Just a quick announcement that an excerpt of Playing 1.e4 – Caro-Kann, 1…e5 & Minor Lines is now available.
So what’s the book like? It’s big – 632 pages. I also hope it’s good, as several people put a lot of effort into it. If printing goes to schedule, it should be published on June 29. And that would mean it would be available on Forward Chess on June 22.
‘Published on June 29’ means that is the first day it will be in chess shops. We generally send out books bought from our website as soon as possible, so if you happen to live somewhere with a quick postal service, you might get lucky and receive the book just before the publication date. The paperbacks have ‘thread-sewn binding’ which is the same binding as our hardcovers, so they should be sturdy.
Will you publish Yusupov’s book at the same time?
Hooray!
Well done John… I’m sure it is worth the wait even though you never quite managed to top the King’s Gambit in doorstep size with a mere 632 pages. Think that deserves a Tunnock’s teacake at least with a bonus Irn Bru (or if you must Tennents Super) celebration on publication day…
Whatever you do, take some advice and make absolutely no declarations about publication dates about Volume 2 unless you have a gun held against your heid…
Yes, that sounds like a good plan.
Damn, that book looks tasty!
Playing 1.e4 Part 1 is interesting for Trompowsky players, because you need something against 1…g6, 1…d6. 1…c6, 1…b6. Playing 1.e4 Part 2: French Defence is interesting.
Is it possible to pre-order this book?
When Will part 2 of 1 e4 be published
Loved your Kings Gambit book John and by the look of the excerpt I’m gonna love this too. I came on to ask the same question as Alex above re pre-ordering.
@Franck steenbekkers
This year. That is the end of that discussion.
@Alex Relyea @Wally Burnett
Both ‘Playing 1.e4 – Caro…” and Yusupov’s ‘Revision & Exam’ are available to pre-order now.
Wally, glad you liked the KG!
That statement may come back to haunt you! *SCNR*
John, due to the hype you should consider sending signed hardback copies. no kidding.
@Tobias
I doubt it.
@Cowe
Anyone who wants to have their books signed should let John know. This does not work if you are having a multi-shipment (3 books or more), as they are sent straight from our warehouse.
Time to switch from 1.d4 to 1.e4! 😉
In the next Book about the French and Sicilian there is the Tarrasch against the French as far as I read.
Is it possible to give (even yet) a piece of information which positiontype will be covered against the Nf6 systems?
I guess the mainlines with Bd3 and the white IQP and not the f4 variations with the kingwalk, right? I am working on my 1.e4 repertoire and need to look for some nice line for some tournament games to come in the next month. So I need to do without Johns book untill it is published but I wanted to look a bit at the line which I will learn in detail wenn the book comes out at the end anyway…
Thx for the great work, really apprechiate the Play xxxx books and the Grandmaster Repertoire series!
What about the ” it’s only me ” variation with 1.é4 ç6 2.d4 Na6 !?!
Is the 1. e4 book is available in chess shops before 29/06 ?
@Jeg taper partiet men vinner krigen
No. On the 20th
Arggh. 29th
@Jacob Aagaard
Greit ! But orders of 1. e4 book directly from the website will be sent earlier than the 29th?
@Jeg taper partiet men vinner krigen
We send them when we get them.
Dear Mr Aagaard,
could you tell us when will the excerpt for the German version of Mr Luther’s book be available?
Regards
Radek
Got my versions of the new books. Looks fantastic, as usual. Bye the way, the hardcover of Kotronias 4 feels a bit more smooth, someting has changed?
@Radek
I will ask Colin to put one up. He must have forgotten.
For me, it seems like some pages of 1.e4 are not printed correctly. Looks somehow unsharp/thicker than the normal pages. Anyone else has that?
@Jacob Aagaard
Thank you! I’m looking forward to this book!
Radek
@Chris
How you have got 1. e4 book already? I thought it prints this week ?
@Jeg taper partiet men vinner krigen
We will receive it in the office today. But those closer to our warehouse who ordered enough books for it to go with UPS (3 or more) could have had it Friday.
We will obviously look out for any possible problems with the printing. We are not expecting any, but will always take all issues/feedback seriously.
Despite being a 1.e4-player for all my life most of the suggestions never appeared in my repertoire so I´m looking forward to study this book which I bought on forward chess (first time for me).
Two questions:
1. The move order 1.e4 g6 2.d4 c6 does not seem to have made it into the book. What do you suggest to stay within the repertoire? 3.Nf3 d5 4.e5 allows 4…Bg4 so perhaps the weird 3.h3!? may be necessary even though after 3…d5 4.e5 Black isn´t obliged to play 4…Bg7.
2. Maybe this is not the right place to ask but I have found a number of wrong diagrams in the ebook. Should I report these directly to forward chess? And does anybody know if its possible to see the page numbers in the android app (I can´t)?
We would like to know too, to check what has happened. John will get back to you on that move order.
@Jacob Aagaard
Thank you for your answer.
One example of a wrong diagramm ist game 103 where after 6.Nf3 this knight is shown as black and the black pawn on e5 is missing. And in game 104 in the notes to 3…f5? after 3…Nc6 4.c3 e5 5.Nf3 exd4 the white knight on f3 is again shown as black.
I have also seen some black rooks that should be white and will report them here if I find them again.
@Tom Tidom
1.e4 g6 2.d4 c6 does not seem a particularly dangerous move order, but I should have mentioned it (actually, I thought I had).
3.h3 looks like the likeliest repertoire move, as after 3…d5 4.e5 I don’t think Black will have a better option than putting the bishop on g7.
3.c4 is also fine, when 3…d5 4.e5 would transpose to the Caro-Kann chapter (Game 2, page 18).
White could even fall for Black’s “trick” and play 3.Nf3 d5 4.e5 allowing 4…Bg4 as 5.Nbd2 followed by h3 and Nxf3 gives White a pleasant position, with the f1-bishop still having all its options open.
The wrong diagrams on FC sound weird. I will contact FC. On the plus side, when they correct them, it will be possible for people who have already bought the FC version to download a corrected version.
I seem to recall a diagram where a white rook was actually black, but other than that, I rely on the inboard board and pay little attention to the diagrams.
1.e4 g6 2.d4 c6 3.c4 d6 seems to be heading to a KID, isn’t it? It may be dangerous to enter KID without the proper knowledge…
I have not studied the repertoire enough, but is h3 a reasonable move against the pirc? It seems we are going with Bg5 and Qd2…
I think if I encounter this move order I would go 3.Nf3. Is it 4.e5 better than 4.Nbd2 transposing to the negi recommendation against 3…g6 in the Caro?
@Gollum
“I have not studied the repertoire enough, but is h3 a reasonable move against the pirc? It seems we are going with Bg5 and Qd2…”
But after 3.h3 (in reply to 1.e4 g6 2.d4 c6) if Black plays 3…d6 or 3…Bg7 he is not going to reach the Pirc chapter. He will remain in the Modern chapter, and those lines are covered there, with Nf3 and Bc4 set-ups.
But yes, 3.Nf3 is also a perfectly good reply.
@Tom Tidom
@Gollum
Forward Chess have corrected all the diagram errors they know about, and have uploaded a new version. So if you have an old version with a few wrong diagrams, you can delete it and download the book again.
In general, if you spot anything about an FC book, you can contact them direct by emailing info@forwardchess.com In my experience, they have been excellent in reacting to feedback.
A few months ago I recall there being a discussion on one of these QC blog sites about a line in this book that was going to render a competitors book on the same line all but worthless….
Not being a 1e4 player I am unlikely to buy this particular QC book but I am curious to know what line this book has put out of business……anyone willing to tell all ??
I think it’s Kotronias’ book on the Scandinavian with 3…Qd6. It’s explicitly mentioned in Shaw’s book
I liked very much John Shaw’s cover of the Scotch ?
No Qualitexit here . I worked on B122 with 15… a5 ( followed by …b5 ) instead of 15…Re8 and was stunned that White was always slightly better despite black bischop pair .
Great work !
The Scotch and … the Petroff ( B122 )
Dear John,
I’ am also very pleased by this book….the long wait is already forgotten. I observed that in Game 35 after 10….d5 11.exd6 and now (instead of 11….cxd6) 11…..Qxe4 12.Nxe4 cxd6 is possible – if I remember correctly this was recommended by Bologan arguing that the the Ne4 ist not so good posted than the Be4 in your variation. Is there also a Quality (Chess) – opinion on that?
@John Shaw
Thank you for the quick answer and suggestions.
I´m quite happy with the book itself but have a feeling that the proofreading of the ebook could have been done better.
Apart from a few inevitable and unimportant typos and some wrong diagrams I have also seen some cases where the moves are not ´playable´, meaning they cannot be displayed on the board of the android-app.
One such example is game 58 where after the fourth diagram the playable moves end after move 15 while the text continues up to move 17. I have seen other such cases (too many to report them, honestly), mostly regarding single move suggestions.
However, the content of the book will keep me busy for quite a while and I´m already looking forward to part two…:-)
@Tom Tidom
For the example you cite it is similar on the apple version. Not a big deal, but I agree a little irritating….
Thank you for the quick answer and suggestions.
I´m quite happy with the book itself but have a feeling that the proofreading of the ebook could have been done better.
Apart from a few inevitable and unimportant typos and some wrong diagrams I have also seen some cases where the moves are not ´playable´, meaning they cannot be displayed on the board of the android-app.
“One such example is game 58 where after the fourth diagram the playable moves end after move 15 while the text continues up to move 17. I have seen other such cases (too many to report them, honestly), mostly regarding single move suggestions.
However, the content of the book will keep me busy for quite a while and I´m already looking forward to part two…:-)”
I am hoping the printed version has less instances of these typos as it tends to spoil the overall experience of the reader, particularly when studying the lines intensely. Perhaps that is why we should not pressure QC too much regarding publishing deadlines.
@Topnotch
I am sure that he guys at Forward Chess will review their process after this, and continue their improvement of their processes and app. I cannot rule out that any typos cannot be found in this 600 page book, but most of what you talk about should be exclusively in the app; and corrected very soon by the guys at FC.
As I understand it, the book file on IOS and Android are the same.
I have only looked at the beginning ( I live in Florida) but I really like everything I have seen thus far. I always sort of liked the Advance against the Caro anyway, after looking at some Nunn games.
@Jacob Aagaard
Yes these are very minor issues in the bigger picture and I cannot imagine the difficulty of the conversion process for a big book. In my view the app is fantastic and the attitude and enthusiasm of the Forward Chess guys first rate.
To me at least the Forward Chess App is the biggest development in chess book (the New in Chess magazine app is nifty too) publishing since you guys set up over 10 years ago.
The print version doesn’t have the aforementioned problem, but a book that large may be a bear to edit.
Thanks for your feedback.
We are always striving to improve our process and fix the bugs. The good news about the format is that one can simply re-download the files and the book is “good as new” 🙂
A case in point is the specific example above – it has been fixed, please feel free to re-download the book. Things like that are relatively rare, but they do happen.
If you come across any errors, please let us know at info AT forwardchess.com
A few other comments.
Single move suggestions are not meant to be playable, this is a deliberate choice. It has been this way in all of the previous books, it is not a new thing nor is it an error in conversion.
The vast majority of users (based on our surveys) deemed such things unnecessary, and it would be a REAL pain to implement. In some cases, when a single move variation is given as a threat, it is impossible to implement because the…
@Forward Chess
I appreciate your response. By the way, your above quote is from me, not Topnotch, who quoted me.
Regarding single move suggestions intentionally not being playable I am of a different opinon but it´s certainly not a major issue.
This is the first time a bought an ebook on forward chess and I´m generally happy with it and will continue to buy books from you.
@Tom Tidom
Don’t forget to download your free bee!
@Jacob Aagaard
Yes, I have downloaded the ebook again and the above mentioned mistakes have been corrected.
Thank you very much!
As far as I can see Fischer’s refutation of the Robatsch line in the Qd8 isn’t mentioned.
Is this general knowledge nowadays?
A strong club player played the Robatsch line in the Scandinavian (successfully(. He didn’t know about the Fischer-Robatsch game. One day I showed Fischers refutation to him and he stopped playing the line.
@Phil Collins
Which line?
This famous game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDF4Aq4oRNA
It’s Game 41 in “My 60 memorable games”
@Phil Collins
Just inserting the game here for others who are interested.
Fischer – Robatsch, Varna (ol) 1962
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd8 4. d4 g6 5. Bf4 Bg7 6. Qd2 Nf6 7. O-O-O c6 8.
Bh6 O-O 9. h4 Qa5 10. h5 gxh5 11. Bd3 Nbd7 12. Nge2 Rd8 13. g4 Nf8 14. gxh5 Ne6
15. Rdg1 Kh8 16. Bxg7+ Nxg7 17. Qh6 Rg8 18. Rg5 Qd8 19. Rhg1 Nf5 20. Bxf5 1-0
@Jacob Aagaard
I’m confused. I thought anybody should know that game.
@Phil Collins
I did not 🙂
I also thought this old game is not in the book because it’s well known.
First of all, great book. I never liked the Scotch set-up with b3 after 8…Nb6, so I’m happy with the proposed improvement.
Today (rd 5 of the Amsterdam Chess Tournament) I got the opportunity to play one of the novelties from John’s book.
In the Scotch Mieses after 8…Nb6, I knew my opponent would follow up with 9…a5 10. f4 Ba6. The game continued with 11. b3 a4, after which I could play 12. Qf3N, as recommended by the book. However, my opponent replied with 12… g6 (which isn’t mentioned in the book). I responded with 13.Bd2, after which we both developed (13…Bg7 14.Bd3) and castled (14…0-0 15.0-0). Then my opponent played 15…f6 which I should have taken, but I thought 15…e6 would work (spoiler alert: I didn’t).
What was the reason 12… g6 was dismissed in the book? I can’t see a clear follow-up. A quick Nc3-e4-f6 doesn’t seem to work in this particular position, and the standard plan of Bc1-e3xb6 looks dodgy to me (and Houdini) as well.
Thanks
First Nb6 should be Ba6
@Jasper
I thought every GM knows every game from “My 60 memorable games” by heart”.
@Jasper
Hi Jasper,
Somehow I didn’t see your question until now. Glad you like the book.
Now, why no coverage of 12…g6? After the novelty on move 12, we cover 4 replies in some depth, and the ones we cover are those that try to “do something bad” to White. Such as grab a pawn. Those are the moves it is wise to be ready for before the game. 12…g6 is a sensible move, but it does not threaten White’s position. So if we are allowed to castle in peace, then we can expect the usual Scotch edge, with our extra space and undamaged pawn structure.
What you played seems sensible, and if you took on f6, you would certainly have an edge. But even so, instead of 13.Bd2 I would prefer 13.Bd3, as it’s more flexible. I definitely want the light-squared bishop on d3, while I am not sure yet where the dark-squared one will be best. Maybe 13.Bd3 would transpose to your game anyway, while cutting out a few options for Black.
Mr Shaw,
I was wondering if you will cover the move orders 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 c6 and 3…e6 as an update. I did not see this anywhere in your recent book.
Thanks for your time.
@Richard Martin
I was thinking the same, but I would imagine JS will say take the pawn and Devon deans only and White should have s clear advantage. In practice it’s not do so simple and have lost many Blitx game as White I these lines.
develop sensibly
Will book two of the Playing 1.e4 be published before the beginning of September? I am very much enjoying the first book. Thank you.
@Richard Martin
As ‘The Doctor’ is guessing, I would take whichever pawn was offered, and then play Nf3, with an extra pawn and a good position. I know anything can happen, in a blitz game especially, but we have to draw the line somewhere in the book, and I feel OK about excluding 3…e6 and 3…c6, as White has no weaknesses that would justify those sacs.
@James
‘Published in 2016’ is as much as we can say for Volume 2. Okay, one more thing: before the beginning of September is too soon.
@John Shaw
Thank you for letting me know. I was interested to see if there might be a full 1.e4 repertoire available before the start of the new season (tends to be end of September). Of course, when Negi’s third book on the Scandinavian is published (if this is before the second 1.e4 book) then this in fact would be the case anyway.
While researching the Advanced Caro Line advocated in ‘Playing 1.e4’ I noticed that: 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.h4 a6!? has been essayed successfully by some strong players, but not covered in the book. In my Database, and from the engines, there is no clear indication on the most promising way for white to proceed after 4…a6. At the moment my preference would be for 5.a3!? or 5.c4, but I would like to know the thoughts of the Q.C team, John Shaw et al, on this line.
Congrats on another excellent book.
Regards Toppy 🙂
Thanks, John.
@ John Shaw
Is it possible to already give a hint about the lines you are going to choose against the French and the Sicilian (in very general terms)? I am considering buying your 2 books and would enjoy studying the first one this summer (in preparation for the coming season), but it would be helpful to have a general idea of the lines chosen against the two openings I am likely to face often.
@Stijn
John will be covering 3.Nd2 and open Sicilian lines.
@Jacob Aagaard
Excellent! Thanks for the heads up, Jacob.
My hope is that he advices for lines with Be2 in the open sicilian, in the style of Karpov, so we have the super ultra sharp Negi repertoire, and another one more conceptual… as it is not possible to prove an advantage against the sicilian, to some it is more important to have an easy to learn repertoire than a nightmare of forced variations.
I do not know how interesting is the Nd2 lines against the french, but I like the Nc3 coverage by Negi pretty much, so I do not think I’ll change there (same happened against the Caro-Kahn, although Shaw has an interesting line to catch people off-guard).
My guess/hope is;
3.Nd2 v French with a similar repertoire to that recommended by Tzermiadianos in his excellent book ‘Beating the French Defence’.
Open lines
6.Bc4 v Najdorf/Scheveningen/Classical
9.0-0-0 Yugoslav Attack v Dragon & Maroczy bind v Acc Dragon
9.Nd5 main line v Sveshnikov
Problem is a lot of these lines were recommended in Modernized the Open Sicilian!
I’m struggling to what JS will suggest v 2…e6 systems like Kan & Taimanov.
Maybe lines with a Maroczy Bind?
Any hints by the QC team would be much obliged!!
@TheDoctor
My hope is that if Negi does not recommend 6 Be3/7 Qf3 against the Taimanov then Shaw will. I also think that 6 h3 in the Najdorf might be chosen. Personally, I would like to see an update on the English Attack with 6 Be3, although I fear that that system against the Najdorf/Scheveningen might carry too much theory to be included in one book on both the Sicilian and the French. I think you have a good idea too there regarding the Dragons.
I agree with both Gollum and The Doctor: I enjoy the Be2 lines in the open Sicilian Karpov-style (as advocated in Timothy Taylor’s “Slay the Sicilian”, for example), and Tzermiadianos’ excellent book made me enjoy the Tarrasch. Together with the Scotch and the advance Caro with h4, this would be a repertoire that I would thoroughly enjoy playing.
I’m using the Internet Explorer 11 browser and for some reason it does not recognise the Reply or Quote functions on this site. Anyone else experiencing this issue and or has a fix for it?
@Stijn
I really do not see John writing a book in the style of TT…
I think John’s greatest challenge will be on finding a strong anti -Dragon line
@ the doctor:
– Bc4 in the Scheveningen doesn’t sound right, there’s some difference with the najdorf
– as for Acc. Dragon, one could feel Negi’s regrets as he admitted that not going e4-c4 simply gives Black better Dragons (a fairly common view). Perhaps John will favor the Maroczy bind ? This could help “finding a strong Anti-Dragon line”.
– for the Kan, one of many setups is the line with e4-c4-Qd3. Hard to avoid and not easy for Black. Maybe this or a Kan-Taimanov one-fits-all ?
– on the other hand, setups with e4-c4 fail to impress against the Taimanov. g3 is nasty (also against 4Knights) but perhaps too specific. In the main line Black often reverts to Scheveningen instead of Bb4-Be7, this connection has to be watched upon.
wait and see ! so far John’s choices vs 1.e4 look quite wise, don’t know if he has any regrets ?
@JacobAagaard Will Negi’s book come in August or even later?
@RB
I will put up a blog post soon (OK, maybe early next week) about our plans for Negi and Avrukh, but end of August would be a good guess.
@Cowe
No regrets about the repertoire choices.
Maybe the surprise for me after working on Volume 1 was the Pirc: I always felt it was a slightly risky defence, almost dubious. But it seems a lot sounder to me now. GM Colin McNab will be dancing in triumph.
I will ask our tech expert about this when he returns. My inexpert advice would be: don’t use IE, here or anywhere else. Chrome?
@Topnotch
Yes, I also have a problem with IE on this site, although I use 10. (I don’t want to have to upgrade my Windows installation, which the IE upgrade wants me to do.) I have to resort to Firefox to post.
@John Shaw
A fine answer if you are running a site selling Linux. For a site intended to sell chess books, on the other hand, I would think you would want to support all the major browsers. Like it or not, that most certainly includes IE. (Heck, I know people who still use IE 8!)
@John Shaw
I have the same problem, but it does work with Chrome!
@John Shaw
Any thoughts on the above query?
@Topnotch
Thanks, I missed that comment earlier. I will reply to it next week. Personal sanity rule: no work over the weekend.
@John Shaw
Thanks, appreciate that.
Dear John,
I also got your book “Playing 1 e4” a few weeks ago and I like working with it very much. I think I will try a lot of the recommendations in the book in my own games. I have a similar question to one that has been asked before in this thread. What would be your recommendation after the move order 1 e4 d6 2 d4 c6 in order to stay in the repertoire? I haven’t played through all games in the Pirc/Modern/Czech Pirc sections by now, so I hope I haven’t overlooked something there.
“1 g4! – Killer Grob” by Michael Basman would be a nice GM-Rep.! (Play future main lines!)
I looked at my calendar and it doesn’t say April 1.
I also noted that omission. It looks very reasonable for Black to me, so I’d be interested in what John would suggest for White there.
@Holger
Hi Holger,
I don’t think I cover this 1…d6 and 2…c6 move order, but it fits into a category I mentioned in the book: “In the Modern, there will always be more possible move orders than can sensibly be prepared for. It’s nothing to worry about: if Black wants to shuffle about on his first three ranks, then there is no need to stop him.”
For a concrete move, you are spoiled for choice. 3.c4 is good if you are happy with 1.d4-style play.
But as a 1.e4 player, you probably want something different, so…
3.Nc3 is fine. 3…Nf6 looks best then 4.f4 is our Czech Pirc coverage. What else? If instead 3…g6 then we are out of (my) book, but 4.f4 is a good move, but that could end up Gurgenidze-style (4…d5), which maybe you are not familiar with.
And White could play various others: nothing wrong with 3.Nf3, even if it does allow a …Bg4.
But my current favourite would be 3.f4, when 3…Nf6 4.Nc3 again is our Czech Pirc coverage. Black could play 3…g6 but after 4.Nf3 if Black heads for some Gurgenidze-style play, he will suffer even more than usual as White’s c2-pawn is not blocked.
That’s plenty of moves, but the most important idea I want to put across is that White should not be concerned about these theory-dodging dodgy lines. There are dozens of them (1…c6, 2…d6 and 3…Qc7 is another that pops into my head) but they generally all give away central space. I would suggest concentrating on being ready…
(continued)
for the good defences, and be happy when someone plays a lesser line you have never seen before.
@Topnotch
I have not forgotten this C-K line. I had a look, and now I will pass it on to Jacob for a second opinion before putting something up.
@John Shaw
Thanks John, looking forward to it.
Hello John,
thank you for your quick and helpful reply! In case I will face this move order again, I will try 3 f4. Really looking forward to the 2nd volume of “Playing 1 e4”!
Hi there,
Would you be able to tell me the line Negi recommends against the Kan?
I would like to know because I want to plan ahead of time if I want to buy the book or not.
Thanks!
This Pirc move orders are hell… What about 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 Nbd7!?
4.Nf3 g6 and we do not seem to have the correct Pirc, but 4. Bg5 does not seem to make much sense, as Black will not play g6…
4.f4 would be natural, but …e5 seems complex…
@Gollum
After 4. Nf3 4…e5 is the only reasonable option, which TR to the Philidor Defence, as White threatens e4-e5 that is very strong after 4…g6.
Great! But because I follow Negi’s repertoire in the Philidor, but what about people who follows Shaw’s?
@Gollum
4.g4! is Game 77, and the reason I stopped playing that move order with Black.
Well, please anwer also this one…?
@Wolfsblut
As I mentioned in the book, Black can play …d5 and swap queens on almost every move in this line, so there are dozens of similar/subtly-different endgames. But they all have in common that Black has weaker pawns on the queenside.
Would a bishop be even better than a knight on e4? Maybe, but that’s a fine knight anyway. In my database the position you mention after 12…cxd6 has been played 19 times with White scoring 58%, which sounds about right to me. Black is trying to hold a slightly unpleasant endgame.
On move 13 White could play any of 4 or 5 moves and have a roughly similar ending (you don’t need theory here). One example: Bologan gives 13.Bf4 as his main line, which goes to an ending where the pawn structure is 5 each: 3 healthy ones each on the kingside, while White has a2- and b2-pawns, while Black is split with pawns on a7 and c6. Bologan says equal, presumably because he thinks Black can hold. I agree Black might hold, but obviously I prefer White, and I think, given a choice of sides, almost every GM would choose White.
Thanks for your time- this answer really helps. I second your opinion….
You should be made aware that Negi failed to consider the aggressive treatment advocated for Black by Simon Williams in his new Chessbase DVD ‘The Black Lion’. On the William’s DVD he often delays castling in favor of an early h6 followed by g5, which if timed correctly could prove tricky to deal with.
@Kevin Denny
The question was about 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.h4 a6.
You mentioned 5.a3!? which has been tested: 5…h5 6.c4 In this set-up, a3 might be more relevant than …a6. Anyway, it’s a funny idea, and worked well in a 2016 game for Movsesian.
You also mentioned 5.c4 but I prefer a more aggressive approach to that idea:
5.g4 meeting 5…Bd7 with the novelty 6.c4!?. Makes sense to me: …a6 and …Bd7 are slow, so we go fast and central. What follows are just a few brief lines to show some ideas:
6…dxc4 7.Bxc4 e6 8.Nf3 c5 9.d5 b5 10.dxe6 fxe6 11.Be2 going for a2-a4.
6…Qc8!? 7.Be2 dxc4 8.Nc3 with compensation.
6…h5 7.gxh5 Bf5 8.Nc3 e6 9.Nge2 heading for g3.
6…e6 would also be an option.
So 5.g4 and then 6.c4 is my recommendation, with Jacob approval also.
Is it possible to update the FC book to reflect that?
Is it a serious alternative? I saw it by chance while browsing the news but dismissed it as impossible for Negi to overlook entirely (I did check it and did not find any mention of this plan).
can you not just take on e5 and avoid this lion-stuff altogether?
@ Jasper:
I think it’s better to avoid the Hanham with John’s repertoire. It’s much simpler than Negi’s recommendations i.m.o., and just as strong.
Thanks for you and your team taking the time to examine this line. I will investigate further your suggested improvement on current theory, and hopefully forge it into an effective weapon.
Thanks again.
@Gollum
I think precisely because Negi failed to cover this treatment by black makes it even more dangerous to meet over the board. The attacking potential is real and should be taken seriously, search YouTube for Simon Williams Black Lion, I think he offers sample game/games in some of the clips.
@Jasper
Yes you can take on e5, but an early endgame is not to everyone’s taste. Moreover it’s not clear if White is really better in that endgame, and if he is better it is very slight and hard to convert into something more, also black has Nbd7 before pushing e5 if he wants to avoid the endgame, of course the drawback is that it allows White more attacking options.
@Ray
You have a point there, I also like the Philidor lines John proposes with Nge2, Nevertheless I advise that one becomes familiar with both treatments, since black can go 1e4 d6 2d4 e5 when 3Nge2 is not nearly as effective. 🙂
I think Negi should write an update about this specific line, as it’s not new – e. g. The Black Lion is the title of the book published by NIC in 2008.
Anyone has both J. Shaw’s book and S. Williams’ DVD? Who is on top?
@Topnotch
We cannot cover every idea out there. Certainly Negi was not aware of this idea from Williams (which was something they played in the 1920s if I am not mistaken), but this is actually not important. It is quite obviously not good. I would not fear facing it without preparation at all. My pieces are well placed and my opponent plays like that? Really? Bring it on :-).
Still, I will get Nikos to provide a small update.
@Topnotch
Black can indeed play 1.e4 d6 2.d4 e5, but then white plays 3.Nf3 and is again in Shaw’s repertoire which is aimed at avoiding the Hanham. Or am I missing something here?
@Ray
You’re right – after 1.e4 d6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3, 3…Nf6 is known to be bad in view of 4.dxe5 Nxe4 5.Qd5, if I remember correctly.
@ The Black Lion
The book has many holes. Here is a review:
http://www.chessvibes.com/?q=reviews/review-the-black-lion
@Ray
“You’re right – after 1.e4 d6 2.d4 e5 3.Nf3, 3…Nf6 is known to be bad in view of 4.dxe5 Nxe4 5.Qd5, if I remember correctly.”
Quite right, but that post was meant to be tongue in cheek, I guess I used the wrong emoticon.
No doubt you are right Jacob, but in fairness Simon has recently employed the idea with success against IM level opposition, so some grandmasterly guidance would certainly not be frowned upon.
@Topnotch
🙂 If fully agree with John (as he states more than once in his book) that you can’t prepare for everything and at some point you just have to play chess – just grab the space and thank black for that 🙂
So far I have looked closely at the Caro-Kann chapter which I liked very much! Curiously the exact same question popped up that Topnotch already asked, what about 4. … a6?
@John: Thanks for the answer there!
While skimming through the Scandinavian 3. … Qa5 chapter, I noticed a move missing:
1.e4 d5 2.ed5: Qd5: 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Bc4 Bg4 6.Nge2 Nc6 7.Bd2
John writes that this move order was missed by Bauer in ‘Play the Scandinavian’
However, after 7. … 0-0-0 8.f3 Bh5! (not mentioned in ‘Playing e4’), we transpose right back into a variation examined by Bauer, which he thinks is alright for Black.
The point is that the bishop on h5 protects f7, which allows 9.a3 Nd4: 10.Nb5 Qb6 11.Nbd4: Rd4: 12.Nd4: Qd4: and Black is alright according to Bauer.
@John: It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this line!
Best regards
DragonFan
fyi this month’s NiC discusses the 5.a3 set-up in de Caro-Kann (pp. 62-65). No new insights imo. I was surpised though that John’s book isn’t mentioned as source (Houska’s book is), so maybe the article was written before the book came out.
I really enjoyed the book (this was my first one on Forward Chess, and this app is really handy).
The repertoire choice is a good compromise between not too much theory and keeping a small advantage for white.
I’m looking forward volume 2 (even if I still have a lot to do with volume 1).
The choice of the Tarrash variation against the French is perfect for me (I already played this variation), but the open Sicilian makes me a little scared (I only play closed systems against the Sicilian). But it will be the opportunity to try.
If you were to do the same book for the black side : which opening would you choose for Black (with the same criteria as in the white repertoire) ?
Hi John, Jacob et al
Down loaded Avrukhs latest sample but no joy with the latest Negi tome. It’s using my marshmallow Android phone. Anyone having success?
Thanks
After some help from our web expert, it should work on your Android phone now. Though you may need to refresh or restart your browser first. It seems Android is very fussy about what we call our filenames.
John
Appreciate the effort but the Negi excerpt has changed from a file that could be downloaded but couldn’t be opened to Not found… Try this list webpage.
Back home after my holiday on Sunday so will download to pc but a heads up its not fixed yet
Apologies John only refreshed by browser. Restarted it and it downloaded perfectly. Many thanks
@John
Did you have a look at the line mentioned above? It seems critical to me.
@DragonFan
Yes, Jacob and I both had a look. For a start, the transposition escaped me in the book, so thanks for pointing it out. White is better, in my opinion, as in the summarized analysis below:
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Bc4 Bg4 6.Nge2 Nc6 7.Bd2 0–0–0 8.f3 Bh5 9.a3 Nxd4 10.Nxd4! Rxd4 11.Nb5 Qb6 12.Nxd4 Qxd4 13.Qe2 Qxb2 14.0–0 e6
Now 15.Bb4 might be an edge.
But I agree with Christian Bauer that the best line is: 15.Rab1! when Black must find 15…Bc5+ 16.Kh1 Qd4 (everything else is really bad for Black). Christian’s verdict was “unclear” but with the benefit of more recent engines, I will say 17.Bg5! is better for White. The position is far more forcing than I realized at first, as Black faces many tactical threats. It is clear that Black’s queen, dark-squared bishop and king are potential targets, but the h5-bishop is also surprisingly vulnerable to 5th rank rook skewers in a few lines.
The following two lines are the best I can see for Black, but White is still better in both of them:
a) 17…Bd6 18.Rfd1 Qe5 19.Qxe5 Bxe5 20.Rb5 Nd5 21.Bxd5 exd5 22.Rbxd5
b) 17…h6 18.Bxf6 gxf6 19.Rfd1 Qe5 20.Ba6! Bb6 21.Qd3 bxa6 22.Qxa6+ Kb8 23.Rb5 Qc3 24.Rxh5 Qxc2 25.Qd3
That looks convincing to me, but do let me know if you see anything better for either side.
I want to point out that I had a small disappointment today after seeing that Bologan’s “11…Qxe4!” is not covered in the Scotch 9…Qe6 section(in the 10…d5 line Game 35). I hope I am missing something otherwise I would like to get Mr. Shaw’s own recommendation on that variation.
Thanks
@1.e4Fan
If you look above to comments 107 and 108 in this thread, you will see Wolfsblut asking the same question, and me answering. The short version is that it’s just another version of a Scotch endgame where White has the more pleasant side. The more detailed version is in the comment above.
@John Shaw
As I told I had missed something 🙂 Thanks for your concern.
Does anyone else also have problems submitting comments?
My comments are never shown…
@John Shaw
Dear John,
the lines you give are indeed convincing!
I looked a bit further and after
b) 17. … h6 also interesting is 18.Rfd1 Qf2 19.Be6:+ fe6: 20.Qe6: Kb8 21.Rd2 (trapping the queen) hg5: 22.Rf2: Bf2:
Black now has three pieces for the queen, but his pawns are still very weak. Play could continue
23.Qe7 Rg8 24.g4 (fixing g5) Bg6 25.Rd1 b6 26.Rd8+ Rd8: 27.Qd8: Kb7 28.Qe7
and my engine likes White very much. Normally I am wary as engines have a tendency to overvalue the queen against three minor pieces,
but with the weak Black pawns here White has very good chances to create a decisive passer on the kingside.
I also considered
17. … Nd7 but this seems weak, as now also the knight becomes a target:
18.Bb5! Kb8 19.Rfd1 Qe5 20.Qd2 Nb6 21.Bf4 Qf6 22.a4!
As you write the Black position is surprisingly fragile as there are a lot of tactical motives looming, the main problem seems to be a lack of control of the white squares around the black king (b7, a6)
Then I also took a short look at
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 Nf6 5.Bc4 Bg4 6.Nge2 Nc6 7.Bd2 0–0–0 8.f3 Le6
which is analogous to 7.f3 Be6!? as also proposed in Bauer’s work.
But again the inserted moves Bd2 and 0-0-0 favour White:
9.Ne4!
a) 9. … Qf5?? loses a lot of material after 10.N4g3!
b) 9. … Qb6 10.Be6:+ fe6: 11.Ng5! Rg8 12.Nf7 Rd7 13.c3 when White is clearly better
c) 9. … Qa4 now White has multiple ways to a clear edge, but I like 10.Be6:+ fe6: 11.b3 Qd5 12.Nf4 Qd4: 13.Nce6: Qe5+ 14.Kf2 Rd7 15.Re1 Qb5 Kg1 and the white knigths are paralyzing the Black position.
So after a closer look, I still think your suggestion of 7.Bd2! gives White very good chances.
Thanks again for the discussion!
Regards
Dragon Fan
Sorry for splitting up my answer that much, but that seemed the only way to get it posted…
Tried and tried for some days and only now it worked after I made some quite small chunks.
First of all, I want to say that the book is really amazing. It provides a rare combination between concrete analysis with many new ideas included (Caro, Scandinavian) and calmer approach still posing many problems for black (Scotch, Modern).
I had a chance to use one of John`s ideas in a recent game against a strong Armenian GM Hovhannisyan. He was clearly surprised by 11.Ne2 but managed to react well and rather creatively. Still, I was better throughout the game and Robert had to show some impressive defensive skills to hold. Anyway, it is curious to know what would be John`s suggestion against 12…Qa3!?. One possible deviation from the game could be 16.Rh3, although it does not seem to be totally clear… Looking forward to your answer!
P.S. [Event “6th RTU Open”]
[Site “chess24.com”]
[Date “2016.08.14”]
[Round “9.8”]
[White “Petrov, Nikita”]
[Black “Hovhannisyan, Robert”]
[Result “1/2-1/2”]
[WhiteElo “2490”]
[BlackElo “2634”]
[PlyCount “100”]
[EventDate “2016.??.??”]
[WhiteTeam “Russia”]
[BlackTeam “Armenia”]
[WhiteTeamCountry “RUS”]
[BlackTeamCountry “ARM”]
[WhiteClock “0:03:30”]
[BlackClock “0:04:27”]
1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. h4 h5 5. Bd3 Bxd3 6. Qxd3 e6 7. Bg5 Qb6 8. Nd2
c5 9. c4 Qxb2 10. Rd1 Nc6 11. Ne2 Nb4 12. Qf3 Qa3 13. Qxa3 Nc2+ 14. Kf1 Nxa3
15. cxd5 exd5 16. dxc5 Bxc5 17. Nb3 Be7 18. Nf4 Bxg5 19. hxg5 Ne7 20. Nxd5 Nxd5
21. Rxd5 Ke7 22. Ke2 g6 23. Rc1 Rhc8 24. Rxc8 Rxc8 25. Ra5 Rc2+ 26. Kd3…
@Dragon_Fan
Thanks for posting those lines. It all seems to be working well for White.
We have a limit set on how big one comment can be, to try to help keep everything readable.
@Zvonokchess
I’m glad you like the book, and thanks for sharing your game. I always want to see how our repertoires work over-the-board, and a 2634 GM is a good tough test.
12…Qa3 is clever, but I don’t like it, as White can force a better endgame.
As you said, 16.Rh3 is interesting, but I prefer 16.dxc5 as you played in the game. But after 16…Bxc5 instead of 17.Nb3, which allows the bad a3-knight access to c4, I would suggest 17.Nc3!. White can win back his pawn and force a clearly better endgame. The d5-pawn is hard to defend and Rh3 will be a developing move with threats against the a3-knight. A few lines to back up those claims:
17…Ne7 18.Rh3 White has various obvious threats, but one less obvious idea is Nxd5 …Nxd5, Ne4 which should soon win back the piece with a great position.
17…d4 18.Nce4 b6 19.Rh3 Black’s position is falling apart.
17…Rc8 18.Nxd5 Ne7 19.Ne4 Nxd5 20.Rxd5 With a fine position. For example: 20…Be7 21.Rh3 Nc4 22.Rg3!? provoking …g7-g6 to weaken the f6-square.
In the game, I see the GM held rook against rook-and-knight. I hope the book helps you to a full point next time! Good luck.
@John Shaw
Thanks for your answer! Indeed, 17.Nc3 looks promising. I was considering it during the game but 17…Ne7 18.Rh3 somehow didn`t seem convincing to me mostly because I misevaluated the position after potential Nd5+Ne4. It seemed quite equal after white regains the pawn when in fact it wasn`t. Personally, I believe black should be holding somehow even after 17.Nc3 but a lot of suffering is almost guaranteed… Well, next time 🙂
@John Shaw (and all you other bloggers)
I have a rather academic question about 3. … Qe7(?!) (Variation C)C1) on p.283) in the Petroff; the approach taken in the book sees us transposing to the ‘normal’ lines of the Petroff, not the modern lines with 5.Nc3, which Black apparently can dodge by doing this (or, if white insists on a Nc3-esque approach, reaches very favorable versions of those lines).
Now my question is: is the position reached by transposing this way (3…Qe7) really worse in a theoretical sense? I don’t know the older main lines that well, but it appears to be pretty standard looking. And if the position reached in said variation really was rather ok for Black, why don’t Petroff players employ this move order more often as it seems to severely limit White’s options?
I hope this is the right place to ask such a question, but it’s been really bugging me for a couple of days now 😀
Anyways, merry Christmas to all of you guys! 🙂
Can we resume the discussion 😉 (duck)
(disclaimer: I rather want a great book such as Part 1 later, instead of a good book now; but I just couldn’t resist digging this out!)
Hello,
is there any reason, why after 4. … Qh4 in the Scotch 5.Nb5 isn’t mentioned?
I like Mr Shaws recommendation, but I was just wondering…
I tried this variation several times in blitz with the continuation 5. …Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Kd8.
Is this position ok for black?
Thank you very much!
It’s three years ago, but if I remember correctly we decided 5.Nc3 Bb4 6.Be2 was the most efficient answer. Not a lot to learn and looking excellent for White.
We did not mention 5.Nb5 as we only need one repertoire move against this rare line. In the line you mention, 5…Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Kd8 looks bad for Black to me – White simply castles then develops with tempo against the queen. Instead 5…Bc5 and 5…Bb4+ are more testing replies.
So I would stick with our recommendation: in the Scotch, against 4…Qh4 play 5.Nc3!.
Yes, I will play your line. I like it.
Thanks for your answer.
While I appreciate I could use other books you have published over the years, I wanted to ask you if there were any plans to do a Grandmaster Repertoire book covering 1 e4 e5 from the black perspective (say, for example, like the 3 book Berg French series)?
Theory has certainly moved on in this area and I would be curious to see what lines the author might recommend against the open games and which line of the Spanish he may pick.
Thank you.
James
There are so many e4e5 books around.
Better to have a new one on the benko gambit.
On a different note, all of you who have been asking about a Marin update on his 1 c4 2 g3 books, Chessbase have released 2 dvds on just that.
Just as an FYI, I’m not promoting anything.
James
@James2
Wow! Very interesting!
@James2
Great to see, but I have always preferred the book format to that of a DVD…..always lived in the hope that Quality would commission an up-date series on the English from Marin….not to be now!
@Michael
Yes! I agree with you regarding the output. I always prefer the written book in the hand to anything digital (perhaps non physical is a better way of putting it).
James
@James2
Since you mentioned another company am I allowed to ask if Gambit Books is struggling? Their output has really dropped lately and it would be a shame if they stopped. We need good chess publishers including of course the king QC.
@John NS
Gambit were of course thriving a lot 15-20 years ago. But when competition expanded, they decided to semi-retire, as I understand it. Murray went back to NZ and Burgess to the US as far as I know.
Maybe a bit off-topic to the recent discussion here, but I think the most matching blog-entry for my question.
Is there any chance that you’ll publish at some point an update for the line Scotch-Line from Jones-Kramnik, since it’s not so easy to face 11…Ne7 OTB? That would be so great!
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1886678
@Chris
I’d like to remind the question quoted above, as it may have been overlooked 🙂
My guess is no, although John has the final say of course, being the author of the book as well as the boss of the company.
When we publish repertoire updates on the blog, it tends to be when a significant error was made, such as a tactical refutation of a recommended line (for instance, if the author did not let the engine analyse deeply enough), or if we neglected to cover a variation which was well known at the time of publication.
With this 11…Ne7 move, it wasn’t played by Kramnik until well after the book was published, so it’s not as if we made a terrible oversight based on the information available at the time. With every repertoire book, it’s only a matter of time before some new idea catches on which was not considered by the author – if we made an update every time this happened, we would hardly have time to publish anything new.
@Chris
I think people are now mostly looking elsewhere for the chance of a small advantage.
12 Qc2 isn’t a great response, but it’s widely believed that 11… Ne7 probably equalises anyway.
Even the Khalifman/Soloviov book from 2019 only has a couple of short game fragments arising from 12th move alternatives for White and assesses them both as equal.
I think the repertoire repair is a choice between trying to outplay opponents in these types of positions or abandoning 9. Nd2 🙁
It’s certainly not fair to expect a publisher to provide future updates for free (not counting some mistake that they choose to correct), performing the work of “maintaining” the repertoire, tracking all significant games, etc. However, I wonder whether it would ever be a feasible business model to provide such a service on a subscription basis, for real money. Readers would be paying the publisher, which comprises a small set of high-level specialists, to perform work that the readers might not be as qualified to do well or have the time for, such as understanding the significance of (or the learning to be gleaned from) new games in the opening lines pertaining to the repertoire. Perhaps readers subscribed to certain repertoires would receive such updates by e-mail or via a key of some kind. Some updates might be just a survey of pertinent recent games showing how great the repertoire has been working. I know I would pay for such a service.
@Benjamin Fitch
It exist, it’s chesspublishing
@Benjamin Fitch
Did I say that I’d expect? Or is it also not fair to ask?
But more important: Isn’t it justified to *just ask*, regarding that Ne7 seems to kill the attempt to play for an advantage after the main recommendation to 1…e5? It is basically the heart of the book.
@Chris
Wasn’t referring directly to your post. More to Andrew’s reply, which gave me an idea. Totally reasonable to ask about Ne7 on the forum.
Kramnik was quite dismissive of the entire line in the interview after (around 3h 43min into the round commentary on youtube). Ne7 a strong novelty, and he didn’t like white’s position in general with the king in the centre.