thanks for the anwser.

Hi,

Did the palliser's book covers 1.e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Nf3 ?

Richard's Bg4xf3 idea in the Closed has been played many times on the White side of the English (more commonly against KID setups where White plays d3 instead of d4, but also where Black puts the pawn on f5 in one move).

I am not sure how helpful it is to think of the sicilian as a reverse English or vice versa. The structures are of course similar, but the objectives are fundamentally distinct - in the English white should be looking for an edge, in the Closed Sicilian Black should be looking to equalise. The extra move changes the character of the position (and the risks the position can sustain) quite dramatically.

If you start reasoning by analogy on anything beyond structural considerations you are likely to find yourself in trouble pretty fast.

I thought I might be able to add something to this discussion.

Richard does seem to be producing a lot of books these days, but then again he likes what he is doing and takes pride in the quality of his books, so it is wrong to judge the quality of his books by reference to the quantity he is producing.

Bottom line: this is a guy who could have gone on to become an academic and write tedious history articles that future Oxford undergrads would be forced to read, summarise and reluctantly critique (at Cambridge they would of course be discrediting rather than critiquing). Instead he has directed his academic interests toward chess literature, and I for one think we are considerably better off for it.

The anti-sicilian book is pretty damn good, as is his beating unusual openings effort (these are the only of Palliser's works which I have recently purchased - of his older works Play 1.d4 and Tango are both very good also).

I think that it is also important, when considering chess books, to view each work in the correct context. Some books are written from the heart with a lot of passion (Ward's first book on the Dragon, my own work on the Dragon, Wells' work on the Semi-Slav, Rowson's Grunfeld book are just a few that spring to mind) whereas other books are written to fill a hole in the market and are largely functional. Very few people are going to have several years' experience in particular anti-sicilian lines that they are just bursting to share, if only because it is not worth investing the same amount of preparation time in developing stunning novelties (the pay-off is just too low when there are several good routes to playable positions).

If the book is functional the task then becomes one of identifying which lines are strong/interesting, researching them thoroughly, explaining the concepts underlying such systems, checking for novelties and errors in the analysis, and finally presenting the information in an accessible and engaging fashion. Coming from the academic background that he does Richard is unusually good at this.

Another point, which I think is often overlooked, is that a strong player can produce something along the lines of a "Starting Out in the Najdorf" guide relatively quickly - if they are already familiar with the theory and the ideas, then actually this is a relatively short job (the hardest task is probably working out what you can legitimately leave out of the book so as to keep things simple!). That doesn't in any way diminish the quality of the book, nor does it undermine the larger projects that an author may be working on - it is simply a different product that must be judged on its own merits.

Anyway, that's my bit for this discussion.

Best,
Ed

I'm considering buying this book.  Against the open sicilian, I always play the Dragon.  Would I be able to use the lines in this book without having to worry about White move-ordering me into playing some sort of non-Dragon open sicilian?  Thanks.

Yep....indeed, unfortunately "prolific" is a bad, bad word when used to refer to a chess writer. However, having said that, I have three of Palliser's books and another book partly  written by him.

So far, I must say I am not dissappointed. And he seems to get glowing reviews with all his books. How does he do it? I wonder sometimes.

I think I read somewhere that Palliser is a university student? But i stand to be corrected. Perhaps this is proof that British universities aren't as tough anymore as they pretend to be  




Disclaimer: I am not British, but I am a commonwealth citizen and I did do my postgraduate education at a British university so I am allowed to poke fun  

bulgroz wrote on 09/20/07 at 14:04:45:


2 of them were the new Everyman CDs, containing the chessbase files of books previously published i.e. not written this year.  Beating Unconventional openings (a good book, btw) would have been written last year to be released so early this year.

So, as a full time working in chess publishing the output for 2007 is:

1 starting out guide (SO the Colle)
1 puzzle book
1 repertoire book (Fighting the Anti-Sicilians)

That certainly doesn't feel like a tremendous amount to me for a year's output.

Bear in mind that a strong player and theoreotician like Richard who has played the Sicilian for years will have a lot of analysis on Anti-Sicilian lines already.

For what it's worth, I also think Fighting the Anti-Sicilians is an excellent book - if you liked Richard's previous works that you have, and given the fact that everyone who has read it praises it - if you are interested in the subject material, you should give it a go.