Quote:


Yes. I'm sure you could learn all of the above lines if you had a free decade. Given that Kasparov couldn't crack the Berlin (even taking into account that the players we play will not be Kramnik), and that Radja continues to make the Schliemann work at super GM level, and that some of the critical lines in the Zaitsev are not reached until move 20+ with countless deviations and move-order subtleties between moves 9-20, not to mention the open leading to a sharp struggle (as does the Archangel), and black can essay one of 6 or 7 other closed lines which all havetheir own positional nuances and ideas, I think you might be trivialising white's task somewhat here.

Not to mention that you are completely ignoring options for black like the Bird, Cozio, 3...Bc5 etc - not necessarily critical tries, but all again relatively sharp systems where white can go quickly wrong if he's not careful.

When you add all the above on top of needing lines against the Petroff, Philidor, Latvian, Elephant, and then throw on the fire all black's other possible 1.e4 defences... 

I suppose your question boils down to what you feel you need to know. But if you want to play the Lopez well as white, you have one hell of a lot of work to do, just on that. I have always been of the opinion that no amateur does (or should) have enough time to really learn and understand the Lopez, and his time is better spent elsewhere learning simpler systems. I have no doubt that 3.Bb5 is white's strongest continuation, but whether it is the most time-efficient way to spend your study time, is a wholly different matter. 

The problem with the Lopez is that, usually, the stronger player will win at U2200 level. If white does not know the opening well, then he will be gifting black major chances that the Lopez is not meant to give black - white will be at a huge disadvantage if he misplays the opening. Most of black's "inferior" tries like 3...Bc5 and 3...Nd4 are still potent enough to cause problems if white does not know them. Black's major tries (Zaitsev, Chigorin, Breyer, Keres etc) are major, major opening complexes, and a white player who is not familiar with both the theory and the understanding of the openings is in danger of finding himself rapidly being outplayed by a black player who has studied them. This sort of understanding takes a lot of memorisation of long lines, as well as studying a lot of games in each particular line, really working to understand the move orders and subtleties in every position.

If this sounds like a couple of afternoons sitting back with a book and a beer, then feel free. To me it seems like a hell of a lot of work for an opening which you would probably get in 1/5th of your games (assuming that 50% you play as black, and 60% of your white games people meet 1.e4 with something other than 1...e5, 2...Nc6 - in most cases this figure is probably even higher).

Glenn Snow wrote on 04/27/09 at 19:10:49:


I am expecting Scotch.

ANDREW BRETT wrote on 04/25/09 at 06:34:44:


Really? I was under the impression that White was quite good.  I'm not sure about the difficulty of playing these positions, not having had the experience.  You may be right.  If it were a straight kingside attack that would be one thing (that's why the everlasting King's Indian is so popular), but White often has to play on both sides of the board.  But I think many players would appreciate a handy guide for doing just that.  I suppose you can learn it from studying games, but a lot of players like to have their hand held.  I do.

The difficulty is that the main line Spanish doesn't actually give that much for white and the sort of positions that arise are probably beyond an average player's skill level.

I am not sure that white can claim an edge against the Marshall as demonstrated by Aronian and Leko. The Zaitsev seems in good shape, the Breyer is not in much trouble (see Kamsky's nice win yesterday v Grischuk) and in the Chigorin although white gets space advantage can he convert it (see Marin's masterpiece for the case for the defence and see Svidler's cd cd nc6 efforts which seem to be holding),

If you add the numerous subvariations on the Ruy eg Moller, white has quite a lot of work to contend with and the practical player may well do better to copy Greet's Worrall ideas

TonyRo wrote on 04/24/09 at 14:57:26:

That is exactly the reason for the slow decline of 1.e4 at my level. All 1.e4 books either go the Khalifman way (ending up with 25 volumes ) or much worse call it an "attacking" repertoire yet suggest feeble lines (even though the analysis may be decent). Emms' "attacking with 1.e4" is anything but attacking (quality is decent though)

I think you can do it in two (as quality chess seems to want to do), but then you would have to do it like Palliser in his d4 book (skipping the absolute main lines for main sidelines). Eg book 1, sicilians with Be2/Be3 (where you get the same structures a lot) and against the Ruy the closed where you push d5 when applicable. In book 2 French with 3.Nc3 (Bg5 against Nf6 and something with a4 against the Winawer), CK 3.Nc3 but not the main lines with h4 and against the other stuff just basic lines which secure a += (Be2/Be3 vs Pirc, exchange or 3.Nf3 against the alekhine, main line against the Scandi and coffee for the rest).
Basically a lot like my own lines. It is not die-hard theoretical, but it is very nasty to play against as black. Still I maintain that it will be more theory than a 1.d4 repertoire.

Khalifman's book is dense because the Main Line Ruy Lopez is dense! It would be tough to make a work smaller than that I think. Of course, I think the focus could have been better. Give some of the rarer lines in the notes with slightly less coverage and add coverage and more explanation to the important main lines, maybe with some example games. 

That said, Willempie's idea of making one book on the Ruy Lopez + Sicilian and the other one about the rest looks a little optimistic. If you covered 1...e5 and 1...c5 adequately in one book it would be ~500 pages in my opinion. 

I think I'd expand the GM Repertoire 1. e4 series out to more books. Give 1...e5 it's own book, 1...c5 it's own book, give the French + Caro in one book, and cover the rest in another. I don't think 4 books is out of line for an ambitious 1. e4 repertoire. It makes more sense from a publisher's perspective to do it that way anyway. 

A few years ago, "Play the Open Games as Black" was published by GM John Emms. Gambit Publications 2000.

An after that, has been published:

* "The Ruy Lopez, a guide for black" by Sverre Johnsen, Gambit Publications, 2007.

* "Beating the Open Games" by Mihail Marin. Quality Chess, 2008.

* "A Spanish Repertoire for Black" by Mihail Marin. Quality Chess, 2007.

* "Dangerous Weapons: 1.e4 e5" by John Emms. Everyman Chess 2008.

As we know "The Spanish Torture" was the term coined to express that if you want to play the Spanish from the black side, you will suffer to equalize the game, so White should be slightly better in every main line.

Do we really need a Spanish Repertoire Book from the White Side?


Markovich wrote on 04/24/09 at 12:45:10: