    Starting Out: Sicilian Scheveningen – Great repertoire for Black. (4 1/2 Stars)
    Starting Out: Benoni Systems – What is covered is decent, but too many miscellaneous topics for 1 book. Benko should be a separate book. Coverage is good in some areas, a little flaky in others. (2 1/2 stars)
    Starting Out: Modern Benoni – Decent book. With the level of theory of the Modern Benoni, it’s not enough to master the opening, but for the audience intended, good book (4 Stars)

  117. Michael Nielsen
    July 12th, 2011 at 18:30 | #117

    Frankfurter Bub :
    At a book stand I just bought Kotronias Grandmaster Battle Manual. The book looks great. And if not already exists in chess-speak “Hübneresque Analysis” after going through the comments of game 1 one could be inclined to create “Kotroniaskios Analysis”
    By the way: Flear’s book looks great, very neatly made. But first I have to work through Kotronias and Shaw

    I totally agree, and i’m very impressed by this. Im halfway into the second chapter, and the amount of analysis is astonishing (for me, since I really like to delve deep into games). I’m not saying I understand it all or have absorbed everything, but the understanding of the critical positions are clearer for me.
    Look forward to the analysis on the Carlsen – Kramnik game in chapter 1, thats fenomonal in my opinion.

  118. MilenPetrov
    July 12th, 2011 at 20:32 | #118

    Yesterday I received my copies of GM8 and GM9. I did not have enough time to look at them deeply and for now just checked some lines which I faced in my recent correspondence games.

    In Volume 9, Chapter 12, Line D2) Avrukh covers only 16.Qc4 and 16.Rd1 and in both cases White must play carefully in order to keep the balance. A couple of months ago in a very strong correspondence tournament I played 16.e5 and a draw was agreed after a few more moves. You can see the game here: http://iccf-webchess.com/MakeAMove.aspx?id=310690

  119. Michael
    July 12th, 2011 at 23:56 | #119

    Received GM8 & GM9, Beautiful books, the paper and the print are wonderful, the lines covered are exciting, looking forward to GM6 2nd edition, but for now, I will be studying these two books. Thank you Jacob, Boris, and Quality Chess for these wonderful contributions to the chess world!
    Great Job!!!

  120. Michael
    July 13th, 2011 at 00:01 | #120

    Jacob, will Lars Schandorff ever do a rep. book for the Queens Gambit, vs. the indain defenses, nimzo, etc…?

  121. Duriel
    July 13th, 2011 at 07:57 | #121

    I’m wondering, does GM Rep 6 cover lines that can be reached from a Kan move order? Maybe some Scheveningen positions perhaps? I’m asking this because I’m taking up the Kan but if there are lines that are also reached by the Kan move order, I’ll get the 2nd Edition. Thanks.

  122. Jacob Aagaard
    July 13th, 2011 at 10:04 | #122

    Lars might, we are trying to convince him. Obviously you should push him as well next time you see him :-).

    I wrote the Starting Out: Modern Benoni, which is more like how I would have written these kind of books (but not today). However, bear in mind that I wrote it in six days after being a bit let down by Andre (who collected the material).

    We would like a book on the French and are negotiating with two guys who have already written a good deal. I don’t think we would put it in the GM Repertoire series from what I have seen so far; not that the material is not good, more that there are many suggestions for Black, and thus fits better in our standard series.

  123. Jacob Aagaard
    July 13th, 2011 at 10:47 | #123

    Yes, GM6 does cover the Scheveningen. But I am not sure you really want to use this book for this purpose. Johan Hellsten wrote a decent book on the opening for Everyman a few years back, and he is a great expert. I would go with his book.

  124. Jacob Aagaard
    July 13th, 2011 at 10:47 | #124

    @GID player
    Yes, it is a conspiracy!

  125. Duriel
    July 13th, 2011 at 14:50 | #125

    Thanks very much for the suggestion. I already purchased Hellsten’s book recently and will study it but I still want to gather as much material as possible to play more than one option against some lines by white.

  126. Patrick
    July 13th, 2011 at 15:09 | #126

    @GID player

    Jacob is right, it’s all a conspiracy. Last night, I had to face one of my arch rivals at the club, and it’s been a while since I had Black against him. I have a specific line that I play just for him because I know he plays the London System religiously. It’s an idea from Duncan Suttles. 1.d4 g6 (I normally play 1…Nf6) 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.Bf4 d6 4.e3 Nc6 intending 5…e5. The last time we faced where I had Black, he played the horrible 6.dxe5 dxe5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Bg5+ f6 9.Bh4 and he got CRUSHED!

    So of course, he plotted out this plan against me with an early Bb5, and we end up in a very wild draw where moves 27 thru 51 were all played with under 5 minutes for both players (time control was Game in 90 Minutes with 5 second delay).

    Game ended in a draw – here’s the scoresheet:

    Michael Kliber (1936) – Patrick McCartney (2038)

    1.d4 g6 2.Nf3 Bg7 3.Bf4 d6 4.e3 Nc6 5.c3 e5 6.Bg3 h5 7.Bb5 e4 8.Bh4 f6 9.d5 a6 10.Qa4 axb5 11.Qxa8 exf3 12.dxc6 b6 13.gxf3 g5 14.Rg1 Bh6 15.Na3 b4 16.cxb4 (Notice how every “piece”, not pawns, is on the edge of the board) 16…Ne7 17.Nb5 gxh4 18.O-O-O Kf7 19.Qa4 Nf5 20.Kb1 Be6 21.e4 Ne7 22.Qc2 Qa8 23.a3 Qxc6 24.Qxc6 Nxc6 25.Nxc7 Ne5 26.Nxe6 Kxe6 27.Rd5 Nxf3 28.Rg2 Bg5 29.Rf5 Nd2+ 30.Ka2 Nxe4 31.Rb5 Rc8 32.f3 Nd2 33.Re2+ Kf7 34.Rxg5 fxg5 35.Rxd2 Ke2 36.a4 Rc4 37.Kb3 Rf4 38.Rd3 g4 39.fxg4 hxg4 40.Rd2 g3 41.hxg3 hxg3 42.a5 bxa5 43.bxa5 Rf2 44.Rd1 Rf8 45.Rg1 Rg8 46.Kc4 Kd7 47.b4 Kc7 48.b5 Rg5 49.Kb4 Kb7 50.Rg2 Ka7 51.Kc4 1/2-1/2

    So yes, it’s all a conspiricy, but chess is still a draw!!!! 🙂

  127. GID player
    July 14th, 2011 at 09:26 | #127

    Jacob Aagaard :@GID player Yes, it is a conspiracy!

    See? I knew it! I knew it!! 😉

  128. Franck Steenbekkers
    July 15th, 2011 at 14:03 | #128

    When will the French book you wrote about appear?
    Will there be an new edition of the Modern of Tiger H.P.

  129. Patrick
    July 15th, 2011 at 18:47 | #129

    GID player :

    Jacob Aagaard :@GID player Yes, it is a conspiracy!

    See? I knew it! I knew it!!

    GID player, that’s one reason I play the King’s Indian Defense. Conspiricy or not, all they can do is force one line that was previously not very popular, like the Fianchetto Variation, to go thru a growth spurt, and be super-popular for a period of time via publication. It’s very difficult to out move-order a King’s Indian player. Much easier to manipulate a Grunfeld player, Nimzo-Indian player, or Sicilian player. Case in point, I had an opponent play 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 in April, and I got tricked into a bad version of the Kan variation, and got killed.

    Therefore, if you don’t want conspiricies knocking at your door and tricking you, come join us King’s Indian players, and be happy!

    You want to play 1.Nf3 first? Ok, I’ll play a King’s Indian. You want to play 1.c4 first? Ok, I’ll play a King’s Indian. You want to delay Nc3? Ok, I’ll play a King’s Indian – I have nothing to trade on c3 anyway. You want try some tricky move order to try to scare me out of my opening, I’ll still play the same moves.

    See how happy you can be just by shorting that d-pawns stride by 1 step? 🙂

  130. Tom
    July 15th, 2011 at 20:46 | #130

    What’s up with Grandmaster Repertoire 10 – The Tarrasch Defence? It is mid July already.

  131. Waldorf
    July 16th, 2011 at 07:48 | #131

    I bought Hellsten`s book too and I like it.
    But nethertheless it is shame that there are so few books about the e6-Sicilians.

  132. Neil Sullivan
    July 17th, 2011 at 15:17 | #132

    On another subject, the second Karpov book still isn’t available in Canada. It’s often been alleged that we are a third-world nation insofar as chess is concerned. Small wonder when we can’t get our hands on good books. 🙂

    Seriously, did a ship sink? Any notion of when they will hit the True North?

  133. James
    July 17th, 2011 at 19:29 | #133

    I’d also like to recommend a few ideas for books which I think would sell well and fill demands in the market:

    1. A GM rep book on the Nimzo-Indian and Queen’s Indian, that also dealt with the Catalan and tricky move orders. I think the last Nimzo-Indian rep book was by Dearing in 2005, and theory has obviously pushed on since then, with regards to the Queen’s Indian I think Andrew Greets excellent “Play the Queen’s Indian” in 2009 was the most recent one, however, I’d still love to see a QC take on the opening. Furthermore I think if such a book was to go ahead a couple chapters on tackling the Catalan would be well received, just so it’s a complete repertoire.

    Finally a GM rep on the Queen’s Gambit Declined (whatever variation you thinks best) would be a great idea, its fine display at the Wch candidates seems to have made it all the rage now, certainly got me wanting to learn to play it.

  134. Jacob Aagaard
    July 17th, 2011 at 21:36 | #134

    @James
    Hi James, we have some movement on more or less all of these areas.

    @Neil Sullivan
    It should be in the US in August sometime. Then it should quickly get to Canada. I am sure they have pre-ordered. Are you really finished with Karpov 1 already!

    @Franck Steenbekkers
    Nothing final yet. We want these things to happen, but no promises. The blog is honest talk in private, not our official announcements :-).

  135. Antonius
    July 17th, 2011 at 21:56 | #135

    @James
    I think the QC guys already told us about future plans about solid GM rep against 1.d4, but not immediatly.
    By the way a repertoire book on the Queen’s Gambit declined has just come out, written by John Cox, covering the Catalan too, if you’re interested.

  136. James
    July 17th, 2011 at 23:25 | #136

    Ah sorry, must have missed it. Glad to hear there are plans though. Ordered Cox’s book last week (liked his Berlin Wall and Dealing with D4 deviations books), hopefully should arrive either on monday or tuesday. I think Chess Stars are doing a Bogo-Indian book that’s going to deal with the Catalan but it’s been delayed apparently.

  137. Grant
    July 18th, 2011 at 04:40 | #137

    I wondered if any thought has been given to a book on the Queens Gambit Accepted or Pirc (say by Marin?)

    I bought the book on Reggio Emilia. This is a wonderful book with illuminating notes by Marin and others and interesting interviews. You also see a number of openings you perhaps would not see regularly in a super-GM event such as Pirc, Open Lopez, Italian and French. Thankfully high quality tournament books are still being written and the tournament need not be of the highest class to be of interest.

  138. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 18th, 2011 at 08:08 | #138

    Antonius :
    @James
    I think the QC guys already told us about future plans about solid GM rep against 1.d4, but not immediatly.
    By the way a repertoire book on the Queen’s Gambit declined has just come out, written by John Cox, covering the Catalan too, if you’re interested.

    I thought the Grünfeld was considered solid, unless you mean extremely solid, like the Slav. The Grünfeld seemed like the perfect opening for a GM Repertoire due to its solidity and easy potential to play for a win, but I am interested in what QC is contemplating for an extremely solid repertoire against 1. d4.

  139. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 18th, 2011 at 08:11 | #139

    Neil Sullivan :
    On another subject, the second Karpov book still isn’t available in Canada. It’s often been alleged that we are a third-world nation insofar as chess is concerned. Small wonder when we can’t get our hands on good books.
    Seriously, did a ship sink? Any notion of when they will hit the True North?

    @Neil
    Did the Chess Federation of Canada stop selling books? When I played in the 2008 Canadian Open they had a lot of opening books to purchase at the tournament.

  140. Jacob Aagaard
    July 18th, 2011 at 10:22 | #140

    @Grant
    Marin is deep into other projects at the moment, so this is not relevant. To be honest – we cannot cover everything, so Pirc and QGA is not high on our priority lists; but never say never…

  141. Jacob Aagaard
    July 18th, 2011 at 10:25 | #141

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    We kind of lost contact with them. Our fault. We will try to re-install contact over the summer.

  142. Jacob Aagaard
    July 18th, 2011 at 10:27 | #142

    @Gilchrist is a Legend
    I think the Grunfeld is extremely dynamic; which people don’t usually connect with being solid. But of course, there is a cross-over, so what do I know!

    We are in the process of bringing some of those solid books to life, but before I feel they will happen, I will not speak out.

  143. July 18th, 2011 at 12:09 | #143

    Gilchrist is a Legend :

    Neil Sullivan :
    On another subject, the second Karpov book still isn’t available in Canada. It’s often been alleged that we are a third-world nation insofar as chess is concerned. Small wonder when we can’t get our hands on good books.
    Seriously, did a ship sink? Any notion of when they will hit the True North?

    @Neil
    Did the Chess Federation of Canada stop selling books? When I played in the 2008 Canadian Open they had a lot of opening books to purchase at the tournament.

    Yes, they are out of the business of selling books and equipment. The only Canadian specialized chess seller is Chess & Math. They have 3 retail stores, including one in Montreal where I live, and sell online. I make a point of avoiding amazon.ca when purchasing chess books, but it’s hard when the choices are so limited.

    I have had great service ordering from NIC. Ironically, their shipping charges are far lower than those from U.S. suppliers. Even so, it’s a pricey proposition.

  144. Jacob Aagaard
    July 18th, 2011 at 12:54 | #144

    @Neil Sullivan
    Thanks Neil. It was actually Chess&Math I was thinking off. I am not hands on with all aspects of the business, so sometimes I get confused.

  145. Patrick
    July 18th, 2011 at 14:17 | #145

    Jacob Aagaard :@Gilchrist is a Legend I think the Grunfeld is extremely dynamic; which people don’t usually connect with being solid. But of course, there is a cross-over, so what do I know!
    We are in the process of bringing some of those solid books to life, but before I feel they will happen, I will not speak out.

    Gilchrist is a Legend, I have to agree with Jacob. I would actually call the Grunfeld the exact opposite of solid. An opening where you not only allow White the big center, but also more often than not allow other trump cards for White like a passed pawn on d6 often times, I’d call the Grunfeld by all means a high risk/high reward defense. There is no way you can put “solid” and “high risk” in the same sentence.

    Solid is where you care more about defending yourself than you do attacking White. Once you have fully equalized with a safe King is when you start thinking about winning instead of drawing. The Orthodox QGD is a solid defense. The Grunfeld is not.

  146. Andre
    July 18th, 2011 at 17:20 | #146

    I guess “sound” is the correct word, not “solid”. 😉

  147. Jacob Aagaard
    July 18th, 2011 at 22:12 | #147

    I am sure he meant solid :-). All of our GM Repertoire books are meant to be sound.

  148. GID player
    July 19th, 2011 at 08:43 | #148

    GID player, that’s one reason I play the King’s Indian Defense. Conspiricy or not, all they can do is force one line that was previously not very popular, like the Fianchetto Variation, to go thru a growth spurt, and be super-popular for a period of time via publication. It’s very difficult to out move-order a King’s Indian player. Much easier to manipulate a Grunfeld player, Nimzo-Indian player, or Sicilian player. […]
    Therefore, if you don’t want conspiricies knocking at your door and tricking you, come join us King’s Indian players, and be happy!
    You want to play 1.Nf3 first? Ok, I’ll play a King’s Indian. You want to play 1.c4 first? Ok, I’ll play a King’s Indian. You want to delay Nc3? Ok, I’ll play a King’s Indian – I have nothing to trade on c3 anyway. You want try some tricky move order to try to scare me out of my opening, I’ll still play the same moves.
    See how happy you can be just by shorting that d-pawns stride by 1 step?

    Patrick, I know what you mean. In the KID, Black seems to be playing always in the same way no matter what White does. In reality that’s not true, of course. And if White refuses to put his pawn on d4 (after, say, 1.Nf3 or 1.c4), it’s not a KID proper, so you’ll have to deal with, e.g., Marin’s repertoire …
    I used to play the KID a lot many years ago, but stopped after losing a really bad game in which my queenside got crushed before I had the faintest chance of creating even a shade of an attack on the kingside. Of course I could have done some homework then, but instead decided to give the GID a try and got hooked somehow. And 3.Qc2 is not a threat to the GID anyway, so my first comment was half-joking.
    By the way, you can play in GID style against 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 as much as you can play in KID style against these moves … In fact you can try to play in GID style all the time, even with White, and (with Black) even against 1.e4 openings: Just have a look at “ZOOM 001: zero hour for operative opening models”, a very interesting book by Bent Larsen and Steffen Zeuthen …

  149. Gerry
    July 19th, 2011 at 14:26 | #149

    Interesting to see Morozevich play the Dc7+b6 line that Boris suggested in Biel. You can follow live here: http://biel2011.whychess.org.liveschach.net

    Is it again QC books influencing where modern opening theory will go…

    Clearly I would prefer keeping some of Boris wonderful suggestions in these books as a little “secret” for a while, but I guess you’ll have a lot of customers… 🙂

  150. Patrick
    July 19th, 2011 at 16:41 | #150

    GID Player,

    I’m not saying that one can play the King’s Indian with no change in their plan.

    For example, in the classical, after 9.Ne1, Black simply has to balance his moves between stopping Queenside Activity, whether that’s playing …a6, or guarding c7 with moves like …Rf7, …Ne8, etc., and advancing on the Kingside.

    However, after 9.Nd2, White’s attack on the Queenside is too fast to execute the same operations. Instead, Black should take advantage of the fact that White has impeded his own Bishop on c1, and while the Knights and c-pawn are quick, the rest isn’t, and Black has time to grab some space on the Queenside, with say, …a5, in order to slow down White’s achieving of the c5-push as now b4 is harder to get in.

    Contrary to your statement that Black’s play is the same in all King’s Indians, what I’m saying is that it’s very hard for Black to get “move-ordered” out of the King’s Indian. The Classical with 9.Ne1, Classical with 9.Nd2, Fianchetto KID, and Four Pawns Attack are four completely different games, and Black should execute differently with all 4.

    However, they are all King’s Indians. Whether White plays 1.c4 first, 1.Nf3 first, 1.d4 first, 1.d4 and 2.c4, 1.d4 and 2.Nf3, etc., Black’s moves are the same, and you really can’t prevent the KID setup. The Grunfeld can be prevented via 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 (2…d5 may be “called” the Anti-Grunfeld, but it’s a 100% different game than the Grunfeld Proper) 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O 5.d4 (too many pieces control d5 to make 5…d5 possible). It can be argued that for a Grunfeld player, he has just gotten “tricked” into a King’s Indian.

    In addition, yes, White can play the Botvinnik setup against the KID, like Marin gives, but he also mentions that going into the KID is better, as Black can play the Symmetrical Botvinnik instead of the …e5 Botvinnik, which is far less scary for Black.

    White can by all means avoid QP openings completely, but the Flank Openings (i.e. English) against a King’s Indian setup are not very effective, and hence the argument that a King’s Indian player should play a King’s Indian setup. However, many Anti-Grunfeld lines and Anti-Nimzo lines can be very strong for White. Check out the Mikenas-Flohr, 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.e4. The Anti-Nimzo and Anti-Grunfeld are by no means refutations, and are playable for Black, but should only be recommended to those that actually like playing the Anti-Nimzo or Anti-Grunfeld positions, and should not be used a mere recommendations simply because you happen to play the Nimzo-Indian or Grunfeld as Black vs 1.d4. These are legitimate lines for White with legitimate chances at gaining an advantage, unlike the inferior lines against the King’s Indian (like 1.c4, 2.g3, 3.Bg2, 4.Nf3, 5.O-O, 6.Nc3 and 7.d3 instead of 7.d4), where it’s easy equality for Black.

    A Grunfeld player should probably play 1…e5 against 1.c4, and 1…c5 against 1.Nf3, going into certain lines of the English (if 2.c4) that can only really be achieved with 2.Nf3 (as opposed to 2.Nc3), like the Accelerated Dragon or possibly a Hedgehog if you like those types of positions.

    A Nimzo player, if they don’t fear the Mikenas-Flohr, can play 1…Nf6 and 2…e6, as the other Anti-Nimzos aren’t very effective for White, and only lead to equality. If Black has trouble with the Mikenas-Flohr, he should dodge 1…Nf6 and 2…e6, and instead play another more strategically rich positional defense, like the Ultra-Symmetrical against 1.c4, and against 1.Nf3, Black can mimic with 1…Nf6, going into a Queen’s Indian if White changes his mind and goes for an early d4, and again going Ultra-Symmetrical if White goes for a pure English but simply looking to avoid 1…e5 lines.

    I have been a long time flank opening specialist, having played 1.c4, 1.Nc3, 1.b4, and 1.f4 for years on end, and occasionally played 1.b3, 1.g3, or 1.Nf3. I even had an opponent last summer, 2447, going up against my then 1999 rating, and he played 1.b3, figuring he could win by avoiding theory against a lower rated player, avoiding his “prep”. I knew the lines deeper than he did (specifically the line where Black plays 1…e5, 2…Nc6, 3…d5, and 4…Bd6 with 5.f4, where if White plays it correctly, it’s usually White gets 2 Knights and 2 Pawns for Rook and Bishop) and won convincingly after he played the inferior 11.Nd3 instead of 11.Nxc6. I’ve played 1.e4 and 1.d4 on and off in the past, but usually without much success. I’m giving 1.e4 another shot right now. If I have Black, and you want to beat me, it’s simple, play 1.e4 or 1.d4, my record against the latter being worse.

    So GID, trust me when I say that the Anti-Grunfeld is NOT in any way, shape, or form, “just like a Grunfeld”, or that all KIDs are the same.

  151. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 19th, 2011 at 20:21 | #151

    I contemplate playing both KID and Grünfeld, especially a years ago when after playing KID in a must-win last round situation, my opponent played the Exchange Variation…

  152. boki
    July 20th, 2011 at 14:05 | #152

    Will there be more books vailable for pre-order in the near future?
    I want to preorder GM 10 and order Kotronias, but a third book would be good 🙂
    BTW received GM 8+9, usual standard top quality as expected 🙂

  153. Patrick
    July 20th, 2011 at 15:53 | #153

    Gilchrist,

    Not saying you should play the KID. This discussion all started from you wondering why no Anti-Grunfeld was given in the Grunfeld books, and my pointing out that the Anti-Grunfeld is not a good fit for 99% of Grunfeld players, unlike the King’s Indian setup against the English because White’s only real legitimate line aside from a transposition is a line that gives White nothing, namely the Symmetrical Botvinnik.

    I think you’ll be a much happier camper if you master 1…e5 against 1.c4 as a Grunfeld player than you would the Anti-Grunfeld. Full of tricks and tactics, like the Grunfeld is.

    Oh, and I won the last time White played an Exchange KID against me (June 2011).

    I may decide one day to add the Semi-Slav back in to my repertoire, especially if the 2nd edition comes out. But the Grunfeld (i.e. 1.d4, not Anti-Grunfeld) definitely is not my cup of tea.

  154. Jacob Aagaard
    July 21st, 2011 at 09:19 | #154

    Semislav 2nd edition will be out in 2012 unless something very surprising happens.

  155. GID player
    July 21st, 2011 at 10:48 | #155

    @Patrick

    “[…] your statement that Black’s play is the same in all King’s Indians […]”

    Excuse me? I said, ‘In the KID, Black seems to be playing always in the same way no matter what White does. In reality that’s not true, of course.’ – Note ‘seems’; note ‘that’s not true’ …

    “However, they are all King’s Indians. Whether White plays 1.c4 first, 1.Nf3 first, 1.d4 first, 1.d4 and 2.c4, 1.d4 and 2.Nf3, etc., Black’s moves are the same, and you really can’t prevent the KID setup.”

    IMHO, they are not all King’s Indians. I agree that White cannot prevent a KID setup (!) by Black, but White can prevent the KID proper (!) by not playing an early d4. (And I would argue that, e.g., the position after a setup with Nf3, g3, Bg2, c4, Nc3, d3 by White [‘English’] against a KID setup by Black is better characterized as a Closed Sicilian with reversed colours than a variety of the KID.)
    Similarly, White cannot prevent a GID setup (!) by Black (as Black can always play …Nf6, …d5 and …g6), but he can prevent the GID proper (!).

    So it appears to come down to a mere comparison of White’s anti-KID and anti-GID systems. You rate the anti-KID systems not as threatening to Black as the anti-GID systems. Fair enough, but then that doesn’t help the GID player at all if he doesn’t like to be Black in a KID proper …

    “A Grunfeld player should probably play 1…e5 against 1.c4, and 1…c5 against 1.Nf3 […]”

    Oh, really? 1.Nf3 c5 2.e4 (oops), and what is the the poor GID player to do now if his main weapon against 1.e4 happens to be the Caro-Kann?

    “So GID, trust me when I say that the Anti-Grunfeld is NOT in any way, shape, or form, ‘just like a Grunfeld’, or that all KIDs are the same.”

    I don’t trust anybody.

  156. Duriel
    July 21st, 2011 at 13:16 | #156

    I don’t agree with the statement that anti-grunfeld lines aren’t like the grunfeld. Yes there are many games that don’t look like grunfeld but there are also many games in the exchange grunfeld that don’t look like the grunfeld. Grunfeld is a very concrete opening. Most top players who play the grunfeld in more than 80% of their games play Nf6-d5 or Nf6-g6-d5 against the anti-grunfeld systems and I think that says something about what grunfeld players should play against c4 and Nf3. I’m not saying that they are better than other english lines. It’s just a personal preference but if there are many 2700+ grunfeld players who play Nf6-d5 and Nf6-g6-d5 against anti-grunfelds, there’s no reason not to play them just because they’re not considered grunfeld in ECO. After all, other english systems like e5 against 1.c4 are not considered to be grunfeld either.

    In my opinion, most grunfeld players would score well in Nf6-d5 and Nf6-g6-d5 systems against the anti-grunfelds because the play is similar enough. Yes it’s not exactly grunfeld but it doesn’t have to be. For example GM Sveshnikov plays c3 against the sicilian, advance variation against the french and he plays the advance variation against the alekhine defence. People who don’t understand these openings deeply would think that they don’t have anything in common but in reality they are very similar and can be played with similar ideas. In all of them, white counts on his space advantage. There are many strong players who follow sveshnikov by playing c3 against sicilian, advance variation against the french and the advance variation against the alekhine although the advance variation against the alekhine is much more harmless than c3 against the sicilian. They score well because once you understand one of them, it’s easier to understand the others.

    But I should point out that different openings are good at different levels and especially at club level, people can play some openings strong but other openings very weak. Anti-grunfeld lines can be a bit hard to play for club players but if they prepare them deeply as they prepare the grunfeld, there’s no reason not to score as good as with the grunfeld since the grunfeld itself is harder than other openings anyway.

  157. GID player
    July 21st, 2011 at 13:29 | #157

    @Duriel
    Thank you! 😉

  158. Duriel
    July 21st, 2011 at 14:41 | #158

    You’re welcome 🙂

  159. Patrick
    July 21st, 2011 at 15:47 | #159

    GID player:

    Your comment:

    “IMHO, they are not all King’s Indians. I agree that White cannot prevent a KID setup (!) by Black, but White can prevent the KID proper (!) by not playing an early d4. (And I would argue that, e.g., the position after a setup with Nf3, g3, Bg2, c4, Nc3, d3 by White [‘English’] against a KID setup by Black is better characterized as a Closed Sicilian with reversed colours than a variety of the KID.)”

    is 100% incorrect. Taking your moves for White: 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.c4 O-O 5.Nc3 d6 6.d3, it is not in Black’s interest to play 6…e5, the required move to make it a Closed Sicilian with colors reversed. This allows a Botvinnik line that favors White. If White commits to an early d3, like your 6.d3, then Black should play …c5, NOT …e5, and 6…c5 7.e4 (or 7.O-O and 8.e4) leads to a line of the Botvinnik that is no more than equal for White.

    You won’t see a reversed Closed Sicilian on my board! The only moves that Black can safely play regardless of move order are Nf6, g6, Bg7, O-O, and d6, then it depends upon what White has done in the first 6 moves. …e5 is NOT an automatic move!

    As for the Anti-Grunfeld, have fun when White plays the following: 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.cxd5 Nxd5 4.e4 Nxc3 5.dxc3. White doesn’t have the luxury of “dulling” the game against 1…e5!

  160. Patrick
    July 21st, 2011 at 16:04 | #160

    GID player:

    Also to clarify, I never said that Black always gets a King’s Indian Defense proper!

    Depending upon White’s choice of moves, and move order, you’ll get either a Fianchetto KID (if White does do a move like 7.d4 after 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O and either 5.d4 or 5.Nf3 d6 6.O-O c5 7.d4) where Black can take on d4 and not allow Avrukh’s d5 lines, or you’ll get one of a couple of inferior lines for White of the Symmetrical English, like 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O 5.Nf3 d6 6.O-O c5 7.d3 or 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O 5.d3 d6 6.e4 c5, both of which give Black no problems at equality.

    In the case of 1.c4 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7 4.Nc3 O-O 5.d4, Black should avoid 5…d6 6.Nf3 c5 as this allows 7.d5. Instead, Black gets to the Yugoslav variation thru the Panno, via 6…Nc6 7.O-O a6 and White can play any of the side lines of the Panno, like 8.b3 (Wojo’s choice), 8.Qd3 (Avrukh’s choice) or main lines with 8.h3, often leading to the line that overlaps between the Yugoslav and Panno variations.

    So no matter what innocuous moves you propose for White, Black always has favorable options with the KID setup, something that is a lot more difficult to find for Black in Anti-Grunfeld or Anti-Nimzo lines.

    Also notice that the move orders mentioned above avoid both the 7.d5 line and the dull 7.dxc5 lines of the Yugoslav Variation of the Fianchetto KID. Black should go for the Panno move order unless White hasn’t played d4 yet, in which case you use the Yugoslav move order and all Anti-KID options for White end up innocuous. …e5 must be played with care, not automatically for a KID player.

  161. GID player
    July 21st, 2011 at 16:37 | #161

    @Patrick
    whatever …

  162. Gilchrist is a Legend
    July 22nd, 2011 at 03:46 | #162

    I am not sure exactly how Avrukh would answer the issue of anti-Grünfelds (unless of course QC sign him to write a repertoire book for Black against the English :)), but from what I see from his games on places such as chessgames.com, he plays the Symmetrical frequently. He also seems to play the Sicilian frequently so 1. Nf3 c5 would not be problematic after 2. e4. I play the Sicilian too, so maybe that is a possibility.

  163. Metichara
    July 22nd, 2011 at 07:07 | #163

    Will Avrukh’s possible book on d4-deviations also be suited for those who intend to answer 1.d4 with 1…d5 or only for KID/GID-players?

  164. Alekhine Power
    July 22nd, 2011 at 11:30 | #164

    Jacob and friends on this blog,

    Please help and post your comments regarding following:

    Which books are the best training books in ELO range 2000-2500 in specified areas.
    Training book is a book with short intros/lessons followed by numerous exercises to test and improve chess players skills 🙂

    COMPREHENSIVE WORKS
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 1500 Band I
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 1500 Band II
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 1500 Band III
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 1800 Band I
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 1800 Band II
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 1800 Band III
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 2100 Band I
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 2100 Band II
    Jussupow: Tigersprung auf DWZ 2100 Band III
    Dvoretsky & Jussupow: School of Future Champions 1
    Jussupow: Schachunterricht
    Popov: Chess Lessons

    ENDGAME
    Dvoretsky: School of Chess Excellence 1
    Dvoretsky & Jussupow: School of Future Champions 3
    Dvoretsky & Pervakov: Studien fur Praktiker
    Guliev: The Manual of Chess Endings
    Rosen: Fit im Endspiel

    TACTICS
    Dvoretsky: School of Chess Excellence 2
    Müller: The Chess Cafe Puzzle Book 1
    Informator: Anthology of Chess Combinations
    Shaw: Quality Chess Puzzle Book
    Blokh: Combinational Motifs
    Ivashchenko: The Manual of Chess Combinations 2
    Plaskett: Can You Be A Tactical Chess Genius

    STRATEGIC / POSITIONAL PLAY
    Dvoretsky: School of Chess Excellence 3
    Dvoretsky & Jussupow: School of Future Champions 4
    Hellsten: Mastering Chess Strategy
    Müller: The Chess Cafe Puzzle Book 2
    Dunnington: Can You Be A Positional Chess Genius
    Aagaard: Verbessern Sie Ihr Schach – Super Edition

    OPENING PREPARATION
    Dvoretsky: School of Chess Excellence 4
    Dvoretsky & Jussupow: School of Future Champions 2

    CALCULATION
    Dvoretsky:Die Universität der Schachanalyse
    Aagaard:Verbessern Sie Ihre Variantenberechnung im Schach
    Mazja: The Manual of Chess Combinations 3
    Hertan: Forcing Chess Moves
    Przewoznik & Soszynski: How to Think in Chess

    ATTACK
    Dvoretsky & Jussupow: School of Future Champions 5

    DEFENCE
    Aagaard: Practical Chess Defence
    Müller: The Chess Cafe Puzzle Book 3

    GENERAL
    Mirkovic: Chess School 1
    Mirkovic: Chess School 2
    Mirkovic: Chess School 3

  165. Jacob Aagaard
    July 22nd, 2011 at 11:58 | #165

    @Metichara
    The not-c4 book will be suitable for all players meeting 1.d4 with 1…Nf6 and 1…d5.

    @Alekhine Power
    A good deal of those books I don’t like. I don’t want to say which, to be honest. But I can point to some pointers.

    Chess Lessons and the Yusupov books are great for 2000-2500 players; so are my own books with the exception of Practical Chess Defence, as it is very difficult. The attacking manuals are very good, my best stuff. They will come in German somewhere next year.

    Gaprindashvili has written two exceptional exercise books. They are very essential for chess training. The first of them was a good deal easier than the second.

  166. John Shaw
    July 22nd, 2011 at 15:52 | #166

    @Alekhine Power

    One of my favourite puzzle books is “The Best Move” by Hort and Jansa. A quick search on-line shows people trying to sell used copies of it for £122. It’s good but it’s not that good.

  167. Andre
    July 22nd, 2011 at 19:09 | #167

    Hort & Jansa “Der beste Zug” in German can be found on eBay pretty often for very little money.

    I second Jacob’s recommendations. His Attacking Manuals are a must read to understand these concepts. The books read like a labor of love.

    Gaprindashvili’s books contain great training material – but you have to be willing to work hard.

    I would add Perfect Your Chess by Volokitin & coach as a very hard puzzle book.

    I used to be a fan of the Dvoretsky books a long time ago, but nowadays I think his concepts have been widely accepted and a new generation of authors has come. Authors who build upon D.’s work and move things forward. This makes many of his books kind of obsolete.

  168. Metichara
    July 22nd, 2011 at 23:31 | #168

    Cool. Thanks, Jacob.

  169. Franck Steenbekkers
    July 23rd, 2011 at 18:05 | #169

    will there be an newsletter soon?
    I am very very interested in the repairing of mr. Avrukh of the game Giri-Swinkels

  170. Jacob Aagaard
    July 25th, 2011 at 08:03 | #170

    It should be out today. It takes a long time to actually send – the machine will work on it for hours – so it did not make it out Friday.

  171. Michael
    July 26th, 2011 at 21:30 | #171

    Jacob, I have another opening question for you in the GM9 rep., 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Bc4 c5 8. Ne2 Nc6 9. Be3 O-O 10. O-O Qc7 11. Rc1 b6, I have played 7 games in this variation as black, won 5, lost 2…The 2 games I lost white played 12.Bd5, which I responded 12…e6, I got into trouble after this move. I looked at the data bases and could not even find this move. therefore I am guesing it is not a good move and I am missing something right in front of me face. Maybe 12…Rad8…
    Thanks for your advice, and I am loving my copies of GM8&GM9

  172. Michael
    July 26th, 2011 at 21:37 | #172

    12…bd7 13.Bxc6 (13…Qxc6, 13…Bxd7) 14.d5 (move piece, 15.c4) pretty nice clamp in black’s position. Is this postion ok for black?

  173. Jacob Aagaard
    July 27th, 2011 at 12:23 | #173

    @Michael
    I am not really sure what the problem is for Black and how you lose :-). The position after: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Bc4 c5 8.
    Ne2 Nc6 9. Be3 O-O 10. O-O Qc7 11. Rc1 b6 12. Bd5 e6 13. Bxc6 (13. Bf4 Qd7 14.
    Bxc6 Qxc6 15. d5 exd5 16. exd5 Qd7 17. c4 Re8 18. Nc3 Ba6 19. Qd3 Qf5 20. Qxf5
    gxf5 21. Nb5 Bxb5 22. cxb5 Be5) 13… Qxc6 14. d5 exd5 15. exd5 Qd7 16. c4 Re8 with good play.

  174. Michael
    July 27th, 2011 at 20:56 | #174

    Yep, 12…e6 is the move! i think I just got caught of gaurd and didn’t think about the position long enough and made bad moves after that, thinking I was worse when really black is fine.
    Thanks for anwsering a stupid question!

  175. Michael
    July 27th, 2011 at 20:56 | #175

    answering…(spelling)

  176. Jacob Aagaard
    July 27th, 2011 at 23:36 | #176

    You are welcome…

  177. Chris
    September 14th, 2011 at 19:17 | #177

    I don’t know where this has been posted, but will the 2nd edition of GM Repertoire 6 on the Sicilian Defense by Ftacnik cover 5.f3 ? I looked everywhere in this book for coverage of this (quite popular) line (with 1500+ games in my database that only covers the last ten years). I’m sure this has been pointed out somewhere else, but given that Short says the main line (5…e5 6.Nb3 d5) is dubious for Black, would like some kind of reasonable line. I’m guessing 5…e5 6.Nb3 Be6 or 6…Be7 (which for some odd reason was given a ! by Chessbase) are the most reasonable tries for equality without transposing into a Maroczy Bind against either the Kan or Accelerated Dragon.

  178. Chris
    September 14th, 2011 at 20:31 | #178

    My apologies for the last post – 5.f3 is covered in the newsletter, August 2010.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

 Limit your comments to