Killer Opening Repertoire Reviewed

Today I received a newsletter from Chessville informing me that Bill McGeary has reviewed "A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire":

The review is in general favourable and contains no big surprises. In my opinion the reviewer somewhat misses the mark when he writes:
"Another thing is that the book is dated. Certainly the material in this book is very good, but a number of the lines have evolved a great deal since the first edition. Johnsen writes that only six new games appear in this edition and only one was taken out, also that some games were expanded."
My objection is that the main updating went into the notes and not into the games selection. Sean Marsh' review in Marsh Towers comes closer to my point of view: "Opening the book at random, I discovered an average of five post-1998 game references per double-page spread. Despite the outward appearance, showing (at first glance) the book to be more or less the same as the old edition, it is clear that Sverre has put a lot of work into creating this new edition, while keeping his footsteps very discrete."


Anyway, the review is mostly positive and for those too busy to look up and read the entire review, I quote McGeary's concluding words:
"I like this book a lot and would recommend it to players in the 1700-2100 range. At club level the material will be a heavy winner and in local tournaments nearly as potent. The most valuable aspect for readers of the book is seeing how the opening flows together as the piece arrangements work with the selected pawn structures. A perfect book for improving players in the rating range I mentioned."


These words certainly were true for the original edition and I hope I have contributed to the book's longevity.

Quality King's Gambit Now for March

Another delay for Quality Chess' King's Gambit book. Now they are heading for March. I expect more delays but obviously something is happening as there now is a new cover:

It looks good but I still think the King's Gambit should wear something more classical.

King's Gambit Delayed Again

In their updated publishing schedule, Quality Chess announces another delay for Shaw's book on the King's Gambit, which was previously announced for December.

A pity - a good fireside book would have been an added delight for the Christmas holidays.

Veresov Books

Some time ago a reader asked for advise on (Richter-) Veresov books. Unfortunately there is in my opinion no really good book on the Veresov. The dedicated books that I am aware of are:

A Ferocious Opening Repertoire
Author: Lakdawala
Publisher: Everyman 2011
Cyrus Lakdawala is a good writer. I find his style somewhat chatty but for many subjects that fits very well. Unfortunately he was probably not the right author for this subject. Not because it actually was his brother that used to play the Veresov but because Cyrus (possibly in contrast to his brother Jimmy) doesn't seem very interested in exact variations and tactical complications but prefers to discuss strategy and pawn structures.


My assessment: ****

The Veresov: Surprise Your Opponents with the Tricky 2 Nc3!
Author: Davies
Publisher: Everyman 2003
I may have mentioned this elsewhere in this blog but I must admire Davies for the consistent high quality on his products (including his electronic ones). This too is a quite good book although not terribly ambitious. The author offers some sensible advice on how to select a Veresov repertoire but his analytical input seems relatively modest.

My assessment: ****

Richter-Veresov: the Chameleon Chess Repertoire

Authors: Gufeld and Stetsko

Publisher: Thinkers’ Press 1999

This book is an interesting documentation of a struggle between a publisher who really wants to make a good book and a pair of authors who really want to make some fast bucks. The result is uneven and not really good but there are hidden nuggets of gold. Gufeld was a strong player and when pressed he was able to present good analysis.

My assessment: ***

The Veresov Attack

Authors: Smith/Hall

Publisher: Chess Digest 1994

This book is full of inaccuracies and the publisher has attempted to transform a magazine article to a book by adding lots of white space.

My assessment: **

Queen's Pawn: Veresov System
Author: Bellin
Publisher: Batsford 1983
Bellin is  one of my favorite authors, and I really like this old book which combines good prose with well selected analysis and game fragments. Unfortunately it's now so old that it's mainly a collectors' item.





My assessment: *****

Richter Veresov System

Author: J.Adams

Publisher: The Chess Player 1978

In 1978 - before the time of game databases - this was quite a useful book. It contains a lot of well organized games and game fragments (some of them of rather low quality) and hardly any words or analysis.
It should be added that the cover of my copy looks a bit better.



My assessment: **


Scale:
******: Perfect
*****: Very good
****: Good workmanship
***: Worth the money
**: Only for collectors
*: Stay away!

A Challenging Subject

The King's Gambit seems to be an extraordinary difficult subject.

First the publication date of Quality Chess' book on the King's Gambit again was delayed. Now it's scheduled for December (the book's info page has not yet been updated). Obviously this may have been a tactical delay in order to prevent Taylor from referencing the QC book in his competing book.

The response was quick and predictable. Now  it's Taylor's book that is delayed with eigth months and scheduled for August 2012. Quality's counter move is not hard to suggest...

However, somehow I don't think tactical considerations are the main reason for these delays. More likely the problems are analytical obstacles. The two principal challenges for anyone writing on the King's Gambit are:

• Black has got unusually many playable defences. They are not all equally strong but they are Black's choices and he may have prepared them well.
• The established mainlines in the Kiezeritsky and Fischer defences may be fine for White in theory. However, they are quite difficult for White to handle and don't appear appealing to the typical aggressive KG player.

I will not at all be surprised if these books are delayed again. So now I am pondering the consequences for my own KG plans. The ideal situation would be to publish without any competing books at all, but that obviously isn't an option.  The second best option seems to be to publish shortly after the main competitors, being able to build on their efforts. That would involve a lot of patience but as a matter of fact I have ideas for how to fill the wating time.

The Muzio Family

Chess nomenclature is a difficult subject in general and in particular within the King's Gambit. For most practical players it is also a relatively uninteresting subject. So I will try to keep such discussions to a minimum in my coming King's Gambit book. However, I want what little I include to be as correct as possible. Therefore I will give the subject some coverage on this blog in the hope that knowledgeable readers may correct anything wrong or even debatable.

In this entry I will try to identify and name White's positional piece sacrifices after the moves 1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5.

I: The Polerio Attack

4 Bc4 g4 5 0-0! gxf3 6 Qxf3 (D)

The Polerio Attack, may be considered head of the Muzio Family. It is generally regarded as fairly respectable. However, it's quite possible that correct play leads to a forced repetition (which theoretically isn't a good result for White).

II: The Lolli attack

5 Bxf7+? Kxf7 6 Nxe5 (D)

The Lolli Attack is the black sheep of the Muzio family. White gives up his bishop instead of his knight and wins some time. Unfortunately White has insufficient compensation as Black after 6...Ke8 7 Qxg4 Nf6 starts winning his tempi back. The Lolli may be acceptable as a blitz or coffee house weapon but is probably unplayable above mediocre club level chess.

III: The Ghulam Kassim Attack

4 Bc4 g4 5 d4 gxf3 6 Qxf3 (D)

This position, which may also arise from the move-order 4 d4 g4 5 Bc4, is known as the Ghulam Kassim Attack after the Indian player who published analysis on it around 1826 (at least the publication seems to have been available in 1843). It may transpose to a (probably good) variation of the Polerio Attack after a delayed 0-0 but White may also consider castling queenside.

IV: The MacDonnell Attack

4 Bc4 g4 5 Nc3 gxf3 6 Qxf3 (D)

This position, which may also arise from the move-order 4 Nc3 g4 5 Bc4, is known as the MacDonnell Attack. It may transpose to the Polerio Attack after a delayed 0-0 but is more likely to merge with the Ghulam Kassim Attack after a quick d4 and queenside castling.


V: The Rosentreter Attack

4 d4 g4 5 Bxf4 gxf3 6 Qxf3 (D)

This is the Rosentreter Attack which obviously is closely related to the Ghulam Kassim Attack, to which it may quickly transpose with an early d4.
 
Instead 5 Bc4 would lead to the Ghulam Kassim Attack while 5 Nc3 would lead to the Sørensen Attack (below).

VI: The Sørensen Attack

4 Nc3 g4 5 d4 gxf3 6 Qxf3 (D)

This position I believe should be called the Sørensen Attack but I assume that some will argue that it should rather be the Quaade Attack. I am not at all sure what's correct and will try to look at bit deeper into the matter. My reasons for preferring Sørensen over Quaade are:

1. The mainline in the Quaade variation is 5 Ne5. It may even be argued that this knight move is the idea behind 4 Nc3 (as it is more or less unplayable in the Rosentreter variation, 4 d4).
2. In Bilguer's Handbuch, the line is attributed to Sørensen. 

Instead 5 Bc4 would have transposed to the MacDonnell Attack.

This classification I think is the easy part of the Muzio nomenclature. The real challenge is to find good classification principles when the lines merge (as they tend to do). Maybe I will return to that subject in a future post.

Cover Uncovered

Taylor's King's Gambit book now has a cover:

I cannot say I find it beautiful. I think the King's Gambit should wear something more classical. However, it probably draws a potential buyer's attention and that's quite an important feature.

I have so far not paid much attention to cover design but I have been very pleased with the covers by Wolff Morrow that Gambit Publication has provided for my books. That attitude will quite soon have to change as the books I plan to publish will need covers. The classic and relatively easy solution is a picture of the subject position on a good-looking wooden chess set. Unfortunately that will not draw a lot of attention, so I will need to add a twist. I will keep my eyes open.

On the Horizon

There are at least two new King's Gambit books on the horizon before my own book hopefully will be available some time in late spring 2012.

First in the row is John Shaw for Quality Chess with simply 'The King's Gambit':

The book is scheduled for October 2011. However, it has now been delayed so many times (and even changed author) that I take the announced publishing date with a grain of salt.

I have more confidence in the content. Quality Chess have sometimes delivered products with surprising gaps in the material but their analysis has always been excellent.

Next out is Timothy Taylor for Everyman Chess with 'Attacking Chess: The King's Gambit'. Judging from the Everyman site it hasn't yet got a cover design. The book is scheduled for January 2012 (in EU) and as far as I know Taylor has generally kept his deadlines. His analysis tend to be lighter and somewhat less trustworthy QC's but often thought provoking. I look forward to seeing his effort.

How will the existence of these two influence the sales potential for a third book? I must admit that I don't know. One point in my favour is the fact that I probably will be able to list these competing books in my bibliography. Reviews and publishing order will certainly influence the sales numbers. My gut feeling is that those who already love the King's Gambit will open their pockets and buy all new material but maybe the financial uncertainity even will influence this part of the economy?
Another factor is the position and reputation of the chess publishing companies. How easy will it be to convince London Chess Center, Niggemann, New in Chess or Chess4Less to promote a book from a new publishing company. I am eager to find out!

A Brief Return to Chess Blogging

My apologies for letting this blog sleep for so long with no explanation. I will return for some months now and some time in the spring 2012 I hope to move to a more appropriate forum for my future chess writing.

Quite likely a lot of my next postings will be about the King's Gambit (D).

I am working on a manuscript on this fascinating opening now. I feel I have a lot of good content but I am struggling with the organization of the material. And of course there is always the danger that essential variations are refuted during analysis.

For now I don't have any co-author but I hope that will change in the coming month.

PS: I am using a new set of tools to produce diagrams. I expect there will be some test and trials for the next few days.

The Queen's Pawn Family 2 - Krause Variation

If you want to make your Queen's Pawn Opening an all round weapon, you may have to face the line 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c5!? (D).

Now Lakdawala recommends 3.c3 in order to reach the London safely, and that may also be the best attempt for those hoping for something related to the Torre. For Colle players, 3.e3 is the obvious choice. Unfortunately it's less clear that this will give White an edge than the Nimzo move-order 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.e3 - after all Black hasn't blocked his light-squared bishop.

However, none of these moves appears particularly threathening to Black's opening. It could be argued that Black is too optimistic trying to take on White's role in the early phase of the game. If that's the case, White now should play energetically in order to punish Black's arrogance. White's critical moves in the diagram position probably are:

  A: 3.dxc5
  B: 3.c4
  C: 3.g3
Let's look a little deeper:

A:
(1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c5)
3.dxc5
White is playing a reversed Queen's Gambit Accepted. I will not go into much detail here, as this move was the repertoire choice in "A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire". I will only point out one omission and one important alternative for White:
3...e6
3...Nc6?! probably is dubious and wasn't mentioned in the Killer Repertoire. One interesting attempt at refutation is 4.a3 a5 5.Nc3 and now:
a) 5...e6 6.Na4!? seems sufficient to keep the c-pawn.
b) 5...Nf6 6.Bf4 e5 7.Nxe5 Bxc5 8.Nd3 also gave White a safe extra pawn in Bogdanovich-Hubel, Crailsheim 1998.
c) 5...d4 probably is too optimistic: 6.Nb5 e5 7.e3 Bg4 8.Be2 (even stronger may be 8.exd4 exd4 9.Qe2+ Be7 10.Nd6+ Kf8 11.Bf4) 8...Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Bxc5 10.exd4 Bxd4 11.Nxd4 exd4 12.0–0 with an obvious advantage for White in Matlak-Orsag, Karvina 1992.
4.e4!?
This is an important alternative to 4.c4 which was recommended in the Killer Repertoire.
4...Bxc5
It seems White can keep an advantage after 4...Nf6 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.Bd3:
a) 6...Bxc5 7.Nc3 Qd8 8.0–0 Nbd7 9.Bf4 a6 10.Ne4 Nxe4 11.Bxe4 Nf6 12.Qxd8+ Kxd8 13.Rad1+ += Kharlov-Cifuentes Parada, Leeuwarden 1994.
b) 6...Qxc5 7.Nc3 Nbd7 8.0–0 Be7 9.Be3 Qa5 10.a3 a6 11.Qe2 0–0 12.Rfd1 Qc7 13.Bg5 b6 14.Ne4 Bb7 15.Nxf6+ Bxf6 16.Bxh7+ Kxh7 17.Qd3+ Kg8 18.Qxd7 Qxd7 19.Rxd7 Bxb2 20.Rb1 Bxf3 21.Rxb2 Be4 22.Rxb6 Bxc2 23.Rbb7 +=  Ki.Georgiev-Seirawan, Brussels 1992.
5.exd5 exd5 (D)

In this fairly typical IQP position it seems chances are roughly even. That doesn't mean it cannot be a good practical choice for a good technician. If White makes it to the endgame, he probably will have something to play for.
5...Qb6 probably is too optimistic: 6.Qe2 Nf6 7.Qb5+ Kf8 8.Qxb6 axb6 9.dxe6 Bxe6 10.Nc3 Nc6 11.Bd3 Nb4 12.0–0 += Ruck-Balog, Hungary 2008.
6.Bb5+ Nc6 7.0–0 Nge7 8.Nbd2 0–0 9.Nb3 Bd6
Also 9...Bb6 seems fine: 10.c3 Bg4 11.Be2 Qd6 12.Nfd4 Bxe2 13.Nxe2 Rad8 14.Bf4 Qf6 15.Qd2 h6 16.Be3 Bxe3 17.Qxe3 Nf5 18.Qd2 d4 = A.Sokolovs-Howell, Germany 1996.
10.c3 Bg4 11.Be2 Re8 12.Nfd4 Bxe2 13.Nxe2 Qc7 14.Ng3 Rad8 15.Re1 Qd7 16.Be3
Chances were equal in P.Nikolic-Leko, Horgen 1994.


B:
(1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c5)

3.c4
With this move White offers Black to play the Tarrasch Defence.

3... cxd4
Instead the Tarrasch would arise after 3...e6. This old defence has, as far as I know, a sound theoretical standing, but many of the resulting positions are hard to defend against skilled opposition. More independent alternatives are:

a) 3...Nf6 4.cxd5 cxd4 5.Qxd4 Qxd5 6.Nc3 must be a shade better for White. A recent example is  Kovalyov-Gomez, Dresden 2008 where Black was close to equality after 6...Qa5 7.Ne5 Nc6 8.Nxc6 bxc6 9.g3 Bb7 10.Qa4 Qxa4 11.Nxa4 c5 12.f3 e6 13.e4.

b) After 3...dxc4 4.d5!? may be critical (4.e3 e6 leads to a quiet line of the Queen's Gambit Accepted). Two recent examples are: 

b1) 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.e4 exd5 7.exd5 Bd6 8.Bxc4 0–0 9.0–0 Bg4 10.h3 Bh5 11.Bg5 h6 12.Bh4 Nbd7 = Akopian-Shirov, Ohrid 2009.

b2) 4...e6 5.Nc3 exd5 6.Qxd5 Qxd5 7.Nxd5 Bd6 8.Nd2 Ne7 9.Nxc4 Nxd5 10.Nxd6+ Ke7 11.Nxc8+ Rxc8 12.g3 Nb4 13.Bh3 Rd8 14.0–0 N8c6 15.Be3 Leitao-Matsuura, Santos 2007.

4.cxd5 Nf6

Black should avoid 4...Qxd5 5.Nc3, e.g. 5...Qd8 6.Qxd4 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 a6 8.Nd5 Kd8 9.Nb6 Ra7 10.Bf4 Nd7 and now Rybka points out that 11.Ne6+! fxe6 12.Be3 would have been the most efficient, even if White has several ways to a big advantage.

5.Qxd4 Qxd5 6.Nc3 Qxd4 7.Nxd4 a6 (D)

This is typical for what White can expect in this line. The pawn structure is symmetrical but White is somewhat better developed. It seems likely that Black can equalize with some care but White can create some difficulties. One sample continuation is:

 8.g3 Bd7 9.Bg2 e5 10.Nb3 Bc6 = Landa-Ovetchkin, Krasnoyarsk 2007.

C:
(1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 c5)

3.g3
This quiet move attempts to play a reversed Gruenfeldt Indian. The only problem is that there is no black knight to exchange on c6, so if White hopes for a genuine Gruenfeldt a tempo up, he has to bide his time.

3...cxd4

3...Nc6 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.0–0 e6 6.a3 b5 7.Bg5 Bb7 8.Nc3 h6 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.dxc5 Bxc5 11.Nxb5 Qb6 12.Nc3 +/- Young-Akobian, Chicago 2009.

4.Bg2

4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb3

4...Nf6 5.0–0 (D)

In a sense this is a critical position. Should Black play the obvious developing move 5...Nc6, allowing White to have his desired Reversed Gruenfeldt?

5...Nc6

This is Black's most popular move but there are alternatives:
a) I don't know why 5...Nbd7!? is untested. Black threatens ...e5, so 6.Nxd4 e5 is natural. Then one possible line is 7.Nb3 Nb6 8.Nc3 Be6 9.f4 with complicated play.

b) 5...h6 is a bit strange but on second thought it seems useful to avoid the potential Bg5 pin. After 6.b3 g6 7.Bb2 Bg7 8.Nxd4 0–0 9.c4 dxc4 10.bxc4 Qb6 11.Qb3 Na6 12.Nd2 Nd7 13.N2f3 Ndc5 gave equal chances in P.Nikolic-P.H.Nielsen, Wijk aan Zee 2005.
c) 5...g6 is natural. Then 6.Nxd4 Bg7 7.c4 0–0 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.Nb3 e6 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Qc7 12.Rb1 with unclear play in Graf-Shomoev, Warsaw 2005 is one sample line.

6.Nxd4 e6 
That's the problem when White tries to play a sharp line with colours reversed. You will usually find that Black opts for a non-critical line which nevertheless gives good chances of equality. White has scored massively after 6... e5 7.Nxc6 bxc6 8. c4, but partly that may be because the white players have very clearly outrated their opponents. One recent and typical example is 8...Be7 9.Nc3 Be6 10.Bg5 e4 11.Qa4 O-O 12.Rad1 Qb6 13.Bxf6 Bxf6 14.cxd5 cxd5 15.Nxd5 Bxd5 16.Rxd5 Qxb2 17.e3 with a very clear advantage to White in Burmakin-Lochte, Bad Wiessee 2008.

7.c4 Bc5 8.Nb3 Be7 9.cxd5 Nxd5 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.Qxd8+ Bxd8 12.bxc3 Bf6 13.Rb1 Bxc3 14.Ba3 += Romanishin-Salmensuu, Linares 1999.