The books are ten years old. There have appeared significant novelties every year since the books were published. To identify them would be tantamount to doing a second edition.

I use parts of the OFWAK Series 1 for resources in transpositional tricks of my own (like 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 or transposition into the Maroczy Bind instead of the Benoni), for its comprehensiveness in sidelines, and as a reference in combination with other sources. I think they're excellent, but you'd be crazy to try to memorize their main line coverage.

MartinC wrote on 01/20/16 at 19:52:30:


Are there important lines he did not cover (modern lines)?

Is the original OFWAK-repertoire still playable?

rossia wrote on 08/04/11 at 20:11:05:


He's finished it once before, and he's currently doing a 2nd edition. There's a few more volumes before the 2nd edition is completed, so it's not a complete repertoire.

That said, it's completely irrelevant. You can complete the repertoire yourself, it's not that hard.

I have experience with the first edition and all of the second edition works printed so far.

A) Grunfeld and KID Bayonet lines are outdated. Good news is there's viable fixes if you know what lines to choose. 9. b4 Nh5 10.c5 Nf4 11. a4 in the Bayonet is substantially underrated (don't let the statistics fool you) if you wish to continue to stick with the Bayonet. Otherwise I'd recommend the Gligoric, or some 9. Ne1 variation (I have a preference, but I don't want it getting popular so I'm not going to say exactly which variation it is, this also applies to the white side of the Anglo-Grunfeld).

B) Hedgehog recommendation is substantially outdated, white is better advised to look into the d4+Qxd4 lines against black's most usual move order in the Hedgehog (he can use 7. Re1 against the early a6/d6 move orders still, but the standard Be7 requires separate treatment). My suggestion to prospective white players is to find something that makes you comfortable - don't expect too much in the way of an advantage.

C) Theory hasn't been given a chance to move on from volume 3 yet as far as I can tell.

As to your questions:

#1) Khalifman tries to be more main line and critical in everything, so theory tends to quickly move on from the time his books are printed. The good news is he covers almost all of black's minor sidelines, which means it retains significant relevance in all but a few key lines.

#2) The 2nd edition does not yet. However, anyone with a functioning brain can develop the rest of the repertoire to their liking.

#3) If you understand the majority of the positions and know what you're aiming for you'll do quite well. Of course, this can be said for any serious opening repertoire.

#4) Avrukh's series is good as well, about on par.

I personally prefer the Khalifman of approach of trying to cover every base and trying to be critical at all times, but Avrukh's repertoire actually blends in quite well as it concerns the 1. d4 d5 opening transpositions. My advice: combine the two, or use them both. There's no reason to restrict yourself to one or the other.

Please post your truthful opinions!