Not very serious lines really to fix but from what i know there are plans by QC 

Thx, Ametanoitos! I'll have a look at it.

Ametanoitos wrote on 07/28/11 at 17:41:37:


Do you have any improvements on Avrukh's lines? I think that 3. Nc3 dxc4 is not too bad for Black, not worse than the Schlechter, just different.

I went throught the excerpt and for me (ELO 2050) the format is ok. I assume for stronger players it is maybe to basic. I liked also Sadlers introductury work.
Vigus book is certainly good, but for me the amount of variations with little strategic explanations is hard to work throught and - this is the main problem - very difficult to remember.

I don´t like the form of presentation but probably it´s designed for other people than me.

It´s interesting to notice Lakdawala´s rep choices after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 (see p.11, intro)
"I recommend the lines 3...Nf6 4 Nc3 a6, and 3...Nf6 4 Nf3 Bf5"
Don´t like this and don´t understand it - what´s wrong with "a pure open slav approach" and
3.e3 Bf5! or 3.Nc3 dxc4! ?? Why learning so much a6 slav theory (with a quite different, imo
more sophisticated philosophy)? The only advantage may be 1.c4 c6 2.Nc3 (2.Nf3 d5 3.e3 Bg4!)
d5 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nf3 a6! But I would call it wrong to adjust a core point of my anti-d4-rep to a rare
white flank opening sideline. It would be less work to play 1.c4 e5/c5 as Lakdawala has to deal with
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 Nf6 4.Nc3 a6 and now 5.cxd5, 5.Nf3, 5.c5 and 5.Qc2 .

tracke 

Though I do not intend to buy the book you'll have my two SRD.
The criticism of Arctic Monkey doesn't seem entirely justified to me. Sure, the questions are a bit artificial, especially compared to Sadler's, but the remarks all look relevant to me. I hardly found any chit chat.
What bugs me is that Lakdawala takes the concept too far. Sadler doesn't. He stops at the early middlegame and hardly gives notes afterwards. That makes sense in an opening book, as amateurs will not likely repeat 30 moves of the games. Probably this is the reason Sadler's book is much thinner.
On the positive side the reader gets some middlegame and endgame training too.

I must admit, I cancelled my pre-order for this title once I'd seen the extract.  I'm sure it has a market, though, and I don't pretend to be 'better' than the players it seems to be targeting; on the contrary, I'm weak in many areas, but the style and content simply doesn't appeal to me. I still hope the book does well, but I have too many other chessbooks on my shelf, vying for attention, that appeal more to me, and that includes the Vigus, Sadler and Vigorito Slav collective.

Hi has anyone read the new pdf free extracts of this book on the everyman site?? I have and tbh i dont really like it that much.

Does anyone else feel the same way?? Here are the basic reasons why i dont like it:
1. Is it really even 'Move by Move' like the format Daniel King pioneered? Doesn't look like it, which is what i was expecting. As in, there doesnt appear to be a scoring system.

2.How long was one game,,, 15 pages?? jeez thats very long! it makes me wonder how much information is actually in these 416 pages. Dont get me wrong, im not someone who thinks every book should be like Grandmaster Repertoire 22. 1.a3! or whatever, but that is a lot of explanation. Some (imo) unecessary since i thought it was an opening book not and opening-endgame one.

3.Does anyone really like Lakdawala's little dot point summary's in random positions? i think their random and even worse, random.

Ok maybe im being too harsh. His explanations are good and all (i wanted tests! like DK Move by Move), but this has soured my hopes for what i thought could be an extremely good idea for a book. I want a point system and dont want the games to last a novel a piece!