There is something that has me curious about this book.
First, according to IMRichardPalliser:
IMRichardPalliser wrote on 12/01/07 at 17:55:37:
Craig doesn't cover the Botvinnik, but rather those lines which he plays and is interested in. In general that's systems with Nf3. Thus he advocates 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 d4 against the Symmetrical, taking on the Hedgehog, and 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 g3 in the Reversed Sicilian. The coverage of the main lines does look pretty good: Craig clearly understands the key ideas, as well as many small nuances, pretty well.
Hope this helps a little!
Further, according to Alumbrado:
alumbrado wrote on 12/20/07 at 11:30:18:
I have pre-ordered this book from Amazon and my order history states quite clearly that when I did so, the provisional title for this book was 'A Complete Chess Opening Repertoire for White'.
I see that this has now changed to 'An Active Opening Repertoire for White'. I didn't think anything of this particularly until I happened to be walking past the BCM shop yesterday and decided to look in. The book is now out and was on display so I had a thumb through, and I will confess that my first impressions were not good.
But a major flaw is that the repertoire seems to me to depend on a willingness to play the Queen's Gambit with an early Nf3, as the repertoire given includes 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.Nc3. Pritchett does not cover 3...d5 as far as I could see, so you need to be aware that this is NOT a complete repertoire (as Kosten's is).
As far as I can see Pritchett does not even mention that 3...d5 is a possibility - not even to say that the game transposes into a Queen's Gambit and that this is beyond the book's scope.
Frankly, the rest of the book didn't look all that great to me either and I may save myself a few quid and cancel it.
So my question is you intend to play the English with an early Nf3 and you intend to transpose to the QG when Black plays an early ...e6, why open with 1. c4 at all? Why not open with 1. Nf3 and reduce Black's options? Am i missing something really obvious?
I see that James Vigus is just as puzzled as I am. He raises the same point that I raised in here in his Feb review on BCM : "It’s puzzling that well over half the book is dedicated to the reversed Sicilian, 1 c4 e5, since the reader could play 1 Nf3, 2 c4, and still remain within the rest of Pritchett’s repertoire."