Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Tim Taylor's Bird book (Read 61164 times)
basqueknight
Ex Member


Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #18 - 02/02/06 at 13:51:35
Post Tools
I have picked up this book!

Its a great source of information and i must say its refreshing knowing that you dont have to face a caro-kann! I fear the Caro-more than a sicilian! I know im crazy.

The bird seems like a nice place to start with looking at newer opening ideas. I used to play the Lenigrad bird but didnt know any of the theory! I just played for an early e4 and i got it alot and crushed my opponents! Why did i stop playing it? I dont know!

But now im back to it and am very excited to be a bird player. 1.F4!

How long will i stick with it? Im not sure but hopefully my mind can stay focused for a while!

If there is any doubt in your mind about the book being worth the money i would say yes a long with all the rest of its supporters here. Good luck with the bird


Basqueknight
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #17 - 02/01/06 at 04:01:07
Post Tools
Aren't you contradicting yourself, as you stated that 7.c3 leads to a drawish endgame?
Please note, that I don't claim a White advantage after 1.f4.

What about 7.Qe1 d4 8.e4 dxe3 9.Nc3!? It will be about equal of course, but it also will be a long game yet.
The same is true for Taylor's 7.Nc3 line. After 13.Ne3 White threatens to play 14.f5 - agreed, it is not a scaring threat - while 13...e6 is a bit ugly.
In the 7.c3 your idea 13.e6 indeed looks interesting too.

I stick to my opinion, that White cannot prove an advantage, if Black knows how to conduct his defence, but still can create winning chances.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JN
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 56
Joined: 12/11/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #16 - 01/31/06 at 12:45:50
Post Tools
Quote:
Black's main idea in the Leningrad Dutch is to get a favourable KID position with e7-e5. So with colours reversed: instead of 7.c3 I would prefer 7.Qe1 or 7.Nc3 first!


Both 7.Qe1 and 7.Nc3 should be met by 7.- d4 leading to easy equality after:

7.Qe1 d4 7.e4 (what else?) de3 8.Be3 Ng4 =; 8.Qe3 c4! as in Pelikan-Eliskases, San Nicolas 1957.

7.Nc3 d4 8.Ne4 Qb6 9.Nf6 Bf6 10.e4 de3 11.Ne5 Nc6 12.Nc4 Qc7 13.Ne3 with equality according to Taylor.

Surprisingly enough, 7.c3 is actually more "imbalanced" than the other two tries  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #15 - 01/31/06 at 10:53:34
Post Tools
Well, I am a simple guy and prefer straightforward chess. Black's main idea in the Leningrad Dutch is to get a favourable KID position with e7-e5. So with colours reversed: instead of 7.c3 I would prefer 7.Qe1 or 7.Nc3 first! The first might be the most flexible.
Generally speaking I think the queen should be on e1 (in the Dutch: on e8) before playing e2-(e3)-e4. We do not play positionally risky stuff like 1.f4 and 2...f5, only to exchange queens withing 10 moves, do we? Even though Williams recommends this in a couple of lines in his book on the Classical Dutch.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JN
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 56
Joined: 12/11/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #14 - 01/31/06 at 07:52:33
Post Tools
Quote:
Anything on 7 Qe1 and 8 a4 ?


No.

Quote:
The main issue is then, how to imbalance the position. I feel, without having concrete evidence, that the Leningrad Bird is more suitable for this goal.


Taylor apparently believes that Black can more or less force a drawish ending if White plays the Leningrad Bird. The way to do it is to follow in the footsteps of Schandorff as in the game Danielsen-Schandorff, Reykjavik 2001:

1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 Nf6 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 c5 7.c3 b6!? 8.e4 de4 9.de4 Ba6 10.Re1 Qd1 11.Rd1 Nc6 12.e5 Ng4 etc.

I tend to agree with him although I think that I have found a possible improvement for White (13.e6 looks better than Danielsen's 13.Ng5). Still, the position is not that imbalanced. Moreover, 7.- Nc6 is also a good move. So what should White do? Perhaps not 7.c3... Any suggestions?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #13 - 01/31/06 at 03:17:59
Post Tools
"is the Classical Dutch a counter-striking system that white - having the first move - doesn't need to use"
I think this is the case. After 1.d4 e6 2.c4 f5 etc White striving for a safe game very often results in Black taking over the initiative.
After 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 and 3.e3 etc. Black may confine himself with neutralizing White's initiative.
But as 1.d4 and 1.e4 allow Black to equalize as well imo, this might not really be an objection. The main issue is then, how to imbalance the position. I feel, without having concrete evidence, that the Leningrad Bird is more suitable for this goal. But please feel free to disagree.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #12 - 01/30/06 at 23:30:57
Post Tools
That sounds like a copout.  And besides, that doesn't even follow the line I was curious about.  7 a4 and 7 Qe1 can be transposed, of course, but I'm not crazy about the intermediate 8 Na3.  Anything on 7 Qe1 and 8 a4 ?
  

"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JN
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 56
Joined: 12/11/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #11 - 01/30/06 at 14:39:41
Post Tools
He refers to the game Wheatley-Cobb, Swansea 1999:

1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.d3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 c5 7.a4 Nc6 8.Na3 b6 9. Qe1 etc. and concludes later that "this is definately worth further study".
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #10 - 01/30/06 at 14:06:04
Post Tools
I will need to put in an order for Taylor's book, but in the meantime and following on from MNb's and JN's discussions, I'd be interested to pursue Taylor's contempt for 7 Qe1, which I tend to prefer.  In recent games, I've played 7 Qe1 followed by 8 a4, using the extra tempo to claim space on the queenside and put the Queen on a more flexible square.  I wouldn't pretend to assume that this guarantees a strong advantage, but I'm a little surprised by Taylor's dismissal of it, especially since I've always managed to cling to some kind of an advantage.  Does Taylor provide any analysis to go with 7 Qe1 ?  And does he refer to 8 a4 ?
  

"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JN
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 56
Joined: 12/11/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #9 - 01/30/06 at 08:13:16
Post Tools
MNb wrote:

Quote:
1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.d3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 c5 7.Nc3 e6 should be met by 8.Qe1 first and only then 9.e4.  
That's how Black plays it in the Iljin-Zjenevsky of the Classical Dutch.
Also 7.Qe1 might be more precise than 7.Nc3 first, but I am not sure. In the IZ it is, but in the Bird of course the question is how White's extra tempo works out.
The comments in this thread tempt me to buy Taylor's book.


8.Qe1 or 8.e4 is probably just a matter of taste. If 8.Qe1 a possible line could be Nc6 9. e4 d4 10.Nd1 b5 12.a4 which seems to be ok for both parts. If 8.e4 a possible line could be d4 9. Nb1 Nc6 10.c3 which also seems to be ok for both.

7.Qe1 is not good according to Taylor. He concludes (page 49) "7.Qe1 cannot be recommended, despite the big names with whom it is linked. It is simply too early to commit the queen, and we see Black equalize very smoothly, or even emerge ahead. One should especially note Game 12 (T. Taylor-A.Kretchetov, Los Angeles 2004), where the extra tempo hurts White!"
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Knut S.
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 58
Joined: 01/27/06
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #8 - 01/29/06 at 16:03:22
Post Tools
HgMan - OK, you're probably right, not terribly critical, however MNb did write in a reply to your "Is it a dead Bird?" - thread:

"Though I love the Iljin-Zjenevsky, I think e3 systems in the Bird are to passive for White. As Mednis once put it: White should play as White, Black as Black!"

And that's the sort of issue I want to discuss:
1) is the Classical Dutch a counter-striking system that white - having the first move - doesn't need to use,
2) or are playing a decent opening (dutch) with an extra move + the advantage of playing the same system as white and black more important factors?

On the same topic and more, see Simon Willams' comments on page 47-48 in this thread:
http://www.chesscenter.com/kingpin/Kingpin/37kp07.PDF





  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #7 - 01/29/06 at 15:02:32
Post Tools
Funny: I don't recall MNb being terribly critical of the Bird at all...
  

"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Knut S.
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 58
Joined: 01/27/06
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #6 - 01/29/06 at 08:49:54
Post Tools
"MNb: The comments in this thread tempt me to buy Taylor's book."

That's an interesting develpment. I've seen a lot of very good comments from you on the IZ/Classical Dutch, but as far as I can remember you (and many others) have been quite sceptical of the Bird's.

I don't really see why, and particuarly for someone who plays dutch as black. In the majority of games, black answers d5 and a reversed dutch with an extra move for white follows. Admittedly, that move might not mean too much in many variations, but I'd rather have it than not. And playing the Classical Dutch as black, I am familiar with many of the strategies / ideas. I think this is what the MBA and advertising people call "synergies". And although other openings might be slightly better at securing white +=, deep knowledge / experience should more than compensate at the non-professional level.

I also like the fact that the Bird's is less analysed / played by GMs than many other openings. That leaves amateurs with a bit of exploring to do, which can be a goal along with getting good tournament results.

So MNb, are you coming around to the same sort of views? Or are you just getting the book for ideas in the IZ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
le gars(Guest)
Guest


Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #5 - 01/29/06 at 00:15:57
Post Tools
I also have Tim Taylor's book.

In my point of view, this book is clearly the best I've read on the Bird's opening, and by far. I think that the best point of the book is that the author knows what he is talking about, as he is a regular Bird player.

But I also think that many lines are missing. For example, there is only one game dealing with the line 1.f4 d5  2.Cf3 Cf6  3.e3 Cc6. yet this line is the most frequent of bird all variations. Taylor considers this line as dubious, but gives no way to obtain an edge with white ! I am quite confused.

Another strange point : the Bird database of Mr Taylor seems to be really small, as he often say : this line needs practical testing. But in my database, (big Bird Powerbase) these lines have already been tested !

I also don't understand white the author gives a whole chapter on the line 1.f4 e5  2.fxe5 d6  3.exd6 Fxd6  4.Cf3 Cf6  5.d4 Cg4. Yes this variation is quite complicated but it doesn't occur too often, one game was clearly enough.

And these are only a few examples of strange or missing points in the book.But as I've already said, I think that this book is the best on the Bird, so all Bird's players should buy it ! Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10756
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Tim Taylor's Bird book
Reply #4 - 01/28/06 at 21:08:44
Post Tools
1.f4 Nf6 2.Nf3 g6 3.d3 d5 4.e3 Bg7 5.Be2 0-0 6.0-0 c5 7.Nc3 e6 should be met by 8.Qe1 first and only then 9.e4.
That's how Black plays it in the Iljin-Zjenevsky of the Classical Dutch.
Also 7.Qe1 might be more precise than 7.Nc3 first, but I am not sure. In the IZ it is, but in the Bird of course the question is how White's extra tempo works out.
The comments in this thread tempt me to buy Taylor's book.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo