I was not happy when I one week ago noticed that the publishing date for 'Win with the Stonewall Dutch' was delayed with another month to April. But I was not surprised either as I was starting to realize that with a normal production time after the final proofs were done, March was just barely possible.
I was more surprised today when I saw that publishing date now is May. I have absolutely no information about the causes for this delay. However, Gambit Publishing is a relatively small company and I assume that minor problems, like a bankrupt print shop (there must be some in these times of financial problems), an employee on sick leave or even a data crash will have more noticeable effects than they would for a bigger company.
I only hope that the editors will be less restrictive about including last minute updates than they usually are.
In the meantime I am busy with another book project for Gambit. I don't know why it's not listed in their list of upcoming books but it may be because it's an update of another author's work and that they now are pondering whether I have been too keen adding material and comments to the original. I hope I will soon feel free to disclose the title.
10 comments:
I am eagerly awaiting the release of your Stonewall book! :)
Hmm, booked-up opponents tend to know the mainlines, and thus go for 1.d4 2.c4 and 3.g3 etc, but I have noticed many players going 3.Nc3 instead. Does your book cover this? Can/should Black still opt for the Stonewall structure?
Yes, we cover the move-order 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3. But after 3...e6 4.Nf3 we don't recommend 4...d5 as we think 4...Bb4 is a much better move after which Black is very close to interesting equality. We had some discussions about how much information to include on 4...d5 as it certainly is playable (and has been played by some strong players). That discussion may not be closed yet as sometimes the publishers have opinions on such matters, but I expect there will be only a brief mention of 4...d5.
The subject of exchanging dark-squared bishops in the Stonewall isn't quite as clear-cut as you might think and there are some very interesting thoughts on the subject by Glek in an article in Secrets of Opening Surprises No. 9. Glek also offers some very useful input regarding the move-order 2.g3 versus 2.c4 followed by 3.g3.
Thanks for your informative response.
I guess 4...Bb4 will take the game more into Classical Dutch channels, especially after ...0-0 and ...d6. I think the position was dealt with briefly in Simon Williams' book.
I am curious on your solution to: 1 d4 f5 2 Bg5. What approach is considered in tune with the Stonewall?
Thank you in advance for considering my question. Good Chess! Keith
Anonymous,
Yes, Williams' book was a useful source for some of the non-Stonewall lines. If I recall correctly he had some good material on the early ...Bb4(+) lines.
A major difference between the normal Classical Dutch and the one arising from 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3 Bb4 is that Black more easily can develop his queenside with ...b6 and ...Bb7.
Hello Keith,
I am afraid our solution isn't very much in tune with the Stonewall but we hope it's the best one. We suggest 2...g6, mainly offering the current mainlines (but with an improvement for Black compared to Kindermann's Leningrad book).
We also added an interesting low-theory idea for the readers to work out for themselves. I will not reveal it here and now. In the future I may offer a more detailed examination either on this blog or in another book on the Dutch.
If you want to know more please e-mail me at tafl64@gmail.com. If you find it interesting we may exchange some analysis.
Can we hope that your next book is titled "Win with the Scandinavian"? I notice that you recommend the Scandinavian, because it is one of the smallest repertoires against 1.e4. In addition you recommended London as white and Dutch as a response to 1.d4. So your third opening book should be on the Scandinavian :-)
There are not many good books on the Scandinavian. The best one "Modernes Skandinavisch, band 2" is great, but it is not translated into English.
Anonymous,
There's a definite possibility that one of my next books will be 'Win with the Scandinavian'. That is, if I can find a suitable co-author and if Gambit likes the idea.
If so, there is still one major question: Should the book be on the traditional 3...Qa5 line or the hotter 3...Qd6? The 3...Qa5 line fits better as a companion line to the London and the Stonewall (solid and usually with pawns on c6 and e6) but I must say that for the moment I find the 3...Qd6 lines more interesting. A third option could be to cover both lines but I doubt there is room for that in one book.
The Qd6 Scandi is having a sort of crisis over the g3 line that has become white's most popular choice. I myself used it to defeat the #1 ranked CC player on a web site a couple years back. Since then whenever I play the black side in blitz online, about half the time white players will opt for the kingside fianchetto.
Here's my win in that CC game, though admittedly my endgame was sloppy and missed quicker finishes:
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd6 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 a6
6. g3 Bg4 7. Bg2 Nc6 8. O-O O-O-O 9. d5 Nb4 10. h3 Bh5
11. Bf4 Qc5 12. Be3 Qd6 13. Qe2 e5 14. dxe6 Qxe6 15. g4 Bg6
16. Nd4 Rxd4 17. Bxd4 Nxc2 18. Qxe6+ fxe6 19. Rad1 Nxd4 20. Rxd4 Bc5
21. Rd2 e5 22. Rc1 Bd4 23. g5 Nh5 24. Nd5 c6 25. Ne7+ Kd7
26. Nxg6 hxg6 27. Rc3 Nf4 28. Rf3 c5 29. Rb3 Nxg2 30. Kxg2 b5
31. Ra3 Ra8 32. f4 e4 33. b4 Kc6 34. bxc5 Kxc5 35. Rc2+ Kd5
36. Rc7 Re8 37. Rc1 Ra8 38. Rb3 Re8 39. h4 e3 40. Kf3 b4
41. Rd3 a5 42. Rcd1 Kc5 43. Ke2 Re4 44. h5 gxh5 45. f5 h4
46. Rc1+ Bc3 47. Rf1 Re7 48. f6 gxf6 49. gxf6 Rf7 50. Rf5+ Kc6
51. Rxa5 h3 52. Rxe3 h2 53. Rh5 Rxf6 54. Rxh2 Rd6 55. Rd3 Re6+
56. Kd1 Re1+ 57. Kc2 Kc5 58. Rg3 Re4 59. Kb3 Bf6 60. Rf3 Be7
61. Rf5+ Kc6 62. Rh6+ Kc7 63. Ra5 Kb7 64. Raa6 Rf4 65. Rae6 Rf7
66. Ka4 Kc8 67. Rea6 Bc5 1-0
Additionally, I worked extensively on the main line theory and posted it on the chesspub forums quite some time ago. I remember we had worked it out to where 7... Nc6 was just about completely refuted, and indeed various chess authors began to shy away from the line.
Anyway. If you decide on Qd6, you're going to have your hands full with the 6. g3 line. Its both sharp and powerful for white with a LOT of new theory.
Hello Wolf,
My apologies for my belated reply. I have been a bit apatic after finally finishing the Stonewall project and a meaningful reply requires a minimum of analysis. This will be a blog entry today or one of the next few days.
Post a Comment