cathexis wrote on 03/10/22 at 21:16:16:


I think he priced them at around $90 when they were first published. Print run of 200 copies that he said were down to 60 by March 2017 and his last 5 by 18 May 2017.

Got my copy of Shaw's book and noticed Chesspublishing.com got a little love on the bibliography page!

cathexis wrote on 03/01/22 at 22:18:01:


Tim's books were always decent. He just took exception to the editing of that one is all.

As for other stuff, you can find quite a lot of info in various 1 e4 e5 repertoire books for Black:

3...Nf6 – Emms

3...c6 – Lokander

3...Qh4+ 4 Kf1 d6 – Bologan & Ntirlis

3...f5 – me

and 3...Nc6 is (as MNb says) in Shaw's big KG book, though 4 d4 Nf6 5 Nc3 Bb4 6 Ne2 f3 7 gxf3 d5 is considered to be pretty much equal now – and played out to four draws in TCEC (Top Chess Engine Championship) games 2019-20.

Thanks Mr. Tait!

But I also read some of that thread. Today, in 2022, would you say it is a great book on the KG in general and the bishop's gambit in particular?

And since 2015?

I must first admit that I have not even come close to reading the 260+ posts that make up the body of this thread. What I am asking however is if other books focusing on the Bishop's Gambit (3.Bc4) have come out in the 15 years since this was first published? I don't mind buying older books, but despite the fact it was written by a forum member it has received some pretty harsh criticism on Amazon on the layout, etc. of the book itself. That and the age make me hesitate to get it even though I'm curious to learn more on the KG, bishop's gambit ideas. Any thoughts?

TIA,
Cathexis

Tada! It's now over 100K!

In 'The fascinating King's gambit' T. Johansson wrote: 'unfortunately modern computers soon came up with some strong improvements for black, in the theoretical main line, i.e. the Kieseritzky Gambit. These new ideas are almost certainly the reason why the King's Gambit has almost vanished from grandmaster practise the last few years'

I haven't found much information about these improvements, could someone please give a hint about where I should search?

Thanks.

Wow, thanks a lot. Setting up a tournament with different programmes goes beyond my capability, but just tossing a bit with the pieces a bit further down the line with different programmes kibitzing - and looking at the game excamples from Taljechin -  have made me realize that 4...b5 may actually not be that good.

I then looked at 4...Ne7, which is interesting, but I failed to find anything good after 5.Qh5! d5 (5...Ng6 6.d4!) 6.exd5 cxd5 7.Nxd5 Nxd5 8.Bxd5 Qe7+ 9.Ne2 with good play for White.

Thus, so far my conclusion is that 3...c6 probably doesn't yield Black better chances than 3...Nf6. It is still interesting though that it scores better and seems to have a higher average rating amongst it's followers, at least in my database. I may have to buy Johanssons book to get deeper into it.

Anyway, since the release of Shaws book, my personal preference has clearly been 3...Nc6, which has also paid of in terms of many good practical results. That move has been discussed at some length in the thread on Shaws book elsewhere on the forum (and where I'm still hoping for some feedback to a replay (139) I made 25 november 2014...).

Thanks again both to Tony and Taljechin!

Here's some food for thought from what examples I found in the database. To me 4...b5 looks like an unnecessary weakening but today's engines may well overvalue the benefits of forcing play as they get deeper quicker into lines with forced moves (especially goes for Stockfish in the opening phase).

If you want to investigate it more thoroughly I'd suggest you let the engines play a theme tournament on the position after 4...b5 with a long time control and 2 games w+b between every engine. I would expect Houdini (and probably also Rybka) to score quite well as White (and probably also as Black depending on opposition). Other engines to invite would be for example: Komodo, Critter, Fire/Mars/Robbolito, Strelka plus perhaps a few different Sfish-clones tweaked differently (there are plenty of them nowadays).

After a few games you'll notice which engines get the position best as white or black and can pit them against each other. and you'll notice recurring themes as well and you can move the starting position further in as the main line tends to develop.

micawber wrote on 03/19/06 at 17:59:19:


There's an internet archive site called
The Wayback Machine.
You might be able to find the Thomas Stock site on gambits through this Wayback Machine link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020603234324/http://thomasstock.com/gambit/

Thanks Jon for sincere answers. I can hardly wait for your book, and by the way I expect three books on KG: one is yours, second is from Quality Chess Books, Sweden, and the third comes from Beyer Verlag, Germany. Johansson's FKG has 224 pages, I'm wondering how will you cover all variations of KG in single volume with small pages...

I don't understand why your future book Mr. Tait on KG must or will have 192 pages as all new opening releases from Everyman Chess. The KG bible is expected, and I don't see a reason why nobody writes a new modern book, complete and comprehensive on KG. Today we see only intros and "Novice books", books with false titles like "Bashing the...", "Winning with...", "Beating the...". Only money counts, so there are really few experts who are ready to deal with writing a top notch opening book. I feel resurrection every time when top GM outplays oponnents in openings which are disregarded. The truth really has many faces...

I do not see a reason why one should abndon KG, a specially a Bishop's KG! Here I see names from the so called "high level chess", such like Tait or Kosten by the way, and I, an amateur, think that in over the board games allways wins the better prepared player... When we speak about a computer chess there are more subtle and almost different conclusions, and because of that we do not have KG games in computer vs computer matches. I do support Mr. Johansson who wrote a KG books and I do have both, and with pleasure I do expect his future releases in this opening. And Mr. Tait, I have seen that your book about KG will apear in Everyman Chess next year. I can hardly wait to see how will you diclose KG and what will be your verdict... I must admitt that I'm a tactical player and I have all Renko's CD's on tactics. With KG I can beat even stronger players cuase theory is very important. As a future Master of Scinece I do feel delight when I must cruse in the ocean in variations which has Mr. Johansson privided for us KG followers. I sincerely hope that in those murky waters of KG lies the truth: and once even Pilatus asked the Iesus Christ: "Quid est veritas?", or in plain English: "What is the truth?". Thanks Mr. Johansson and Mr. Tait, I do love chess thanks to the KG, please keep develop it!!!

TalJechin wrote on 05/25/05 at 02:54:10:


Mark has just assured me that it was, in fact, a backgammon debt!

Looking at the list of contents of the July issue of Chess (UK) one notes "Farewell to the Kings Gambit: so let it RIP".

Who's the author and what's the reason for  this gloomy title?

TalJechin wrote on 07/12/06 at 09:43:20:


through hundreds of wasted hours looking for one

I have this book

but I prefer your earlier one Thomas.

Mainly because such in depth analysis, although admirable, is a bit irrelevant in the King's Gambit I think. There is no advantage to be found for White in the King's Gambit, so looking for one is ultimately a depressing endeavour. It's much more pertinent just to find little ideas, things to try out in actual games and have fun. Analysing them in depth rather defeats the point I think.

Thomas Stock had an interesting site on gambits a few years back. But it has disappeared into an electronic Walhalla without leaving a trace. This site contained interesting information on the Kings Gambit , especially the Muzio.... He tried both to trace the history of this variation, provide new analysis and organised email-thema-tournaments. Most of the games of these tournaments have been saved by Tim Harding on his Mega-Correspondence-CD.

Dear all,

It seems to me from the lines given above and even from the absence of lines given by TJ (Qe2? but where?), that he made the right choice when writing about the Bishop Gambit.

                                                                         Regards,
                                                                               Hubert

MNb wrote on 03/17/06 at 01:35:36:


I fully agree with TJ & MNb's sentiments. Its precisely because of this that is really tempting me to get both the Creative Aggressor & the FKG......to either learn alternative lines against the Fischer defense or to avoid it altogether by learning to play 3.Bc4 instead. TJ's recommendation of 5.b3 is my preference to 5.d3 as the latter looks  somewhat tame (psychological block p'haps, since ive always hated playing d3 moves as white in other openings. ive always believed in the e4-d4 pawn ctr)

I wonder if TJ has any other new ideas against the Fischer defense since the creative aggressor.....I would be interested to know them. MNb's 4.Nc3 looks interesting too.

In his 1998 book the KG for the Creative Aggressor TJ recommended 3.Nf3 d6 4.Bc4 h6 and now either 5.b3 or 5.d3.
"By the way, 5.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.Ng1 is the most popular variation, but I don't think I can recommend it. Partly because I have a horrendous score in it myself and partly because I've come to feel that it's against the spirit of the King's Gambit."
I fully agree with the second part of this statement and have always found 4.Nc3 interesting: g5 5.d4 or if a draw is not really a problem 5.h4.

I could be wrong here, but doesn't the Fischer Gambit arise after 3.Nf3 d6 4.d4 g5? Since TalJechin's book is based on a repertoire which is centered on the Bishop's Gambit (3.Bc4), I doubt that there are any transpositions to this line. I'm sure he will kindly give you his opinion anyway, however. 

On an off-topic note, as Tim Taylor quite nicely shows in his Bird book, From's Gambit is under quite a bit of a cloud in most variations. It's quite amusing however, that I've played 1.f4 twice, knowing that my opponent plays 1...e5 so I could meet it with 2.f4.

Best wishes,
Craig

Well, thanks for the confidence in me, but I've already had one KG group 6-7 years ago and we didn't reach many conclusions and dissolved after 1-2 years.

This forum works very well for all openings I think so why start a group on just one opening? Besides, there's already at least one google (or was it yahoo?) group dedicated to the KG on the net...

I suggest that some of the leading authors (like Johanssons etc.) writes a book about King's Gambit which would not be a theory compedium, but on the contrary a sort of book which would include the following themes:

a) history of King's Gambit
b) great followers of the King's Gambit
c) evolution of lines and a body of theory
d) explanation of strategy and ideas through centurys
e) anecdotes, names of variations etc.
f) list of all worthy manuals and software about the King's Gambit

Such book would be a good crossroad for all future player and a treasure for all of us who already play this opening.

Hey people! I was wondering if we can build or form a sort of King's Gambit Society which would bond all players around the world. The society can then inform people about new books, software etc., perform thematic tournaments on the net (i.e. on playchess.com), build a register of members etc. I don't know if this project could pass, but one never knows...

Quote:


Well, I still hope to get it finished in a couple of months but alas tempus fugit - the main problem is that I tend to get caught up in some interesting position and spend way too much time on it than it might deserve compared to the whole picture...

The main chunks are the following parts:
5.Qe2
5.g4
3...Nf6
3...c5
2...c5/2...b6
misc 2nds

At the moment I'm halfway through 5.g4 (which may not be as bad its reputation, though one needs to growel for 2-3 moves in the main defence...)

I expect the remaining parts to go quicker than the first two as they're less intense in play - so late May early June may not be too optimistic a time frame... 

Thanks for asking btw, always nice to hear that there might be a market for the RG book! 

I'll try too keep the books info page more updated within a few days, so keep checkin this page 

http://hem.passagen.se/tjmisha/reti_gambit.html

Quote:


It seems fritz's trainer is a Fischer fan, the game follows Bobby's analysis from 1964 up to 21.Qc4+ - a strange choice for a black repertoire...

Hey masters of attack! I've played one blitz game against Fritz 9 using his openings book, playing tournament moves, and just look how bad the variation is given by opening book moderator:

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 c6 5.Bb3 d5 6.exd5 cxd5 7.d4 Bd6 8.Nge2 0-0 9.Bxf4 Bxf4 10.Nxf4 Re8+ 11.Nfe2 Ng4 12.Nxd5 Be6 13.h3 Bxd5 14.hxg4 Bxg2 15.Rh2 Bf3 16.Qd3 Rxe2+ 17.Rxe2 Bxe2 18.Qxe2 Nc6 19.0-0-0 Nxd4 last book move 20.Bxf7+ Kxf7 21.Qc4+ Kf8 22.Rxd4 Qb6 23.Rf4+ Ke7 24.Rf7+ Ke8 25.Rf1 Qe3+ 26.Kb1 Qe7 27.Qg8+ Kd7 28.Rd1+ Kc7 29.Qxa8 a6 30.Qg8 g5 31.Qc4+ Kb6 32.a3 1-0

My book comes for Easter. Can hardly wait for leraning great unexplored stuff.
Best wishes!

To get the thread back on track and also to inform any german KGeers here, it seems the FKG has now a german reseller!

Instead of just quoting the back cover like everyone else, they quote my entire Introduction, which is OK by me - but they could've asked first...

https://www.schachversand.de/scripts/querydeutsch.idq?CiBookMark=N-1e4e9f0-ebcb-...

Perhaps it has already been mentioned but just in case I'll note that one book has already been published on 1.e4 e6 2.b3.  I sold it years ago (now wish I hadn't) and can't remember the title or the author.  About the only idea I can remember from the book was the gambit 1.e4 e6 2.b3 d5 3.Bb2 c5 4.Nf3!? dxe4 5.Ne5.  Anyone aware of this book?

You might have something there, and I've considered something similar but it tends to be too long a title... 

MNb wrote on 02/24/06 at 01:13:34:


Nah, sounds too long!  Btw, Rudolf had only 2/3 (Müller, Grau & Foltys) while Reti himself had 2½/3 (and should have won the stem game against Maroczy too) so surely Reti was the first to have success with it! -Especially since winning the tournament in Göteborg 1920 (where the stem game was played) was something of a breakthrough into the chess summit for him. Unfortunately, 'the Gothenburg variation' is already taken at least once...

Btw, I've just noticed a large order of FKGs to a shop in Heiden Germany, so in a couple of weeks I suppose germans hesitant about online ordering may be able to buy it over the counter! 

alumbrado wrote on 02/23/06 at 16:00:36:


Well, according to the net and Oxford Companion it's known as the Reti Gambit, while Schiller called it Papa-Ticulat, which sounds horrible to me! But there will of course be an undertitle mentioning 1.e4 e6 2.b3 and a cover picture - so it should be hard to confuse it with the Reti Opening, I hope! 

But I'm open to suggestion, if someone has a better title. Though, I guess I'll throw in an adjective (or maybe a noun this time?!) in the title just to annoy the reviewers!

Quote:



Well, the site's been there for at least 6 years and the fact is that so far, you're the only one who's complained and twice too.
True, pop ups have increased there the last couple of years but nowadays there's built in anti-pop-up programs in most browsers - or add ons available for download. And backgrounds etc can be eliminated in your own browser's option tabs, or you could just choose not to watch the site...

Personally, I can't imagine there's any chessplayer in the universe who judge an opening depending on the look of a web page!

Anyway, I think you should be aware that using capital letters in textmessages is very bad netiquette and considered yelling - usually a good way of either irritating people or making them ignore you!





http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/prose/aesop63.htm

I've started a thread & poll called Reviewing The Reviewers in the general chess section! 

I think CH book-reviews are rather good. He was one of the few reviewers that spotted that Lalic's book on the Marshall-Gambit (spanish) was not very good (a book we could have done without!).
At least he takes the time to substantiate his critical opinions. That his reviews of serial publications like the informator and new in chess are predicatable doesn't mean he does his job.
His criteria to judge opening-books are quite clear and employed consistently.

Watson's book reviews were rather good as well! He also wrote personal and rather honest opinions.

I don't think that the FM Carsten Hansen is the best reviewer or that he is an standard for the book quality, but I am sure that his writing is open, attacking, rewarding, and I guess honest also. I do not like read reviews in which the reviewer constantly praises the book and with this attitude he intentiously misleads the pontenial buyer. We all know that every book has the good and the bad side, and by pointing with finger on this nuances one gets much objective picture. Some reviewers are paid for writting good critics, they receive gratitude and free copies etc., etc... Don't be fooled by some verdict. Only when the large number of reviewers and specialists, buyers aslo, states that some work deserves praise, then we peacefully say that this or that book is good. How can somebody review the book if he never plays the King's Gambit at all. I get impression that most of them look the cover, index of variations etc., and then they simply try some lines with computer. The truth is somwhere out there, and WE ARE THOSE WHO WILL HAVE LAST WORTH ON IT. I can hardly wait for my copy, and then I will surely contact Mr. Johansson and share my thoughts with him, and also with the people who read this.

Quote:


I don't see any reason why CA should be any better a reviewer than others. Usually, he's rather predictable - like "*****" for any Informator. Most reviewers functions as notice boards, 'look this is available' but less as consumer informants.

The sternest test for any chess book, is actually this forum! As contributers here
1) actually read the books they buy
2) usually play and already know alot about the opening they've just read about.

Thanks Trolletje, you spotted it before I did! 

It seems that Watson has really been burning the midnight oil for the last year to offer optimal enlightenment to prospective buyers...   

SorenJensen wrote on 02/10/06 at 08:43:47:


Hej Sören,

so far I don't remember seeing any important games with the SilverSurfer, but C33 seems to be rising in TWiC lately so maybe it takes a year to go through the book?! 

Quote:



Well, the main reason is probably 'lack of promotion', considering the current wave of new chessbooks every month... Still publicationwise, je ne regrette rien! 

Hello!

Somewhat surprised about an earlier comment, I thought the book was doing well regarding sales... Pity, possibly, it was not edited by Gambit, that would have helped a lot and make it slightly cheaper.

Gambit's books are normally excellent, but they have also tried some crappy manuscripts. Well, I guess guessing if a book will sale well is an ardous task!

I guess it all depends how many copies you thought was worth your effort...

One question: Is there anything wrong with 2...Qh4 against the King's Gambit? I've looked at it as Black and can't see anything obviously bad. Good luck with the book! 

Well, perhaps some clarity. In the present thread discussions on old an new topics are woven together.
It becomes increasingly difficult to find the way as the number of contributions increases.
In new threads you could start to summarize in the first post what we've learned in the discussion so far on a single topic; and start the new discussion from there.

Greetings, Micawber.

Taljechin,

No offense meant. But isn't it time we started a new KG thread after 180+ contributions
and more than 7000 views.
Perhaps call it  The Fascinating KG - the bloodchilling sequel 

Hi,

I ordered the book and I shall get it in one or three weeks.

Good luck for your book!

HI,

How is it possible to get a copy of your book? Do you sell it in french library?

I would be interested.

Thanks

Hi,

It is true that I like the position after 5e5 in the Morphy line. On the other hand I studied (not too long I must say) the position after 5Nf3 ( "A la Fischer" you said) and may be I am wrong but I don't understand the problem for Black. If 5...O-O 6 O-O Nxe4 looks slightly better for Black and 6e5 d5 7Bb3 d4!? (my idea) looks excellent for Black.

The old line with 5 Nge2 was met very well by 6...d5 7exd5 f3!? 8gxf3 0-0 with a  good position for Black, the game game Alekhine-Levitsky can easily be improved. After 9 d4 Nxd5 is better for Black.

The line proposed by Nigel Davies is though nut to crack.

I will speak soon about the king gambit!! Don't worry!

Olivier