The book was written nearly two years ago, so one should expect a large amount of errors (read: improvements) to be found in the book by now. Also, Houska may not have had Rybka when she wrote the book. 

Even Vigorito's book "Play the Semi-Slav", written not even a year ago, does not cover some recent developments, such as Topalov's 12.Nf7 idea or 14.Re1 (Radjabov-Anand, Mainz 2006 and  Corus 2008), because they were played or only became popular after the book was sent off for publication. 

@Ender

Cut the 'crap' please.

I agree with AlanG. The coverage of the Classical line allows the class player to get his head in the door a bit to understand the important theory. Without Houska's book you'll find yourself outside with your nose stuck to the window instead.

It appears that chess engines, like Rybka, can sniff out some of the shortcomings in analysis very quickly. One has to wonder if the proof readers only eyeball the text when doing the checks before publishing. I guess "chess engine checks" are time consuming.

I'm going to go out on another limb here and state that I suspect Houska's work has been manipulated a bit in this section of her book -- and maybe not to her liking. For example, the text on p.74 clearly belongs in the note to 15.Re1 on page 89. Considering Houska's fine work placing text beside game scores earlier, why is this so obviously misplaced? I don't think this was her decision. I'm thinking the page 74 text was in the note to 15.Re1 in the first place but got changed by someone who was not aware this disturbance in the continuity of the book. Did the publisher interfere to the point of agitation here?  

I've come across another issue in the note to 19.Bg3 in the stem game, p.90. 

19.Qb3 Kh8 etc. does not lead to an equal position. Black loses a pawn with no compensation. I tried 19...Qd7 instead of 19...Kh8. Then gave White 20.Ne4 and followed with 21...b6 and I also tried 21...Rac8 but the positions were very difficult for Black. I thought they were like walking a tightrope over the precipice while White was watching to see if you fell -- very uncomfortable chess.

Then I went back in the game score to look for improvements. I was amazed to realize that 18...b6 instead of 18...Qc8!, in the stem game, gives Black better play. The Bg7-h6 move used in the 18...b6 variation has some tactical and positional strengths. At least it is an active piece, unlike in the 19.Qb3 lines. 

You can realize these by letting your chess engine sniff around a bit. From Bh6 the B guards c1 so a White Ra1 can't play on the important c-file via Rac1. Also, the Black Q stays put and off the c-file leaving room for a Black R to be placed on c8 quickly. In additon, ...Bh6 gains a tempo on the Re3.

Many hands make light work so interested players can deny or verify some of this. Thanks.

Now after looking at this line, I tking You guys are right : Qc7 line looks like a crap. I feel disappointed, since i pay for the book to get good source against Panov and Advance. And half of Panov chapter is a crap  
How can 2400 player don't use computer in position, where she violates some basic rules in opening? (don't move the same piece twice in opening, don't grab pawns  instead of developing pieces etc). 
To Ms. Houska : before you call something 'sophisticated', better turn your Rybka on and check if it's not +- !
I'm very disappointed by this chapter. If this book was Quality Chess we would have update right now, but it's JUST Everyman I spend some $ to get book full of errors (I found some typos in classical line).

Your first suggestion of Nb5xa7 seems to be the problem.

The computer suggests 14 Nb5 and then either

14 ... Qxh2 15 Bd3 Ka8 (freeing b8 for the queen, which is in some trouble) 16 Nxa7 Nxa7 17 Qxb6 Qd6 18 Qb3 or
14 ... Qd7 15 Nxa7 Kxa7 16 d5

Both with clear advantage to White (it thinks).

Can you improve on this for Black?

In the line we're discussing Black does play 0-0-0 before taking the pawn, so there's no transposition required. 

This is the line:

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Nf3 Bg4 7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. Qb3 Bxf3 9. gxf3 Nb6 10. Be3 e6 11. Rg1 Qc7 12. O-O-O O-O-O 13. Kb1 Qxh2 14. Rg3 

Are you suggesting 13 ... Kb8?

Quote:


I might have guessed that such a well aired line would not be dismissed so easily. Thanks for the reply on this and the other line.

Looking at A1) Rg1 in the Panov Attack, I can't say that I place much trust in 11...Qc7!?, p.81

Can Black really get away with the pawn grab on h2 leaving White to opt for the d4-d5 push?

Could someone show me some encouraging analysis, p.82, after 14...Kb8 (bottom left in the stem game). 

I don't like the look of things after 14...Qh5 15.Rg5 Qh4 (15...Qxf3 16.Bg2 followed by Bxc6) d5 instead of f4. When the R on the g-file swings over to the Q side, it appears to be a very difficult game for Black.

14...Kb8 also seems to allow White to play d4-d5 when appropriate.

This 11...Qc7 line seems to fly in the face of the blockading strategy promoted earlier in this section of the book. 

Houska says the ...Qxh2 grab is sophisticated. I would have liked more proof of that from the book in this section.