< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 29 OF 29 ·
|Dec-26-14|| ||parisattack: Hi <Shams> I haven't purchased it as yet, but seems to be getting decent reviews. The Rubinstein never appealed to me. Not too keen on giving up the center so readily...perhaps I read too much Reinfeld. :) Soltis pushes the Burn in Fighting French but then of course you 'risk' the Steinitz.|
Curious - as a French player - what is the breakdown of variations you get from white? My experience (30 or so games) was 1) Steinitz, 2) Advance, 3) Tarrasch, 4) Nc3. I really like the McCutcheon but rarely got it...drew a 2400-er twice with it. I find the Advance lines with white a3 really tough.
|Dec-26-14|| ||Shams: Hi <parisattack> I downloaded the book last night, then this morning I decided I wanted the physical book so I ordered that instead. No additional charge and for only twelve bucks I get same-day delivery. Gotta love that. |
You'd be surprised how often I see the Exchange variation too. Probably 1.Advanced 2.Nc3 (Steinitz about half the time) 3.Exchange 4.Nd2 5.Other would be the rough order of frequency.
I'm learning the Rubinstein as a drawing weapon against stronger players, and a first choice line against the Tarrasch.
|Dec-26-14|| ||parisattack: OK, I will order it this weekend. I have the Classical Move-by-Move coming in a Christmas order along with the Modern Tiger, the updated Larsen games and the Bogo book. |
1. ...e6 still 'feels' like a good repetoire move tho lots of possibilities.
BTW - Do you know the games of <Joseph Ryan> Irish fellow plays a lot of Frenches, sort of unique/Nimzo-ish twists. <Domdaniel> turned me on to his games.
|Dec-27-14|| ||Shams: <parisattack> Incidentally, Langrock recommends the 4...Bd7/5...a6 line against the Advanced French. Do you have an opinion on that variation?|
|Dec-28-14|| ||parisattack: Howdy <Shams> I've seen it but not studied it - Watson has done articles on it in ChessPub, I'll need to look at those.|
I hit 365chess (CG.com DB is great for historic work but not-so-great for current study). Have you seen Mukhametov-Eingorn where the black QN isn't developed until move 18? Interesting....
|Dec-30-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> I will respond here to your query on my page. I actually bought three recent books on the Benko:|
<The Dynamic Benko Gambit> by Sergey Kasparov (2012; 301 pp. before indexes)
<Attack with Black> by Valery Aveskulov (2012; 222 pp.)
<Play the Benko Gambit> by Nikolai Pedersen (2011; 201 pp.).
Kasparov's is a bit overwhelming, with 273(!) complete games. It would be good to have if you were planning to play the Benko in correspondence games, but I'm reasonably certain that you're not. Moreover, with so many games he doesn't have the space to deeply analyze the opening lines. His approach is more like, "Here's the history of every line, you figure out the analytical details and which subvariations you like best." I want more guidance from the author as to which lines he recommends, and deeper analysis.
Pedersen's book is built around 49 illustrative games. Each game is discussed at considerably greater length than Kasparov is able to do with about 5 1/2 times(!) as many games. The opening analysis is also a lot deeper than Kasparov's, but maybe a little less deep than I would like in a few places. I'm thinking specifically of his comment on page 63 that Shulman went on to win a prior game between the same players, "although Khalifman would naturally have had an improvement ready somewhere." Gee, thanks for that insight.
Aveskulov's book is the only one to reject the illustrative games approach. Instead he gives you theory, and lots of it. Every line is deeply analyzed. He also has sections on "Dream Positions for Black," "Positions to Avoid," and "Tactical Exercises." Those are useful, and lacking in the other books. Unlike the others, his book is a complete repertoire book against 1.d4, and gives thorough coverage of how to respond if White avoids the Benko - not just on move 3 but by means of the Trompowsky, Richter-Veresov, Colle System, etc. (The only deviation that Kasparov covers is 2.Nf3 c5 3.d5; Pedersen discusses that and 3.Nf3.) To my mind, this is the best of the three, with the deepest analysis and the best coverage of White deviations from the Benko. I think that you would agree.
|Dec-30-14|| ||FSR: Incidentally, I see that the chessvibes reviewer compared Kasparov and Aveskulov's books and, like me, preferred the latter. See http://www.chessvibes.com/reviews/r... and http://www.chessvibes.com/reviews/r... A reviewer of Aveskulov's book at chess.com was also very impressed with it. http://www.chess.com/blog/Bookrevie...|
|Dec-30-14|| ||FSR: btw, the Amazon reviews of Aveskulov's book are extremely positive: 8 5-star reviews and 2 4-stars, nothing else. (The other books have a lot fewer reviews.) One reviewer says that the Kindle edition is updated from the paperback to address the analysis in Kaufman's repertoire book. That reviewer claims that the Kindle edition is a "must-have."|
|Dec-30-14|| ||FSR: To correct myself slightly - I see that I really have <four> recent books on the Benko, the most recent being <Benko Gambit: Move by Move> by FIDE Candidate Master Junior Tay (I think that translates to around 2200 FIDE). The author of that book is weaker than the other authors (two GMs and an IM). His book lacks theoretical depth, concentrating more on explaining his illustrative games than on up-to-the-minute theory, and appears to be aimed at weaker players than the other books. I don't recommend it to you.|
|Dec-30-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> Thanks much for that! This is a bit embarrassing but it turns out I already have the Aveskulov book, and I have gone through it quite a bit. For some reason I didn't put two and two together; or I assumed that he had a second book that was just on the Benko gambit and not a comprehensive guide to 1.d4 for Black. |
And I agree, it is great. Solid coverage of the Blumenfeld and Vaganian gambits too.
Sounds like too many games in the Sergey Kasparov book.
|Dec-31-14|| ||Fusilli: Best wishes for 2015!|
|Dec-31-14|| ||Shams: <Fusilli> You too, you crazy bastard! =)|
|Jan-01-15|| ||ketchuplover: joy to ye in 2015|
|Jan-01-15|| ||Shams: Thanks <ketchuplover>, you too.|
|Jan-01-15|| ||Shams: Ok so I gotta ask, what is it with you and ketchup? You have a thing for Theresa Heinz or something?|
|Jan-02-15|| ||perfidious: <Shams> Don't see any problem there--Teresa is well preserved and must have been a looker in her day.|
|Jan-13-15|| ||FSR: http://www.komonews.com/news/local/...|
|Jan-15-15|| ||Shams: <FSR> If they can train dogs to drive the buses I might ride more often.|
|Jan-16-15|| ||Shams: I can't tell if Diana Krall is really good or if she's just decent and I think she's really good because she's so beautiful.
|Jan-16-15|| ||technical draw: <Shams> Diana Krall is very good. However she needs a bass player to carry her through some awkward chord changes. She's more a pianist than a singer.|
|Jan-17-15|| ||Shams: <td> Thanks. I almost posted that on your wall so I'm glad you commented.|
|Jan-17-15|| ||Shams: Kind of stoney but also kind of amazing:
|Jan-18-15|| ||kellmano: <shams> you ordered yourself Krzhizhanovsky yet? If not, then get on it and have an existential start to 2015|
|Jan-18-15|| ||Shams: <kellmano> I can't order any more books until I pay down my library fines. :)|
Did you ever see "Waking Life"? If so do you remember the professor (Linklater's in real life as it happens) giving his brief defense of existentialism?
|Jan-19-15|| ||Fusilli: Greetings, <Shams>. The three games I submitted from the Nashville city championship are up, including my win over IM Burnett:|
M Sana vs R Burnett, 2015
T D Andrews vs M Sana, 2015
D Justice vs M Sana, 2015
(I had played all these players before, and all those games are in the database. I hope next time I play Todd Andrews or David Justice I get white!)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 29 OF 29 ·