It IS very strange that he didn't give 6 Ne5 and went for this strange Grunfeld sub-line, I agree. Especially as his analysis of 6 Nh4 is of markedly lower quality than some other lines.

I think El K said in the intro to one of the early volumes that he'd aimed to give a complete repertoire even against second-rate Black moves since the players he was aiming to help would meet a lot more of those than of the critical lines. I guess that's where I've had to make compromises - in one volume you just can't show every playable Black move. But people will have to see for themselves if they think that's a problem: whether the book turns out to be good or not others will have to say but I do think there's a gap in the market for the product.

Yes, and I have actually read most of them as well!  For the third (and final!) time, the claim that it is "according to Kramnik" is not intended to mean that Kramnik plays all the lines suggested in the book; rather it refers to the idea of playing 1.Nf3 to cut out various black options and then transposing to 1.d4 lines - in part, lines played by Kramnik himself, but this is not the point.  I really think this is clear enough.

I venture no opinion on whether or not this means he should have given the books a different title.

Enough now.

fluffy wrote on 05/31/06 at 14:30:22:


Well, I was actually suggesting that Kramnik switched to 1.e4 because he wanted to sharpen up his play - whether that is true or not, I don't know, but it strikes me as a possible explanation.

I have explained (or at least I thought I had) what I meant by Khalifman basing the repertoire on "Kramnik's treatment of the opening" - it is not about specific lines, it is about getting to 1.d4 openings without allowing Black certain options - as, in fairness, Inn2 did recognise in one of his posts.

Please don't call me a smartass - at least not on this messageboard - or I will simply delete your post  I really don't see why there was any call to get personal.

If he is 'copping out' in your terms by presenting a repertoire option which was not Kramnik's own choice, then fair enough.  But in a previous post I have already agreed that the repertoire presented by Khalifman was not necessarily an identical fit with Kramnik's.  Khalifman is not really claiming that, as a close reading of the books will confirm (I have all of the books and have played most of the repertoire at one time or another).  Rather, the repertoire is based on Kramnik's treatment of the opening (using 1.Nf3 to reach certain 1.d4 openings precisely as a means to avoid certain lines) which is a different proposition.

But a lot of the criticism for 'copping out' seems to have been directed at the fact that the lines chosen were not the sharpest or most critical.  And it is there that I feel Khalifman's critics have missed the point.

alumbrado wrote on 05/31/06 at 10:16:37:


it is understandable if Khalif exploited his 1. Nf3 move order to avoid the nimzo and grunfeld. But since he recommends transposing to 1. d4 main lines after 1. Nf3 d5, he ought to have recommended the more critical systems especially if Kramnik was the chief protagonist (say in the 6. Ne5 Slav).

John's book is the REAL Opening for White According to Kramnik!! 

I think 5.c5 is the "principled" choice vs 4...a6. 4.e3 b5 5.c5 I predict won't last. Black has a very good antidote that is not so well known yet. I can hardly blame John though, as it is currently the fashionable choice (until Turin at least, now we are seeing a lot of 5.c5!).

6.Nh4 vs the Slav in the Khalifman series is a total copout. When did Kramnik play this move? I can't blame Khaifman here as it was a big project. But we see how ambitious the Anand series is. If you do not think it is a copout, think about how it would be if the Anand series had Main Line Ruy and Petroff, Open Sicilian, Main Line Caro, and then the Exchange French. wouldn't be very consistent, would it? Also Kramnik was THE 6.Ne5 practioner when the series was fresh. The Grunfeld was also a bit of a copout. Khalifman covers a harmless line (though Kramnik did play it a few times) even though Kramnik was the biggest supporter of the Exchange with 8.Be3.

Ah ok I see your point now. You wait for white to commit while he has the less optimal options. And with the Nc3 the bishop doesnt sit well on b2 neither.