Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Understanding the Marshall Attack (Read 28508 times)
walkingterrapin
Junior Member
**
Offline


Why play the Colle when
you can play 1.e4!!!!!!!!!

Posts: 98
Location: NC
Joined: 07/04/10
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #25 - 07/04/10 at 21:54:07
Post Tools
the marshall is not a drawing weapon for amateurs, especially if you playing the real marshall attack.  you have a chance to bust white before more 20 which gives more practical players under 2200 fits.  i dont think this book will cover these lines though.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #24 - 06/01/10 at 06:04:30
Post Tools
@Fluffy.
It seems I ruffled your feathers a bit.
First of all - in case you didnt notice-
I did recommend your book
I also stated that it was well researched

And I will add that I do recognize that it took a lot of work to put this book together.

Re: quoting John Nunn, and hardly quoting anyone else
* No argument about the quality of Nunn's 1989 book.
* By your own admission, You did treat John Nunn's book different from other sources .
I argue that Tim Hardings 2001 CD was also an important landmark for the development of the Marshall theory and allready corrected a lot of Nunn's error's. After all: Harding did not only co-author Nunn's book but allready had been co-author of a previous book on the Marshall (Harding/Wade).
I keep to the opinion that both Harding and Vitomskis deserved more quotations, than they got.

missing game quotations
*No, I do not require you to know every game in the Marshall ever played.
*But 31 games on 10 pages is an awful lot compared tot the games that were quoted. And most were not exactly hard to find:
*The databases provided on the Total Marshall would have provided al lot of the pre-2001 quotations needed.
*And the ultracorr2/ultracorr3 databases would have gone a long way to provide a sufficient addition to standard chessbase databases to cover the post 2000 period.
(correspondence players on this forum will confirm, that the ultra-databases are an essential source).
Original analysis
You claim "tons of original analysis".
There I disagree with you. If I strike off unquoted games and unquoted analysis, there is not much new or original material, except minor corrections.
Let me explain this a little further by giving an example:
In the variation
12.d3,Bd6 13.Re1,Bf5 14.Qf3,Re8
15.Rxe8,Qxe8 16.Nd2,Qe1+ 17.Nf1,Bg6 18.g3,b4
19.c4,Nf6 20.Qxc6!
This line is covered in chapter 6.pg.112.
Here you gave a single line, without comment, that quotes Nataf. with the hardly informative remark that "further developments are sure to come".
For further details you pointed the reader to the Informator.
Brunello on the other hand, devotes 3 pages of dense analysis and some explanation to this position.
And this is warranted since it is the only way, White can hope for any advantage in this line.
By the way, in this example a game quote is missing too. A year ago, in another post I allready pointed out the game Novak-Chopin, 2008.
( it wasn't hard to find  Wink and incidentally contained a clear improvement over the last move of Natafs line)

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1227103984/73

By the way, it might have helped, if you had distinguished between analysis - you thought to be- original and analysis concious not quoted by using the N or TN symbol. (TN as in Theoretical novelty).
« Last Edit: 06/01/10 at 07:12:42 by micawber »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #23 - 05/30/10 at 09:18:34
Post Tools
I promised to give my impression of the book after I had taken a closer look:

First my general verdict:
I can recommend it. It is the only one of the three recent books on the Marshall
that gives a good overview of all important lines on the Marshall and it is well researched.
in the stile of Amazon/Chesscafe valuation I would give it 3.5 stars. 1 star is deducted because it has little original analyses, and half a star is deducted because it annoys me that in lots of lines the game quote or the author of the analysis (not being Vigorito) is missing.

That I substracted only half a star for the missing quotes for games and analysis of others is a sort of average. Personally I would have subtracted a whole star as I think that it should be made clear which lines contain original analysis by Vigorito and which are the intellectual work of others. But I know that part of the chess community wont find this bothering.

To give an impression of the problem. The chapter on the Spassky-variation (main line Marshall) contains 10 pages (page 21 through 30).
*Missing game quotes: 31
*Unattributed analytic lines by others: 13
*Missed important transpositions: 4
*Dubious evaluations and analytic errors: 9

This is more or less typical for all chapters.
I just didnt bother keeping score for all of them  Wink

Let me make these points a little:

Missing game quotes:
The main line of variation [A]/page 21 was actually played in Tazelaar-Straka. 2007, but is introducted as "I recommend".
The main line of variation [C21]/page 25., was actually played in Elias - Wagenaar. 2004
Unattributed analysis
Hardings commentary to his own game against Olaffson (page 27) is given without mentioning the source.
One of the main victims is corr.GM Vitomskis, who died last year, and was one of the co-authors of the "Total Marshall CD". A recognition of his original analytic contributions to the Marshall would have been appropriate. But unfortunately in the whole book hardly any of his contributions is properly attributed.
Another "victim" is Blatny who both as a player and an analyst contributed to theory.
There is one notable exception: Nunn's analysis is properly quoted throughout the book. Now this would not have something to do with the fact that Nunn is one of the bosses/editor's in chief of Gambit Pub. Wink
Transpositions
Recognizing these is not one of Vigorito's strong points. In several positions he misses direct transpositions to other variations in the book, instead giving a new variation.
Dubious Evaluations/Analytical errors
*The number of clear computational/analytic errors is in general negligible. The only chapter that contains quite a lot of them is the chapter on the pawn push,
as I remarked earlier in this thread.
*There is a number of dubious endgame evaluations where Black is a pawn down, but is in no danger of loosing if he knows what he is doing. The opinion on those is of course a bit personal.

Two examples:
example 1
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
Metz-Oim, 1988
Vigorito now gives 30...Ra6! following the game score.
But Black has an interesting possibility Vigorito does not mention:
example 1 continued
30...Qh1 31.Ke2,Rxe3 32.fxe3,Qxh2+ 33.Kd3,Qg2!
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
Now take a good look: How is white going to stop the h-pawn?
-----------------------------------------------------
example 2
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
*
This position was reached in the game corr.  Tacke-Kraft. Both players are of corr.master strength (2400+).
Incidentally this is one of the missing game quotations.
In the actual game white decided to repeat the moves and accede a draw.
Vigorito however claims that White is winning and gives 25.Qa5, Rxb2 26.Qd8+,Bf8 27.Ra8 to make his point.
The first question you might ask is: would two very strong corr. players both have missed this simple line?
(that his if you knew the source)
If you look at the position a little bit longer,
25.Qa5, h6! will come natural to any strong Marshall player. After Black has disposed of the 8th rank tricks Black's threats on the K-side and the attack on the b-pawn are renewed, and it will prove difficult for white to make progress.
One sample variation:
26.Rab1, Rf6 (26...Rc8 is good as well) 27.Nd2,Rf5 (threatening Qh3-Rh5)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #22 - 04/25/10 at 20:37:55
Post Tools
He only lists Pavlovic's Fighting the Ruy Lopez.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Daniel
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 169
Joined: 05/29/06
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #21 - 04/25/10 at 18:19:22
Post Tools
thanks.  About his bibliography, he does list Attacking the Spanish and Fighting the Ruy Lopez right?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #20 - 04/25/10 at 16:33:03
Post Tools
For an example of the pawn push look here:

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1172103665

Curiously this variation is not mentioned by Vigorito who more or less condemns this line because of 21.Bxd5, Kh8? apparently overlooking 21.Bxd5,cxd5!
22.Qxd5,Kg7!

Unfortunate the link we used in 2007 to create diagrams no longer exists  Sad
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Daniel
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 169
Joined: 05/29/06
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #19 - 04/25/10 at 15:26:40
Post Tools
What is the pawn push variation?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #18 - 04/25/10 at 12:25:55
Post Tools
I received my copy yesterday. I will provide some more information in a week or so.
My first impression is, that the book is well researched and the author has consulted adequate sources.
A plus compared with the other two recent books (Brunello/Pavlovic) is that it caters for both Black and White.
Another plus - of course - is that he lists Chesspub as consulted source.  Wink

The coverage of the pawn-push variation is unsatisfactory, and relies too much on allready outdated analysis.

I noted that a lot of analytical lines that were worked out by Harding&Vitomskis
(their CD-rom The Total Marshall is given as a consulted resource on page 3 or 4)
are given without source, which creates the somewhat false impression that the author has done an enormous amount of analytical work. This makes it a bit difficult to distinguish true novelties from long known lines.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Antillian
God Member
*****
Offline


Brilliance without dazzle!

Posts: 1756
Joined: 01/05/03
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #17 - 04/16/10 at 21:10:04
Post Tools
I don't think the point is that there is anything wrong with anti-Marshalls from Black's perspective. But why invest so much time in learning and maintaining highly theoretical opening that you never get to play.
  

"Breakthrough results come about by a series of good decisions, diligently executed and accumulated one on top of another." Jim Collins --- Good to Great
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Daniel
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 169
Joined: 05/29/06
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #16 - 04/16/10 at 20:16:26
Post Tools
what's wrong with playing anti marshalls?  It's like you get to play a closed ruy lopez with white having made a concession for free.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TonyRo
God Member
*****
Offline


I'm gonna crack your skull!

Posts: 1778
Location: Cleveland, OH
Joined: 11/26/07
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #15 - 04/16/10 at 17:43:13
Post Tools
Agreed - you act as though a bunch of club players are going to walk into something dangerous and theoretical and let you beat the crap out of them. They get to pose you problems as well, you know? Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #14 - 04/16/10 at 17:22:01
Post Tools
That's the whole thing about the Marshall.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Reverse
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 212
Location: USA
Joined: 11/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #13 - 04/16/10 at 16:26:18
Post Tools
I am very frustrated with this opening! I would recommend that people learn a different variation. Now a days most people won't let you into the marshall. 98 percent of my games are anti marshalls, which is fine, but I learned the marshall so that I could play it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
micawber
God Member
*****
Offline


like many sneaks and skunks
in history he's a poet

Posts: 852
Location: Netherlands
Joined: 09/07/05
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #12 - 04/14/10 at 05:01:03
Post Tools
I think i saw 27 april as publication date.
The sample looks quite good, and well researched.
Though when I played through some lines, I came upon an endgame assessment that was simply wrong.
I have both Brunello's and Pavlovic's books on the Marshall, and I think I will get this one as well.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Daniel
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 169
Joined: 05/29/06
Gender: Male
Re: Understanding the Marshall Attack
Reply #11 - 04/14/10 at 01:12:56
Post Tools
Does anyone have this yet?  Thoughts?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo