ChessPub Forum - Everyman announces book on the Leningrad

(UTC)

ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › Daring Defences to 1. d4 › Dutch › Everyman announces book on the Leningrad

(Moderators: proustiskeen, Hadron, CraigEvans)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7

Topic Tools

Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies)

Everyman announces book on the Leningrad (Read 110342 times)

tafl Senior Member Offline Posts: 380 Location: Norway Joined: 05/27/05 Gender:	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #84 - 03/02/11 at 14:04:56	Post Tools	Print Post
	Quote: Btw, when looking thru the DW Dutch, I noticed another omission of a vital corr game in an Everyman book - maybe they should sponsor their authors with a corr base? 1. d4 f5 2. Bg5 h6 3. Bh4 g5 4. e4 Rh7 5. Qh5+ Rf7 6. Nf3 Nf6 7. Qg6 Nc6 8. e5 Ne4!? 9. d5 Nb4 10.Nc3!! seems to tip the scales clearly in White's favour. (Now, Williams only gives: 10.e6 Nxc2+ 11. Kd1 dxe6 12. Kxc2 Qxd5) 10... gxh4? (10... Bg7 11. Nxe4) 11.O-O-O Nxd5 12. e6 dxe6 13. Nxe4 1-0 Smith,D (2016)-Herzog,K (2041)/LSS 2007. However, 9...gxh4 instead of Nb4 may save the line for Black, or simply playing Williams' mainline 8...gxh4 instead of the interesting Ne4. Any opinions on 8.Ne5!? as suggested in "A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire".

	A computer once beat me at chess but it was no match for me at kick boxing - Emo Philips
	IP Logged

Bibs God Member Offline Posts: 2346 Joined: 10/24/06	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #83 - 03/02/11 at 12:50:11	Post Tools	Print Post
	Cripes, didn't notice it in the book. Shelved it quickly as it disappointed me. Figured the game score had gone. Will be interesting to look, likely a great example of how faulty my memory is. Bellin to blame - he chose the opening! Basically, yeah black plays Qe7, Bd7, Nc6, 000. In that order. As Har Zvi notes. No more, can't steal the fella's thunder. 4.e4 looks a great line for your engines.


	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #82 - 03/02/11 at 11:48:45	Post Tools	Print Post
	Bibs wrote on 02/26/11 at 13:15:47: 2...h6 is of course very tricky, but not necessarily bad I feel. Played it against G. Kasparov (yes, him!) in a team simul with three others, including Dutch expert IM Robert Bellin, some 17 years back. Kasparov showed nothing theoretically, he offered a draw much later, we accepted (I voted to refuse as we were outplaying him I thought, but was outvoted 3-1). Same simul he crushed a team led by GM Dlugy, and only conceded 3 draws in total. Poor book, but not for this reason. According to McD your team actually fumbled first, with 10...Nc6 and then in the game 14.Nb5! "would be very awkward for Black". Though imo, 11...Qf7? is the real fumble, as 11...Nh5 still seems to work, and perhaps also 11...0-0-0 which seemed to be your plan from the beginning. Btw, when looking thru the DW Dutch, I noticed another omission of a vital corr game in an Everyman book - maybe they should sponsor their authors with a corr base? 1. d4 f5 2. Bg5 h6 3. Bh4 g5 4. e4 Rh7 5. Qh5+ Rf7 6. Nf3 Nf6 7. Qg6 Nc6 8. e5 Ne4!? 9. d5 Nb4 10.Nc3!! seems to tip the scales clearly in White's favour. (Now, Williams only gives: 10.e6 Nxc2+ 11. Kd1 dxe6 12. Kxc2 Qxd5) 10... gxh4? (10... Bg7 11. Nxe4) 11.O-O-O Nxd5 12. e6 dxe6 13. Nxe4 1-0 Smith,D (2016)-Herzog,K (2041)/LSS 2007. However, 9...gxh4 instead of Nb4 may save the line for Black, or simply playing Williams' mainline 8...gxh4 instead of the interesting Ne4.


	IP Logged

Bibs God Member Offline Posts: 2346 Joined: 10/24/06	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #81 - 03/02/11 at 04:16:40	Post Tools	Print Post
	Forgive my provocation and crass name-dropping. Back to chess. Anyhow, Har-Zvi looking at Bg5 now on ICC videos for those interested. Kasparov always played 1.d4 f5 2.Bg5 h6 3. Bh4 g5 4.e3 rather than 4.e4 and did against us fwiw. Har-Zvi has discussed both thus far.


	IP Logged

MNb God Member Offline Rudolf Spielmann forever Posts: 10780 Location: Moengo Joined: 01/05/04 Gender:	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #80 - 03/02/11 at 00:36:15	Post Tools	Print Post
	Nelson wrote on 03/01/11 at 18:10:20: Name dropping doesn't make your opinion any more valid. Neither does making strong statements without giving lines to back them up.

	The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged. GC Lichtenberg
	IP Logged

Nelson Junior Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 77 Joined: 04/12/08	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #79 - 03/01/11 at 18:10:20	Post Tools	Print Post
	To Bibs, "Opinionated Duffer" Ha Ha Ha, Not good enough to tempt me to relinquish montths of analysis. Name dropping doesn't impress me either or make your opinion any more valid. I will however offer some lines in due course against 2..g6 in due course for comment as I'm currently struggling with this one! Regards, Nelson
	« Last Edit: 03/12/11 at 10:27:59 by CraigEvans »

	IP Logged

Phil Adams Full Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 163 Joined: 04/04/08	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #78 - 02/28/11 at 00:41:43	Post Tools	Print Post
	TalJechin wrote on 10/27/10 at 12:51:07: Got the book today. Leafing thru, it's got some interesting suggestions, and comments and it's very "readable without a board" as there are very few sidelines in the notes - but there's a limit to how little you can say and still be worthwhile reading... For example, the main ML 7...Nc6 8.d5 Na5 9.Qa4! which has always been the theoretical problem with 7...Nc6, is dealt with on pp 147-150 in two recent otb games. And as a devotee of 7...Nc6 since the mid 1990s this was one of the first things I looked at, along with 2.Nc3 where he only gives 2...d5 3.Bf4 a6!? as the dynamic alternative. It would be nice to have an alternative to the mandatory 2...Nf6 3.Bg5 d5 4.Bxf6 exf6 etc; if it works... Looking at the ML, sadly it literally took me 2 minutes with my corr database to find an improvement (and a rather obvious one at that!) on his mainline: 9...c5 10.dxc6 Nxc6 11.Rd1 Ne4!? 12.Nxe4 fxe4 13.Ng5 Nd4 and now he only gives the clumsy 14.Rd2 as "14.Bf1? Bd7 and White will lose at least the exchange after [...] a fork on c2". Well, as I've mentioned elsewhere, a theory book that ignores corr games will age faster than a vampire in sunlight, and after 14.Be3! White has a very good score in corr, as taking the exchange crashed and burned in: Klausen,T (2415)-De los Santos Serrano,A (2338) ICCF 2003, 1-0 in 28. And the better 14...Nf5 is met by 15.Qb3 with a white advantage as in for example: Chorfi,K (2095)-Schakel,C (2383)/ICCF 2006, 1-0 in 44 moves. Sadly I've only had the book for a couple of hours and already I'm disappointed - but hopefully, some of of his other suggestions will hold water vs the corrbase... The good news is that the back cover promises "2 free updates of this book available within a year of publication at www.everymanchess.com" - it will certainly be needed... This skimpy treatment of the critical line with 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.0-0 0-0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.d5 Na5 9.Qa4 c5 10.dxc6 Nxc6 11.Rd1 is indeed a weakness. McDonald continues with 11...Ne4 and writes "This is the move Black wants to play – he responds to White's decentralizing queen move with a counterattack in the centre that gets full value out of 1...f5. However, we can't always play the moves we want, even in the Dutch – so can Black get away with it? The question is whether the resulting dynamism will compensate for the weak pawn that appears on e4 and Black's generally reduced control of the light squares." This is very fair and objective. The problem is that McDonald does not provide an alternative continuation to fall back on if 11...Ne4 encounters a problem (which it has, to judge by the corr. games cited by TalJechin). In the light of his comment above it is somewhat surprising that McDonald fails to mention not only 11...Kh8 - played by Mateusz Bartel - but also 11...Qb6!? played by McDonald's former student Tom Rendle three times in 2009. I wonder, was there some problem at the editing stage? The history of the book does seem somewhat troubled... Be that as it may, I have attached some relevant games and added a bit of home analysis (not deep, so do check it).

	9_Qa4_ideas.pgn ( 6 KB \| Downloads )
	IP Logged

Glenn Snow God Member Offline Posts: 1720 Location: Franklin Joined: 09/27/03 Gender:	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #77 - 02/27/11 at 23:31:00	Post Tools	Print Post
	TalJechin wrote on 02/27/11 at 17:26:34: Quote: Much more important in my view is how well McDonald's main lines stand up and I'd be interested in some serious discussion of these. As I mentioned previously, it took me two minutes with a corrbase to more or less refute his main mainline in the 7...Nc6 variation... As has also been mentioned by Markovich, authors definitely need to invest in a good corrbase before beginning an opening work. However, I too think that are some good or at least thought provoking variations in McDonalds work. For what it's worth I tried hard to find a reasonable continuation for Black after 7...Nc6 8.d5 Na5 9.Qa4, but was unable to do so. My advice would be to scrap this line and concentrate on something else. Perhaps the 7...c6 variations in his book are holding up although they're not the main lines of even this subvariation.


	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #76 - 02/27/11 at 17:26:34	Post Tools	Print Post
	Quote: Much more important in my view is how well McDonald's main lines stand up and I'd be interested in some serious discussion of these. As I mentioned previously, it took me two minutes with a corrbase to more or less refute his main mainline in the 7...Nc6 variation...


	IP Logged

Phil Adams Full Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 163 Joined: 04/04/08	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #75 - 02/27/11 at 13:55:42	Post Tools	Print Post
	Arcticmonkey wrote on 02/21/11 at 17:07:44: I have a question for Phil Adams; You said something about needing a degree of 'scholarship' about Mcdonalds book. I think the main problem people have with this book is not with Mcdonald's explanations, it's with his lack of coverage. When i received the book, i was suprised he didn't cover the 'Dangerous Weapons the Dutch' suggestions such as 1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.h3!? Furthermore, i don't think he covered 3.Bf4, or 2.Qd3 that much at all, i think there was one line. I also don't think he covered 1.d4 f5 2.Nh3!? as well. I mean, you are right that his explanations are good, but i think if someone else was writing the book, say palliser, then he would have definetely covered that. In fact, that was my very first thought when i heard that everyman was announcing a new book. I also don't even want to think about whether or not his update is going to cover Marin's English Repertoire vs. the Dutch setup. Better be a damn good update in my opinion. Any ideas Phil? Sorry for the delay in replying! I think you are being a bit harsh! I am quite happy to be persuaded that this may not be McDonald's best book, but my impression so far is that it is not a bad book. I was somewhat unimpressed by Dangerous Weapons: the Dutch and thought that there was a distinct sound of barrels being scraped! However, since DW came out in 2009 and McDonald's book in 2010, I agree that it was not unreasonable to hope that McDonald would cover the suggestions for White in Dangerous Weapons. But publishing dates do not necessarily reflect the dates that the manuscripts were finished, and it is not impossible that McDonald had not seen DW. Still, I agree it is a bit disappointing, especiallysince both books were from the same publisher. But I don't regard these gaps as a major flaw. These are pretty rare and minor lines, and besides, when I buy an opening book I always expect to have to do some work myself. All opening books have gaps, even ECO, even the incredibly comprehensive Khalifman series for Chess Stars. Much more important in my view is how well McDonald's main lines stand up and I'd be interested in some serious discussion of these.


	IP Logged

TalJechin God Member Offline There is no secret ingredient. Posts: 2892 Location: Malmö Joined: 08/12/04 Gender:	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #74 - 02/27/11 at 13:33:06	Post Tools	Print Post
	I can't say I'd blame him for not delving into those various h3/Nh3 ideas - black is roughly equal with little theory to study, so it would be like complaining that a Sicilian book didn't spend time on 2.Na3 or 2.a3. Too much to cover with little chance of it getting used. - I've played the Dutch frequently online the last few days and haven't encountered a single game with 2/3.h3 or 2.Nh3. Besides, DW is also from Everyman...


	IP Logged

TN God Member Offline Posts: 3420 Joined: 11/07/08 Gender:	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #73 - 02/27/11 at 13:13:05	Post Tools	Print Post
	Arcticmonkey wrote on 02/27/11 at 10:12:35: Ok, so no one has answered my post? Am i the only one who noticed Mcdonald didn't cover DW: The Dutch and other things? Would be good to get a bit of social approval. Also, I wonder if Mcdonald should read this forum, shouldnt take more than like an hour! He did used to be an author of some sections to my knowledge It's hard to notice when I don't have the book. But I can suggest sending Neil a polite email if you have any queries. He might give you a couple of weapons against the Dangerous Weapons, or at least tell you if/when he will address them.

	All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
	IP Logged

Arcticmonkey Full Member Offline Russell Peters ftw Posts: 118 Joined: 02/21/11	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #72 - 02/27/11 at 10:12:35	Post Tools	Print Post
	Ok, so no one has answered my post? Am i the only one who noticed Mcdonald didn't cover DW: The Dutch and other things? Would be good to get a bit of social approval. Also, I wonder if Mcdonald should read this forum, shouldnt take more than like an hour! He did used to be an author of some sections to my knowledge


	IP Logged

Phil Adams Full Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 163 Joined: 04/04/08	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #71 - 02/26/11 at 14:55:42	Post Tools	Print Post
	MNb wrote on 12/04/10 at 15:03:16: Phil Adams wrote on 12/03/10 at 12:46:26: I am slightly puzzled at the negative comments on McDonald's latest Dutch book. McDonald may not be a "superstar" author, but despite being rather prolific he has maintained a consistently high standard of work, with his main strength lying in the quality of his explanations, Thanks for enabling me to compare McDonald's remarks with those of Taimanov (1980) and Schwarz (1964). Everything up to 16...Nb3 is just copied, except the two games in the notes which are taken from a database. And even that choice is biased - where is Vaulin-Diu, RUSch, Elista 2001 ? Too much work to figure out the transposition perhaps? You have confirmed my suspicion that the book is as superficial as the one on the KG. Which is a pity, as McDonald's analysis of the French Tarrasch is truely excellent. MNb: I always read your generally erudite posts with great interest, but, like many of us, just occasionally you are a bit too quick to judge, based on your "suspicion", and to read what you want to read, in line with your prejudices. Please read my original post carefully. The game Benko-Tal is not in McDonald's book. You will see that I mentioned it as the source for my own interest in the 9...Na5 line. For better or worse, the comments in the pgn attached to my original post are mine. In fact McDonald focuses on 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.0–0 0–0 6.c4 d6 7.Nc3 Nc6 8.d5 Na5 9.Qd3 e5!?, based on Babula - Bartel,Prievidza, 2009, instead of 9...c5 as played in Tal-Benko.


	IP Logged

Bibs God Member Offline Posts: 2346 Joined: 10/24/06	Re: Everyman announces book on the Leningrad Reply #70 - 02/26/11 at 13:15:47	Post Tools	Print Post
	Nelson is of course talking Absolute Rubbish, though the book has many other problems. Nelson - give variations, or look like an opinionated duffer. 2...h6 is of course very tricky, but not necessarily bad I feel. Played it against G. Kasparov (yes, him!) in a team simul with three others, including Dutch expert IM Robert Bellin, some 17 years back. Kasparov showed nothing theoretically, he offered a draw much later, we accepted (I voted to refuse as we were outplaying him I thought, but was outvoted 3-1). Same simul he crushed a team led by GM Dlugy, and only conceded 3 draws in total. Poor book, but not for this reason.


	IP Logged

Page Index Toggle

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7

Topic Tools

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Bookmarks:

del.icio.us

Digg

Google

Google+

reddit

StumbleUpon

Yahoo

« Board Index ‹ Board Top

Top

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge