MartinC wrote on 09/02/08 at 09:55:15:
Well actually I was slightly underwhelmed by the book. Interesting ideas yes and not a bad book but it didn't seem terribly sure what sort of book it wanted to be.
It sort of wants to be a repitoire book (blurb on back, some elements of the layout) but really it isn't. It also shows signs of wanting to be an ideas book like the Dangerous weapons series - those weapon markers for instance (which I found more annoying than anything esle) - but it's not really that either.
In essence it's a set of interesting annotated games loosely grouped by themes. A bit like Ulhman's Winning the French in that sense I suppose. Hardly a bad thing of course! It's just that presenting it this way might have helped the book.
There were also some niggly things. For instance - iirc - after 6 a3 c4 7 Nbd2 in the advance annotating 7..f6! in one game then 7 .. Na5! in the next with the comment next to it that it's the only sensible move.
Some pretty dogmatic looking assessments in places too: giving two positions in which draws were agreed a big advantage sign for black, a small advantage to black sign to a totally normal Bxf5 position in the advance etc.
(the Budapest might need such things, the French doesn't.).
Still it's not a bad book and has plenty of interesting content to work with
A bit overhyped though I think - I really do prefer Watson's books for instance.
I've had more than a look at this book. I've skimmed the whole of it and examined certain parts of it very carefully, and find I disagree with much of the above posting by the normally pretty astute MartinC..
First, it is clear that this is not intended to be a repertoire book. It is a resource book, mainly but not exclusively from the black side, much of it based on Moskalenko's own practice. By the way, it's repertoire, not repitoire, and Uhlmann, not Ulhman.
Second, authors deserve at least accuracy from critics who nitpick. After 6 a3 c4 7 Nbd2 in the Advance, Moskalenko gives 7..f6 the marking !? not !. It is only after the move 7 g3 that he gives 7...f6! His commentary makes clear his views in both cases.
Third, I find it a virtue rather than a criticism that Moskalenko sometimes expresses an opinion which goes against the prevailing orthodoxy.
In the Advance, his experience and private study have led him to the belief that positions with BxNf5 ...exf5 are in general at least equal for Black. I suggest that his high rating and long experience of playing the French entitle him to express such an unorthodox view, and also entitle his opinions to be awarded a degree of respect by us mere amateurs.
As you will have guessed, I think this book is an extremely useful contribution to the literature on the French. I find it a generally honest book (although inevitably superficial in parts - it is not intended to be ECO after all) and certainly not one where the evaluations are skewed to sell more copies.
Pages: 
C00-C19: Flexible French (Read 61771 times)
