I recall reading in Chess Life one day GM Shamkovich (not exactly a weakie) slam this guy for criticizing his analysis on the Scandinavian "Opening for the Future." Shamkovich was looking at the Scandinavian as an underestimated opening, and this guy with "theories" wrote in to criticize the GM because, you know, 1.e4 wins by force.

What was interesting is that the Grandmaster told him he needed to look at Morphy games because he clearly did not understand (based on the gentleman's "analysis") the need for proper development and how to take advantage of lack thereof...

Although I wouldn't want to ban anyone who said "1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Qe2 called , 'Playable' by Garry Kasparov."  

But really if Bush hadn't succeeded in killing irony, this man will.

My credentials seem to be one of your concerns so here goes. My theories have been reviewed and approved by World Champion Garry Kasparov, GM Max Dlugy, GM Lev Alburt and GM Andy Soltis who gave two of my books favorable reviews in the New York Post calling my Evans Gambit book, "A well researched original analysis of an old opening." IM Gerard Welling and ICM van der Tak corresponded with me for months over my new opening system for Black. Apparently, I was just wasting their time with hackneyed ideas. ICM John Elburg and I have been playing casual games for months in the Latvian Gambit, an opening where he is one of the world's leading experts. I've drawn two out of four games and came up with an innovation good enough for John to ask the following question, "All the variations favor White. But what to do, give up the Latvian Gambit? I like it too much!" This was an innovation in the game Fischer-Pupols won by Pupols. You may not have heard of Pupols. Have you heard of Fischer? I improved on his play. Two of my innovations have been awarded the winner in the "Best Question Contest" by GM Larry Evans, essentially the top award an amateur can win. I have been given kudos by the Editor of Chess Life. I have had my games published in Chess Life and Inside Chess and have had two openings named after to me by various columnists (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Qe2 called , "Playable" by Garry Kasparov. My innovation in the Petroff 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Qe2 Nc6 4.d4 N! in one of the oldest openings in chess has been named after me by Bill Wall and appears in several data bases. 

And your qualifications to call my book snake oil are...? =antillian link=1226348173/45#58 date=1231889860]sloughter wrote on 01/13/09 at 23:29:05:


Garry.....who??? Yeah, I think I heard of him....he is some Russian politician right?
[/quote]

TopNotch wrote on 01/13/09 at 23:45:21:


You don't want to know, trust me. Antillian is right: Elburg being positive on a chess book is like the pope being positive on praying.

sloughter wrote on 01/13/09 at 23:29:05:


Garry.....who??? Yeah, I think I heard of him....he is some Russian politician right?

sloughter wrote on 01/13/09 at 23:10:35:


John Elburg is known for giving every single book a good review.

Just perused an excerpt from Sloughter's book 'Magic', it left me speechless to say the least. Final thoughts, if ya gunna peddle snake oil you deserve to be outed. Brings to mind that other cook book The Beginners Game which more or less repackaged the hippo as a brand new and unbeatable way to play the opening with White and Black that  according to the author was hitherto unknown to  chessplayers.....hardly surprising, considering the claims,l that he or she chose to write under a pseudonym. 

As Bibs would say.... chess anyone

Tops

The Silicone monster is impressive. I thought I could put the beast in a bind with the following moves. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nge2 O-O 6.b4! to restrain c5 & then the beast replied 6...c5!! anyway. I'll be playing this game against Fritz 8 at an hour/move and get back. Anyone who thinks Queen Pawn openings are positional, should try this line! Ender wrote on 01/12/09 at 15:14:07: