Any chance to know more about this project, i.e publication date ? Even approximate ... 

@an ordinary chessplayer: Thank you for your feedback! You are right, I should have kept the references to my sources.

But as 99% of my analysis is for my own private use, I normally only note my sources in the file and don't enter all the detailed references, as this takes a lot of time and is unnecessary if I don't intend to publish the analysis.

There are only 2 points where a Corbin game was used, and at both points White played in a suboptimal way rather early.
In Kaissiber 22 Rogers gives the remark that White should just give back the pawn on e5 after Qe7 or 0-0, as the control over the dark squares would give him a clearly better game. The machine agrees...

Unfortunately the other Kaissiber articles I possess don't deal with 6.c4, but other variations.

I noticed however by going over Corbin's games that he seemed to experience consistent problems after 6.c4, and that most of his higher rated opponents would play this move.

So "based on" was perhaps a rather strong expression, more appropriate would seem "inspired by".



I get your point about refuting the Elephant, but if it doesn't matter that/if it is already refuted (in several ways, as you state), I am even more curious what the book will look like, as I can't remember a QC book which promoted a refuted opening.

Perhaps this will be a primer?!
Nevertheless the romantic in me is still hoping for an improvement for Black, to make this actually playable on a decent level. 

@an ordinary chessplayer: how can you be so sure if you haven't taken a look?

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of sympathy for the Black cause, but I couldn't find a line after 6.c4 that looks playable to me.
Perhaps somebody else can?

I remember some threads here which accompanied the process of writing a book (the Tarrasch book of Ntirlis/Aagaard comes to mind), which is a great thing because the exchange of ideas can really advance theory, especially in such a seldom played opening as the Elephant...

Uh-oh.

Did I kill the thread with my analysis?
Or even the Elephant? 

Here is part of the analysis I did some months ago, inspired by Corbin's games which he made available on his site and some old Kaissiber articles.
I came to the conclusion that White is clearly better after 6.c4, and also better after 6.Bb5+ when he doesn't take on c6 but drops the bishop back to e2.

Even the 3.Ne5: lines I found annoying to play, as they often lead to endgames with symmetrical pawns, but the bishop pair for White, which is not exactly inspiring for Black.



@Dragonslayer: I am curious at what point your improvements lie.
The project sounds very interesting, as you have the best publisher in the market, most of their books are simply excellent! I guess I will get the book just out of interest, even if I am not convinced by the opening.

Sounds like an interesting project indeed.

I always thought that 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Bd6 4.Nc3 is a safe edge for White. If nothing else White can continue in Glek-System style with d3, g3, Bg2, 0-0. But I have to admit I have never looked at it seriously.

So, Jacob, John, et al must think this is a pretty reasonable opening by Black, given the books that QC typically publishes (and the occasional remark about perceived lesser efforts/defenses from other publishers). Can you tell us the title (Playing the Elephant Gambit, perhaps)?

TopNotch wrote on 04/06/18 at 16:59:09:


Thx for the pointers! Berliner offers another counter: 1.d4