|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 57 OF 77 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jul-24-13
 | | WCC Editing Project: REPOST:
<TheFocus: Does anyone have <Chess Monthly> for 1892? Mine ends at 1888.
Haven't ordered them from Karel yet.> |
|
| Aug-13-13 | | parisattack: Of the Coming Soon books mentioned in my March 9 post: Perfect Pirc - Moskalenko is released. Reviews were very strong although I did not find it particularly appealing. Chess Secrets: Romantics - Pritchett is still pending. Everyman now shows it as Aug/Sep and Amazon curiously shows it Out of Print. Nimzowitsch: Games and Essays - Reinhardt is still pending. Its been Pre-Order on Amazon for six months! Vassily Ivanchuk: 100 Games - Kalinchenko is released. Excellent book and recommended. Killer Sicilian: Kalashnikov - Rotella. This must be someone at Everyman's idea of a joke. It has been delayed for two years, now shows 2014 publication. Best Move - Shashkin is also anxiously awaited as a new approach to finding candidate moves. The 'Move-by-Move' books, apparently popular, are coming out almost weekly it seems. Three up now: Botvinnik, King's Indian Attack and Larsen-Nimzovitch Attack. |
|
| Aug-13-13 | | parisattack: <Best Move - Shashkin is also anxiously awaited as a new approach to finding candidate moves.> The book is - 'Best Play: A New Method for Discovering the Strongest Move' by Shashin. It appears to be shipping at this time. |
|
Aug-26-13
 | | FSR: Quality Chess has just released an incredible behemoth of a book on the King's Gambit by GM John Shaw - almost 700 pages! He says that he thinks the KG is a viable OTB weapon at every level of play. He says it's not a great choice in correspondence since Black will have an easier time equalizing. He also considers 3.Bc4 slightly favorable for Black, so after 2...exf4, 3.Nf3! (=/unclear with correct play by both sides) is the move. |
|
| Aug-26-13 | | parisattack: I guess big chess books and gambits are 'in' now <FSR>. I bought the 600 page behemoth on the Albin. I still haven't figured out how to tackle it. Curiously lots of KG books, considering how infrequently it is played these days... |
|
Aug-26-13
| | FSR: 600 pages on the Albin?! That seems insane. |
|
Aug-27-13
| | FSR: Daniel Gormally: <I've just read that a 600 page book on the Albin counter-gambit has been produced.Maybe I'm jumping the gun here, but 600 pages??? On the ALBIN?? How on earth can you find something to write about on such an obscure opening for 600 pages? I can't help but think that the whole chess book market is over saturated now. There seems to be massive volumes on every subject in chess under the sun. Do we really need so many? It's hard to find the diamonds amongst the dross.> http://thechesscoachingwebsite.blog... |
|
Aug-27-13
 | | perfidious: <Six hundred> pages on the Albin? That beggars belief. Much easier to make a case for the seven hundred on the King's Gambit. Most interesting that Shaw, a great specialist in the KG, does not think very highly of it for CC. Remember playing the KG twice in the prelims of the 13th US Correspondence Championship, losing to Charles R Heising and winning from Art Marthinsen. |
|
Aug-27-13
| | FSR: <perfidious> If you wanted to be unkind, you could say that Shaw is tacitly admitting that the KG is like a giant trap. If Black knows what he's doing he <will> equalize, in various different lines. And that's a lot easier if he has Shaw's book sitting on the table next to him. The Ruy Lopez gives White better chances of inflicting long-term suffering on Black in correspondence. But of course any decent opening will result in a draw if both sides play perfectly - something that may be attainable in correspondence (especially if computer use is allowed), but rarely OTB. |
|
Aug-27-13
| | FSR: Here's a link to the Albin monster: http://www.newinchess.com/Shop/Prod.... So what's your impression, <parisattack>? Is this a worthwhile book? A reasonable treatment, at least for Albin fanatics, or overkill? |
|
| Aug-27-13 | | parisattack: <FSR: Here's a link to the Albin monster: http://www.newinchess.com/Shop/Prod.... So what's your impression, <parisattack>? Is this a worthwhile book? A reasonable treatment, at least for Albin fanatics, or overkill?> I am afraid to open it! ;) Actually I plan to spend time with it this weekend, write a brief review. First glance it looks very well produced. But, yeah, 600 pages on the Albin!? <SimonWebTiger> turned me on to it. My wife is after him with a rolling pin as we speak. I also agree the chess book market close to a ridiculous point here. I've probably bought 25 of the new pubs this year and haven't scratched the surface. It seem when a catchy phrase sells 'Move by Move' 'Dangerous Weapons' you can expect a dozen titles. |
|
| Aug-27-13 | | parisattack: <It's hard to find the diamonds amongst the dross.> http://thechesscoachingwebsite.blog>... Not many diamonds rough or otherwise. I tend to stay with opening books and player collections.The vast majority of 'instructional' books are 'Pick a theme and find a bunch of examples of it.' To me, those are all but worthless and certainly not worth $25-$30... As long as I am on a roll - the entire 'a posteriori' school of chess annotation (about 99% of it) is also worthless. Entertaining, yes, but instructional value, no. |
|
Aug-27-13
| | FSR: I have thumbed through about 30% of Shaw's <The King's Gambit>, which I received in the mail yesterday. Simply an amazing book! Far and away the greatest King's Gambit book ever, and surely at least one of the greatest opening books. (Offhand, I'm not sure what the competition would be for the latter honor.) As for its length, I'm sure Shaw could easily have gotten to 1000 pages. Believe it or not, he had to exercise considerable editorial discretion to keep it down to <only> 680 (653 + indexes). For example, fans of the Bishop's Gambit and Muzio won't be happy: he just explains why they suck (3...Nc6! with advantage in all lines in the former, 9...Qf5! in the latter) and moves on. Ditto for the Allgaier and Professor Rice's brainchild, of course. And there are a lot of sidelines where he basically says "yes, this is playable" and goes on to more theoretically critical lines. To my surprise, he is <not> a big fan of the Kieseritzky, which I had thought was close to obligatory for White. He says yes, it's perfectly playable, but 4...g4 5.Ne5 d6! and 5...Nc6! both lead to boring equality. He prefers the Quaade Gambit, 4.Nc3! After a simul last year, Larry Christiansen told us that 4.Nc3! is the move, so I find Shaw's claim less surprising/eccentric than I otherwise would. Here is a gem in the Quaade Gambit:
<1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Nc3 g4> Natural, but not best. Sakaev's 4...Nc6 is OK. Most challenging is 4...Bg7 5.d4! (after 5.g3!? d5!N (Aagaard), White pretty much has to play the dubious piece sac 6.d4! dxe4 7.Nxe4 g4 8.Bxf4 gxf3 9.Qxf3) g4 6.Bc4 gxf3 7.Qxf3 - a similar sac, but here Shaw thinks White has enough compensation, especially OTB. <5.Ne5 Qh4+ 6.g3! fxg3 7.Qxg4> 
click for larger view<7...g2+?> 7...Qxg4! 8.Nxg4 d5! 9.Ne5!? reaches an ending where White is a pawn down, but has some chances for advantage. <8.Qxh4 gxh1(Q) 9.Qh5!> Reaching a well-known position where Black is a rook up but almost lost; Shaw says that with best play he can reach a bad position a pawn down. <9...Bd6?> 9...Nh6! (box) leads to the aforementioned line. <10.Qxf7+ Kd8 11.d4 Ne7 12.Bg5 Nbc6 13.Nd5!> The "most stylish"; "13.0-0-0 should also get the job done." <13...Qe4+ 14.Be2 Qh1+ 15.Kd2 Qxa1> 
click for larger viewShaw: "White to play and win beautifully (ugly wins don't count)." <16.Qe8+!!> 16.Nxc6+?? mates ugly, albeit equally quickly. <16...Kxe8 17.Nf6+ Kf8 18.Bh6#> Jesus Seoane Sepulveda - Ignacio Prieto, Cadiz 1986. "Games like this are why the King's Gambit has fanatical supporters. Sure, there will be days when White loses a pawn down in an ending, but there will also be days when the black king is filleted by a flurry of sacs." Certainly any King's Gambit fan or potential fan should buy this book instantly. If I were an 1.e4 e5 player I'd certainly get it as well. |
|
| Aug-27-13 | | parisattack: Thanks for the review <FSR>. I couldn't get on either side of a KG - but it sounds like a fun book and I guess I have to keep my KG collection current. My wife will be after you with a hickory stick! |
|
Aug-28-13
| | FSR: <parisattack> Why not give the KG a shot in some forum where you don't care about your rating, or they don't give you a rating? I have played it in online blitz games at playchess.com, and intend to also do so in online correspondence games at gameknot.com. If you want a really fishy pool of opponents, there's also instantchess.com and doubtless others I don't know about. There must be some sites where you don't care about your rating. You'll have fun and win some entertaining games. Sure, you'll lose some too, but who cares? |
|
| Aug-28-13 | | parisattack: <FSR> - Hmmm...Perhaps a good idea, thanks! If chess is 99% tactics then the KG has to be right on. The late Ken Smith gave a lecture here before a tournament long ago...suggested new players spend a year just playing gambits, then go to standard openings then to hypermodern if the spirit so moved them. I guess I got it all backwards! |
|
| Aug-28-13 | | benjinathan: < Why not give the KG a shot in some forum > I agree. I play KG 100% of the time on line after 1.e4 e5. Almost every game is great fun, win or lose. |
|
| Aug-31-13 | | parisattack: The Complete Albin Counter-Gambit by Luc Henris.
I purchased this book mostly because I am a soft touch for opening books and I was curious how one could fill 600 pages on the relatively obscure Albin. It is unlikely I could ever find myself on either side of it. The book is extremely well-produced and the layout is ideal for me: Wide borders, large and widely spaced text, large diagrams. Yup, I am sure that accounts for 100 of the 600 pages. The format is in the style of variation analysis followed by games with comments on lesser sub and sub-sub variations. Its quite easy to follow the analysis as it rarely goes more than two-ply deep, leaving the odds-ends for the Games section. The book is divided into four Parts - A) 5, a3, B) 5. g3, C) 5. Nbd2 and D) 5. Other and early deviations by both sides. The actual analysis is in the 'modern' style with emphasis on moves, not too much explanation or ideas. (There is a brief 'Introduction and Ideas' of four pages - and a four page 'History.') I think this is a weakness for a book calling itself 'Complete' - I could easily see a 20 page version of Introduction and Ideas. At the end of the book is an Index of Variations running 20 pages with diagrams which is most excellent. Also a complete Index of Games and Index of Players. I was disappointed a line our discussion here on CG.com in the Albin forum considered 'critical' 4. e4 and 5. f4 - an attempt at outright refutation - is consigned to a two games and no analysis section. Still given the depth of mainline analysis and the large number of games it is clear Henris scoured many books, periodicals and databases for content. If you play the Albin, want a sharp alternative against 1. d4, bone up on it if you are a 1. d4 player - or just have to have every opening book published - buy it! I'd rate the book a 3.5 of 5.0. If you want to just see if the Albin might be up your alley, start with Eric Schiller's monograph which can be had for around $5.00. Below, other resources on the Albin - and, of course, the forum here on CG.com. Albin Counter Gambit
Anapolsky - Albin Counter Gambit
Davies - Gambiteer II
Harding - Counter Gambits
Henris - The Complete Albin Counter-Gambit
Lamford - Albin Counter-Gambit
Schiller - How to Play the Albin Countergambit
Steinkohl/Heemoth - Albins Gengengambit
Ward - Trends in the Albin Counter Gambit
Ward - Unusual Queen's Gambit Declined
Anti-Gambit
Avurkh - Grandmaster Repertoire: Beating 1. d4 Sidelines. Bronznik - 1. d4 Beat the Guerillas
Georgiev - Squeezing the Gambits
Schandorff - Playing the Queen's Gambit
Videos
Kashimedzhanov - Albin's Countergambit
Martin - Foxy Openings: Albin Counter Gambit |
|
| Aug-31-13 | | parisattack: I will post Henris' assessment if/when I spend more time with the book. First glance it would be something like: "Black can almost get equality if White plays correctly. But along the way there are many pitfalls for the first player - and some untried moves that may have promise for the second player." Its the same old bottomline, IMHO: If you know a line substantially better than your opponent you will probably get an opening advantage. If that opponent is your equal, the odds of winning are higher. If that opponent is stronger, the odds of holding on longer are better. :) |
|
| Sep-12-13 | | parisattack: If publication rates are a guide, opening books continue to be very popular. (I recall telling a student who was fascinated by the openings, "You should study the endgame more!" To which he replied, "Why? You only play an endgame once-in-awhile but you always play an opening!) Opening books on the Dutch, Nimzo-Larsen, King's Gambit, King's Indian Attack, Sicilian (3 - if you count the Killer Sicilian which has been 'Coming Soon' for 2+ years) and French (2) are due this year. The popular 'Grandmaster Repertoire' series is up to volume #14. They remind me of the older but extremely good 'Openings According To" series of some years ago. (As a function of the overall popularity of the opening itself, French books lead the way. There are over 100 of them in English.) Victor Moskalenko's books have been extremely well-received, his most recent 'The Perfect Pirc-Modern.' Up next is 'The Diamond Dutch' with the publisher's blurb reading: "Grandmaster Viktor Moskalenko shakes up the lines of yet another chess opening! For those who have the Dutch Defence in their repertoire or play against it, this brings an explosive mixture of danger and opportunity. Danger if you stick to your old ways, opportunity if you are ready to take up Moskalenko’s new weapons or his refutations of old ones. "Moskalenko covers the Anti-Dutch, Leningrad, Stonewall and Classical variations. He guides you through this ground-breaking opening book with the enthusiasm, the ease and the humor that characterize his style." Two non-opening books anxiously awaited are:
Aron Nimzovitsch: 1928-1935 by Nimzovitsch and Reinhardt. (This is NOT to be confused with the second volume of Per Skjoldager's work of which I see no publication date.) Chess Secrets: The Romantics: Anderssen, Chigorin, Reti, Larsen and Morozovich. This will be the sixth volume of what I believe to be among the most instructive chess books to come along in quite awhile. |
|
Sep-21-13
| | FSR: Here's the sort of crunchy goodness you can anticipate in the King's Gambit: [Event "Internet correspondence game, GameKnot.com"]
[Site "http://gameknot.com/chess.pl?bd=201..."]
[Date "2013.09.19"]
[White "krakatoa1"]
[Black "securewebs"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2002"]
[BlackElo "1567"]
<1. e4 e5 2. f4 Nc6> Offbeat, but quite playable. <3. Nf3> 365chess.com has tons of games where White played 3.fxe5?? Black usually responded with 3...Nxc6??, rather than 3...Qh4+!, winning. <3...exf4> Still playable, leading to one of the few lines of the King's Knight's Gambit (3...Nc6) that doesn't have someone's name attached to it. Miles' Countergambit 3...f5!? is more theoretically significant. <4. d4 Nf6?!> 4...g5! leads to equality according to Shaw. <5. e5> In Mega Database 2013, most strong players played 5.e5 Nd5 6.Bc4, so I decided to also do so. After the game, I looked at it with Houdini 3, which likes the novelty 5.Qe2!?, which it rates as +0.29 in favor of White (almost "small advantage White"). Seems awkward, but then White can play Bxf4, it's hard for Black to develop, and his knights are in danger of getting pushed around. <5...Nd5> Houdini says that this is sufficient for equality, and so is 5...Ng4 6.Bxf4 d6. Not good, however, is 5...Nh5 6.d5. <6. Bc4 Ne3> <Houdini says that 6...Nb6 is a good alternative, and that both moves equalize. <7. Bxe3 fxe3 8. O-O Be7??> But here 8...d5! is obligatory, when White has nothing better than 9.Bb3=. 
click for larger view<9. Bxf7+> Of course. White is winning. <9...Kxf7 10. Ng5+ Kg8> The alternatives, neither of them remotely appealing, were 10...Ke8 11.Nf7 and 10...Kg6 11.Qd3+. <11. Qf3!> The dual threats of Qf7# and Qd5# are immediately decisive. <11...Qe8 12. Qd5+ Qf7 13. Qxf7# 1-0> |
|
| Sep-21-13 | | parisattack: King's Gambit a game unto itself <FSR>. I've yet to get Shaw's book and I see Taylor is doing Attacking Chess: The King's Gambit. Jim Bickford wrote a monograph on the King's Bishop's Gambit and I always felt it was a little better than the Knight Gambit. |
|
| Sep-21-13 | | Shams: <parisattack> I like <3.Bc4> too. One of these two players:
Thomas Johansson ...wrote a book on it a couple years ago and I picked it up. The author is just barely an FM though and most of the lines are engine-driven analysis, so the book is unlikely to have much staying power. Unfortunately for us King's Bishop's Gambit fans, Shaw spends only a few pages on the line in his new tome. I believe he gives <3...Nc6> as a flat-out refutation. |
|
Sep-21-13
| | FSR: <Shams> Right. He claims that 3...Nc6 leads to a small advantage for Black. Surprising to me, since I hadn't realized that 3...Nc6 was even an important line. |
|
| Sep-21-13 | | parisattack: I'll pull Jim's book, see what he says on 3. ...Nc6. I played 3. ...Qe7 in a couple practice games, seemed Black was OK. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 57 OF 77 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
