GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/16/18 at 09:57:27:

Smith only mentions 2.c4 and 2.d4 exd4.

@PaulCumbers,
That's true. I have a rather worked-out repertoire of my own design with respect to early move-orders, and I have thought about many of these transpositional matters and made choices for the first few moves. If White has worked on early move-order issues and Black hasn't, Black could get move-ordered. But if Black has done a lot of this and White hasn't done so much, White could himself get move-ordered: avoiding d4, he finds himself in a symmetrical English; avoiding the English and hoping for a Zuckertort, he finds himself in a Semi-Tarrasch; etc., etc.

So, I guess, do some work on what to do against c4, d4 Nf3, and g3 in various combinations. In the end, you will have to either learn a new opening to plug the holes or give up some of your previous preventive measures and play an uncomfortable opening that you already know. I did the former, mostly.

One good method is to make one or two approaches thematic, choose multiple lines that feature the themes, and then fill in the holes. Themes might be, for example, a  ...c5 and ...b6 approach, a ...d5 and ...c5 approach, a ...d5 and ...e6  approach,  a ...d5 and ...c6 approach, or a ...c5 and ...e6 approach, as well as fianchetto solutions. A program like CPT or COW will find all the transpositions instantly and allow you to build an early-move-order practice model.

<Just read the previous post. CC beat me to it.>

ReneDescartes wrote on 12/14/17 at 01:12:11:

I'm trying to say that Black could easily find himself transposing into something he wouldn't normally play. Let's say Black's repertoire is something like:

• 1.c4 e5
• 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nc6 3.d4 Bg4
• 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4
• 1.b3 e5
• 1.Nf3 d5 2.b3 Bg4
• 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 e6 intending The Triangle, avoiding the Marshall Gambit.

Then after 1.Nf3 d5 2.e3 Black might stumble into (for example) some kind of non-1...e5 English line.

Paul Cumbers wrote on 12/14/17 at 00:10:11:


I'm not sure why 3...d4 gets "!?"; it's an old main line of the Reti (by the order 2. c4 d4 3. e3 Nc6) which as far as I know has basically been considered equal since way back.

CanadianClub wrote on 09/22/17 at 21:52:58:

I can tell you from Black's point of view I would not like to see 1.Nf3 d5 2.e3! Is White going to play d4, c4, both, or neither?? I'd be tempted to try 2...Nc6 ("threatening" 3...e5), with the idea 3.c4 d4!?, but 3.Bb5!? or 3.d4 Bg4 might be good for White.

Quote:


As predecessor I would quote the Summerscale's "A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire" (Cadogan, 1999). Unluckily the Carlsen's tendency to play untheoretically is usually followed by some 400 pages dense book written by the boring GM Stockfish.

TD wrote on 10/28/17 at 14:08:27:


Had a quick peruse of the review and his overall feeling is that there is a good book in there but poorly organised. I think he comments on the games being presented in some cases not actually fitting in with the philosphy of playing e3 (i,e some positions actually have e4 being played i think). Secondly, confusion about what lines Smith is actually proposing. I cant remember if he also picks out the issue Bragesjo does. He says that the book is aimed at the more serious player who can adapt to a more flexible opening repertoire than someone less skilled and simply looking for a set of openings to play,