Note: I posted this earlier, but as it was moved I will repeat the link.

http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/6/53/grandmaster_repertoire_2__1d4_volume...

Quality Chess Books: Quote:


Quality Chess also have a blog at http://qualitychess.co.uk/blog/.

Noticed the PGN update file from GM Avrukh on Quality Chess's website.  Thank you!  

I hear this kind of thing all the time. Sometimes 1900 is the cut-off, sometimes 2100. Most of the time it's 2000. So what do you do if you're 1998 or something? Rely on MCO? OH GOD NO.

Actually I think this advice is well....I'm trying to be polite...kind of not so good (not the rest of your post, the need to study some sublines is correct), Antillian.

Why do Silman and company make such determinations? I think such a thing applies when talking about a book that doesn't explain the pre-existing theory in something like the Najdorf or (certain lines of the) Grunfeld. The thought is that one should stay away from something if it's too tactical or theory-laden. This would be because of the tendency to fall into traps or play lines out of order/mix systems because of lack of appreciation or knowledge of the "why's" in a given line. On the other hand, maybe a 1700 with an extraordinary memory could pick up some winning ideas with the right book even in something like the sharpest Sicilian. 

Bottom line is that Masters say all sorts of things that don't really apply and it's hard for me to conceive of a dumber situation than this. A book written for less than 10% of chess players about a relatively safe way for White to pursue a positional advantage/ opening repertoire that will stand the test of time, somehow can't be read by the people that need it most. 

Who's buying these books anyway??

After the following variation on p. 292:

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. e3 Bg4 5. Qb3 Qb6 6. Nc3 Bxf3 7. gxf3 e6 8. e4 Qxb3 9. axb3 Na6 10. Ra4 Nb4 11. exd5 exd5 12. c5 a5 13. Na2 Nxa2 14. Rxa2 Be7 15. b4  why not b6 instead of Bd8? I'm not sure how to prove advantage. Since I tend to go over the lines with an engine, I try to find a way to advantage against the engine's top choice if it is not listed by Avrukh. Here, I'm not sure how. Although, I'm surprised that Avrukh does not consider some top engine choices which to me seem natural... like b6. I'm guessing he probably has Rybka 3, Naum 4 and Zappa Mexico II running on a Quad   so he probably just considers some engine choices positional mistakes and does not explore further.

BTW: I'm aware of the plan with c5 and b4 but still can't find a clear way because Black gets a lot of time to fight it and White can easily overextend. It's even more of a problem since Qxb3 can crop up at almost any second. For example after 7. Nh4 on p.293, Qxb3 is again a possibility.

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 03/27/09 at 21:07:36:


1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 is probably imprecise. As the book starts with 1.d4 d5, then 3.Nf3 is our move order. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 then 3.g3! is the Catalan move order. Bg2 and Nf3 afterwards can be changed in order, I think.

Hi,

I have a question on chapter 6, variation B :
Isn't it possible for black to play 8...c6, with the idea of playing cxb5 if white takes on b5?

regards

exigentsky wrote on 03/28/09 at 20:10:59:


The reason that Black does not want to exchange on b3 straightaway is because it releases the tension too early. Black wants to wait for White to release the central tension with c5 before exchanging queens on b3 because this makes it easier for him to break in the centre with ...e5 (although if Black has played ...Bf3 earlier, White can stop this with f4). 

Also, after 7...e6 there is also something to be said for 8.c5 followed by b4-b5, which is better for White as Black cannot prevent b4-b5. See the game Rustler-Hein, 2006.

@Willempie

That is correct - after 3...dc4 4.Nf3 c5 Black equalises quite easily.