Please, let's not bring sloughter into this.

Neric, I spent the Thanksgiving week away in Seattle, or I would have chastised you sooner.  Stop imputing bad motives to Marin and to people who post here, and keep your posts focussed on chess.

I'm not going to go back and clean up your bad posts here, but I'll be deleting any of your future posts that keep this up.

At the end of the day, it's a set of books.  Buy it or don't buy it -- nobody here really gives a frig.  However, the balance of expert advice is that Marin's effort is a worthy one.

But stop posting in such a saucy vein, trying to get a rise out of people.  Talk chess, you know?

Neric wrote on 11/27/10 at 13:49:28:

Funnily enough, both I and Fritz 9 (plus several other enginges) think white is better (Fritz is claiming a clear advantage ) and black has to play accurately.  Stockfish disagrees, but Fritz is punching holes in it's analysis after which Stockfish suddenly agrees white is better (sometimes jumping from -0.30 to +1.30).

How are you evaluating these positions?

Neric wrote on 11/25/10 at 14:41:47:


Can you tell me which of the following you class as Jobava vs 'NN' - or is it all of them?: 
Jobava,Ba[2556]-Kovacevic,A[2553] Leon 2001 (1-0)
Jobava,Ba[2614]-Alekseev,E[2634] Moscow 2006 (1-0)
Jobaba,Ba[2669]-Pogorelov,R[2451], Budva 2009 (1-0)
Jobaba,Ba[2669]-Inarkiev,E[2656], Budva 2009 (1/2-1/2)
Jobava,Ba[2695]-Timofeev,A[2655], Rijeka 2010 (1/2-1/2)

I am curious about how an unbeaten 4/5 vs 2590 rating average is dismissed.  Or did you miss some of these games due to the move order? I may have missed more. Frankly if the line is capable of that, I wouldn't be so quick to claim it's totally equal - especially since Jobava only duffed up someone 200 points below him once.

I'd like to note that Alekseev won the Russian Championship later on in 2006.  You can't call him 'NN', at least.

BTW, IM John Watson - generally considered to know a thing or two about the English - is quite positive about white's chances in Mastering The Chess Openings Volume 3, and basically implies that theory is in white's favour using this Bg5/Qc1 stuff.  Marin isn't a lone voice in the wilderness.  Watson bases his analysis on Jobava-Alekseev, and having flicked through Marin's work I know he was looking at Jobava's games.

I'd also be obliged if you could explain exactly how black transposes to Bf4/Bd2 by avoiding ...h6.  Watson's explanation as to why black flicks it in is that after 7...0-0 8 0-0 d5 9 Rb1 will probably end up transposing after a later ...h6, and white has extra options like 9 Qc1 and 9 Qa4 so black avoids these.

Finally, Marin actually thinks 6 d4!? is quite promising for white but he didn't think it fitted well with the repertoire.

Oh and about specific analysis...
Neric wrote on 11/25/10 at 14:41:47:


First, "with compensation" actually doesn't mean "with an advantage" - equality is not contradictory.  The with compensations sign even has a "=" in it.  Ever wonder why?

In the meantime, I'll thank Stockfish for the analysis, since it is the only engine I have claiming this "instant equality" - tossing off that "obvious", "instantly equalizing" line seems to be the provence of computers. After 15...c5, it seems to think 16 Qb2 f5 17 Nxc5 Nxc5 18 Bxb7 Nxb7 19 Qxg7 Rf7 20 Qh8+ Rf8 21 Qg7 Rf7 22 Qh8+ is best play and hence the 0.00 evaluation.

A couple of my other engines jump on the chance to play 17 a5! Qc7 18 Nxc5 Nxc5 19 Bxb7 Qxb7 20 Rxc5 Kf7 


- which, whatever it may be, is not "instant equality".  Black has some long term chances thanks to the protected passed pawn on b5, which is about his only asset, but white has a strong iniative and black's king is having to walk.  I'm not sure white is better, and I can't find anything absolutely clearcut, but black has to be extremely careful.  Certainly the engines don't seem to agree on the evaluation here.

As for the part I've bolded above - it's fairly common in academic circles and books to name someone whose analysis you've taken.  Otherwise, you know, you get accused of theft, or not given credit.  Your interpretation only makes sense if you are desperately trying to make someone look bad, whereas it actually shows Marin to be conscientious.

[quote]... I don't like this specific approach by Marin in this specific case. Whenever I read or see (Dzindzi's videos for instance) that someone tries to sell me that white is better after 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3. Bg2 Nf6 4.c4 dxc4, I simply feel cheated. [/quote]

I thought you were complaining at Marin's saying there's 'compensation', rather than that he says there's an advantage. So why connect Marin and Dzindzi?

[quote]It is not that I hate chessbooks and think that GMs are crooks ... It is just that I don't like this specific approach by Marin in this specific case. [/quote]

But above you categorically suggested Marin is a 2600 cheat!

Neric wrote on 11/25/10 at 14:41:47:


My problem is not that there's no advantange in some line of the symmetrical. You can find my comments a few pages earlier that I just simply don't believe that Marin can prove an edge everywhere here. That's fine with me, and as I stated, I'm just looking for interesting positions to play. My problem is simply that you're arrogant enough not to buy the books because you think Black equalizes in ONE line in ONE of the books. You think Marin has nothing good to say? I think the books are fantastic, and even if he misses some stuff, or misevaluates some positions, there's still a lot of great things he hasn't missed that are in these books.

Also, way to be the second one to find the slight flaw in the sample. You were second only to....drumroll please....me.

Neric wrote on 11/25/10 at 14:41:47:


You should get in touch with sloughter. I think you two would get along very well.

parisestmagique wrote on 11/26/10 at 08:32:50:


The problem with these 1120 pages is that if one critical line doesn't work and you can't fix it, then you can safely forget about the rest. Just compare it to the Sicilian Alapin.

That reminds me of something. If this topic was about the Sicilian Dragon for black, you wouldn't accept it. With your white repertoire you obviously seem to be much more generous, because "at least" a draw looks kinda good enough. There is a good chance that your opponent won't play the critical lines after all. In the age of databases this is pretty naive though. I cannot remember a single tournament game over the last 20 years that I didn't prepare for and where my opponent didn't prepare for me. If you play on a somewhat competitive level, this is just how it goes these days.

TN wrote on 11/25/10 at 13:39:27:
 
Very arrogant indeed of GM Marin trying to question Neric' truth. The idea!