@Tickleme
Top notch's reaction hits the mark. 
While Joe Gallagher's book was excellent when it was written, by now it is now 17 years old and much has happened to the theory since.
If you follow his repertoire you are in for a number of big unpleasant surprises.

The theory on the main black defence systems 3...d5
and 3...g5 has seen major changes since 1993.

Gallagher's proposed repertoire against the Kiseritzky would get white in trouble nowadays, if Black follows Fedorov-Ivanchuck. While black can also follow Magnus Carlsen's lead and play 5..d6 against the Kiseritzky without any risk.

On the other hand new interesting attacking schemes for white have been worked out as well.
-----------------------------------------------------
Regarding the John Shaw project:
Have faith yee unbelievers.
I frankly cant remember a Quality Chess book from the past four years that has disappointed me...

I highly recommend Joe Gallagher's book on the King's Gambit. Well worth a read!

Quote:


This doesn't exactly inspire confidence but I suspect that there is a dearth of useful high level tournament praxis to fall back on. Is this supposed to be a repertoire book or a survey of most of the lines?

Didn't Aagaard anounce he had retired from tournament chess in an interview with Watson on ICC? Very difficult to tell when he's serious or toungue in cheek.

Tops

TopNotch wrote on 08/13/10 at 16:55:46:


Actually, Shaw is the new potential author. You can still find ghost copies of the King's Gambit by Jan Pinski on big book sites, despite that it never got published. 

Anyway, on the QC blog it now says "September/October". And if they've been continually working on the book for all this time it should be worth waiting for!

By the way, on my favourite booksite I saw an entry about another unavailable KG book from 2009, El rey de los gambitos / The King's Gambit by Antonio Gude. 
Is this for real or another ghost? And if it's real, is it any good?

TopNotch wrote on 08/13/10 at 16:55:46:


Hardly all his life: I happen to know that the King's Gambit was Shaw's choice back in the day but he gave it up while still rated in the 2200s, and perhaps not coincidently shot up quite quickly in rating once he'd adopted the 'boring' openings you seem to despise.  I'm fairly certain he was playing the dragon for a while too.

I'm not terribly sure he isn't a thrill seeker, but if his openings produce the desired results with the desired output of energy then that's fair enough.

I'm fairly sure that it will end up being the best book on the KG by far, as he will want to prove it viable but he should be quite objective about it.

From what I understand from the QC blog, all office blitz games have been mandated to be in the King's Gambit for quite some time and Aagaard at least has been punting it occasional in tournament play.  I think it's just been delayed as Shaw has been too busy editing other books.

Shaw tries to avoid complications in all his games with white or black like the plague all his chess playing life, preferring quiet system openings like exchange ruy and an assortment of anti sicilians, quiet lines of the slav for black etc etc. Hardly the thrill seeker he seems a strange choice for a book on the Kings Gambit.

Incidentally, wasn't that Quality Chess Kings Gambit book slated to come out for ages now, and continually pushed back. Actually I thought the project was put on hold until new potential authors could be found.

Tops

It is a KG game collection with lightly annoteted games. If you like to play through games from a book I guess the book is OK, but if you are looking for opening theory there is not much to come for.

I did buy the book, but in my opinion it is not worth the money.

see more in this tread 
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1263354036/9#9