Latest Updates:
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) C47-C49: The Four Knights Game (Read 26946 times)
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3100
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #25 - 04/13/14 at 12:01:39
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 04/13/14 at 07:26:23:
One doubt about the reliability of that game is that it was played in the European under 12. The winner later won the FIDE knock-out and both players are now GMs.

I meant you should look at Nigel's analysis to the game rather than the bare game itself. Still, the game wasn't so bad for a game between kiddies! Smiley
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #24 - 04/13/14 at 07:26:23
Post Tools
The Ponomariov-Azarov game was similar to mine except they removed the Bishops by throwing in Nxb4 and Nxb5 before the Knights returned to d4 and d5 to exploit the pins. This improves the idea for White as the Bishop can be evicted from f3 by Qe3 and White has f4 as a follow-up.

One doubt about the reliability of that game is that it was played in the European under 12. The winner later won the FIDE knock-out and both players are now GMs.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3100
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #23 - 04/12/14 at 21:19:47
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 04/12/14 at 18:28:56:
So what's the best way to "refute" 7. .. Bg4, if indeed there is one? The idea of 8. Bxf6 gxf6 ( 8. .. Qxf6 would lose a piece after 9. Nd5) and 9 Bxc6 bxc6 has been tried to exploit the doubled pawns using the Knights.


Nigel Davies analysed Ponomariov-Azarov for the site many, many years ago, and wrote (about 7...Bg4): "It seems that there are a lot of errors and omissions in the book analysis of this line. It's not at all easy to refute and White might not even have an advantage." I suggest you look at this game.
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #22 - 04/12/14 at 18:28:56
Post Tools
One of the first chess books I ever read was the Penguin "The Game of chess" by Golombek and one of the first openings he discusses is the Four Knights sequence which runs 1 e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bb5 Bb4 5. 0-0 0-0 6. d3 d6 7. Bg5 . Golombek now writes (with translation from English descriptive) of 7. .. Bxc3
"A necessary exchange, since White was threatening Nd5 followed by Nxf6+ when Black has to break up the Pawns in front of his King by gxf6, leaving his King thus open to attack"

So taking this as received wisdom, I would always take on c3 with Black and expect it by my opponents when White.

That is until today when my opponent retained the symmetry with 7. .. Bg4. I continued with 8. Nd5, but then 8. .. Nd4 and 9 Bc4 Bc5. I now duly weakened his King side pawns with 10 Bxf6 gxf6 and now punted 11 Qd2 in the interests of a rapid 12 Qh6, 13 Nxf6 and 14. Qxh7 mate. When he met this with 11. .. c6, I though I had blundered a piece, but found what looked an escape route with 12. Ne3, the point being that 12. .. Bxf3 can be met with 13. c3. Even so Black should snatch the pawn with 12. .. Nxf3 13. gxf3 Bxf3, the point being that 14. Nf5 can be met with 14 . .. Kh8 and the threat of Rg8 check fends off the White attack.

So what's the best way to "refute" 7. .. Bg4, if indeed there is one? The idea of 8. Bxf6 gxf6 ( 8. .. Qxf6 would lose a piece after 9. Nd5) and 9 Bxc6 bxc6 has been tried to exploit the doubled pawns using the Knights.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10514
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #21 - 03/06/12 at 10:12:58
Post Tools
ghenghisclown wrote on 03/06/12 at 03:17:00:
Writing something more understandable and more basic is not the same as condescending,

That's not what I wrote, rather the contrary, for which I brought up Euwe as an example.
I did not even write "goofy is condescending". What I wrote was that "goofy writing is more suited for an ELO 1400-1800 audience" is condescending.
Edited:
Moderator's Note: Edited for content ~SF March 6, 2012

« Last Edit: 03/06/12 at 19:03:21 by Smyslov_Fan »  

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


Pedicare Vestri Latin

Posts: 1022
Location: HollyWeird
Joined: 07/19/06
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #20 - 03/06/12 at 10:01:12
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 03/06/12 at 05:50:35:
ghenghisclown wrote on 03/06/12 at 03:17:00:
Writing something more understandable and more basic is not the same as condescending, especially these days with the breadth and width of data and complexity of chess. I don't know about the Goofy comment (never bought any of Lakdawala's works) but I have watched him play: He's very serious. And if by serious you mean dry, I'll take Goofy.


I don't mind goofy, I just expect thorough.
Funny that in the recent...d6 book, one of the lines already busted by Greet's suggestion. Same publishing house, would have had access.
Easy to see - just follow both books. See intersection, follow Houdini, white wins.



Greet's e4 book? Yes anyway, that's unfortunate...but every book has mistakes.
  

"Experience is a dim lamp, which only lights the one who bears it."
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2169
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #19 - 03/06/12 at 05:50:35
Post Tools
ghenghisclown wrote on 03/06/12 at 03:17:00:
Writing something more understandable and more basic is not the same as condescending, especially these days with the breadth and width of data and complexity of chess. I don't know about the Goofy comment (never bought any of Lakdawala's works) but I have watched him play: He's very serious. And if by serious you mean dry, I'll take Goofy.


I don't mind goofy, I just expect thorough.
Funny that in the recent...d6 book, one of the lines already busted by Greet's suggestion. Same publishing house, would have had access.
Easy to see - just follow both books. See intersection, follow Houdini, white wins.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ghenghisclown
God Member
*****
Offline


Pedicare Vestri Latin

Posts: 1022
Location: HollyWeird
Joined: 07/19/06
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #18 - 03/06/12 at 03:17:00
Post Tools
Writing something more understandable and more basic is not the same as condescending, especially these days with the breadth and width of data and complexity of chess. I don't know about the Goofy comment (never bought any of Lakdawala's works) but I have watched him play: He's very serious. And if by serious you mean dry, I'll take Goofy.
  

"Experience is a dim lamp, which only lights the one who bears it."
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #17 - 03/06/12 at 01:42:53
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 03/05/12 at 21:44:33:
Yes. And it's still condescending. Try some books by Euwe, someone who understood a few things about chess and also was a qualified teacher. His explanations always were elementary but never goofy, not even slightly.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a6/Goofy.svg

I share not only your point of view about what sort of writing is good for teaching, but your admiration of Euwe's works.

  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gwnn
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 472
Joined: 03/21/11
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #16 - 03/05/12 at 22:20:28
Post Tools
dfan wrote on 03/05/12 at 22:05:22:
gwnn said (or so I inferred) that the goofy writing style works better for 1400-1800 players than it does for a 2200, not that the goofy writing style works better for 1400-1800 players than a more formal approach does.

Thus there is no inconsistency with the belief (which I share) that a more mature writing style is better for all classes of players.

This is what I meant to say but I see rereading my short posts that I was far from clear. Perhaps it still sounds condescending - well fair enough, we will have to agree to disagree. I never said all 1400-1800 players like goofy chess writing or that no 1400-1800 player likes serious writing.

For what it's worth, I don't mind either style as long as it's well done (whatever that means - I don't have clear criteria). I don't have a clear preference and see advantages of both styles. And I believe that, on average, the advantages do not apply equally for a ~1600 than for a ~2000 player.

I'm sorry for derailing this thread.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
dfan
God Member
*****
Offline


"When you see a bad move,
look for a better one"

Posts: 732
Location: Boston
Joined: 10/04/05
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #15 - 03/05/12 at 22:05:22
Post Tools
gwnn said (or so I inferred) that the goofy writing style works better for 1400-1800 players than it does for a 2200, not that the goofy writing style works better for 1400-1800 players than a more formal approach does.

Thus there is no inconsistency with the belief (which I share) that a more mature writing style is better for all classes of players.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10514
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #14 - 03/05/12 at 21:44:33
Post Tools
Yes. And it's still condescending. Try some books by Euwe, someone who understood a few things about chess and also was a qualified teacher. His explanations always were elementary but never goofy, not even slightly.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a6/Goofy.svg
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gwnn
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 472
Joined: 03/21/11
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #13 - 03/05/12 at 18:15:34
Post Tools
I am 1700 and I like to be taken seriously too. I just meant to say that it is more likely that it works for a 1400-1800 than for a 2200. Do you disagree with that?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10514
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #12 - 03/05/12 at 16:52:11
Post Tools
gwnn wrote on 03/05/12 at 11:09:59:
The former approach works much better for 1400-1800.

How condescending. I am an 1800 and I like to be taken seriously by chess authors.
  

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gwnn
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 472
Joined: 03/21/11
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #11 - 03/05/12 at 11:09:59
Post Tools
Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 03/05/12 at 04:28:44:
I had some responses about the Move By Move Nimzo book, and have been told that it was good even for my level (~2250). But I wonder how much is attributed to theory both in that book and also in this forthcoming book.

It really depends on the writer, methinks. Lakdawala seems to be slightly goofy when he writes, to keep his readers from getting bored. Emms treats you more seriously. The former approach works much better for 1400-1800.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gilchrist is a legend
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1039
Location: Manchester, UK
Joined: 03/02/10
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #10 - 03/05/12 at 04:28:44
Post Tools
I had some responses about the Move By Move Nimzo book, and have been told that it was good even for my level (~2250). But I wonder how much is attributed to theory both in that book and also in this forthcoming book.
  

Creo lo que creo no importa lo que creen los demás.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
KampongBoy
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 32
Location: Vancouver
Joined: 10/18/04
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #9 - 03/04/12 at 18:16:51
Post Tools
What level of player is it aimed at? A move-by-move book on the Four Knights would seem to suggest a rather simplistic treatment of a straightforward opening. I have always thought this "move-by-move" series was aimed at lower rated players (under1800) am I wrong?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
tracke
Senior Member
****
Offline


Introite tam etiam ibi
dei sunt

Posts: 423
Location: Kiel
Joined: 09/21/04
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #8 - 03/04/12 at 12:53:35
Post Tools
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2050
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #7 - 01/01/12 at 18:46:03
Post Tools
Volcanor wrote on 12/31/11 at 11:35:54:
As TopNotch expressed it, I'm also disappointed by this book. It has been written by Obodchuk, an unknown (to me) russian IM in 2010, and translated by Steve Giddins to be published around summer 2011. It contains 64 full games, 40 of them being played between 2007 and 2010.

I especially disliked 2 things about this book. The first is the lack of comment in most games, either in the opening phase or later. I sometimes wonder how a book can be filled with so much information (e.g., GM series from Quality Chess). With this book, I wonder how it is possible to produce a book with so few information. The second point is the lack of consistency for a repertoire book. You often have 2 or 3 choices for White against each variation, but the author never states which one he prefers, the advantage / drawback of each and so on. In fact, there is almost no prose in this book.

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 (it also covers 3...Bc5) 4.d4 cxd4, both 5.Nd5 Bg7 6.Bg5 and 5.Nxd4 Bg7 6.Be3 are covered. I couldn't find out the preference of the author, neither an explanation for what type of games we reach in each variation. Does one involve greater risks, does one suit strategic players, and so on.

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 d6 7.Bg5 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Qe7 9.Re1 Nd8 10.d4 Ne6, we reach a main variation of the spanish four knights. Three moves are covered. 11.Bh4 in one game, descibed as "Not considered as strongest (...) main moves are Bd2 and Bc1." 11.Bd2 in two games, descibed as "This move is no weaker than the main line Bc1." No additional comment! And 11.Bc1 is covered in only one game with the comment "This position has been reached in practice countless hundreds of times. It is considered that White has some strategic initiative, thanks to its preponderance in the centre and the two, albeit for the time being, passive bishops, but in general, the position is close to equality." It's then up to you to decide between 11.Bd2 and 11.Bc1.

Personnaly, I expect more from a good chess opening book. It's a selection of games, but with very few (or even no) opinion given by the author. Maybe some people will like this book, but it is cleraly not my cup of tea.


That's also my main problem with the book. How can you have a repertoire book where the author does not outline clear recommendations.

Flaws aside, I would say the chapters on the critical Rubinstein (4...Nd4) variation might be worth the price of admission, and according to ads in New In Chess magazine the book appears to selling well despite the misleading 'Repertoire' label.

Tops Smiley
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Volcanor
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 61
Location: Switzerland
Joined: 03/16/09
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #6 - 12/31/11 at 11:35:54
Post Tools
As TopNotch expressed it, I'm also disappointed by this book. It has been written by Obodchuk, an unknown (to me) russian IM in 2010, and translated by Steve Giddins to be published around summer 2011. It contains 64 full games, 40 of them being played between 2007 and 2010.

I especially disliked 2 things about this book. The first is the lack of comment in most games, either in the opening phase or later. I sometimes wonder how a book can be filled with so much information (e.g., GM series from Quality Chess). With this book, I wonder how it is possible to produce a book with so few information. The second point is the lack of consistency for a repertoire book. You often have 2 or 3 choices for White against each variation, but the author never states which one he prefers, the advantage / drawback of each and so on. In fact, there is almost no prose in this book.

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 g6 (it also covers 3...Bc5) 4.d4 cxd4, both 5.Nd5 Bg7 6.Bg5 and 5.Nxd4 Bg7 6.Be3 are covered. I couldn't find out the preference of the author, neither an explanation for what type of games we reach in each variation. Does one involve greater risks, does one suit strategic players, and so on.

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bb5 Bb4 5.0-0 0-0 6.d3 d6 7.Bg5 Bxc3 8.bxc3 Qe7 9.Re1 Nd8 10.d4 Ne6, we reach a main variation of the spanish four knights. Three moves are covered. 11.Bh4 in one game, descibed as "Not considered as strongest (...) main moves are Bd2 and Bc1." 11.Bd2 in two games, descibed as "This move is no weaker than the main line Bc1." No additional comment! And 11.Bc1 is covered in only one game with the comment "This position has been reached in practice countless hundreds of times. It is considered that White has some strategic initiative, thanks to its preponderance in the centre and the two, albeit for the time being, passive bishops, but in general, the position is close to equality." It's then up to you to decide between 11.Bd2 and 11.Bc1.

Personnaly, I expect more from a good chess opening book. It's a selection of games, but with very few (or even no) opinion given by the author. Maybe some people will like this book, but it is cleraly not my cup of tea.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Reverse
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 212
Location: USA
Joined: 11/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #5 - 12/30/11 at 16:40:57
Post Tools
I played a tournament game recently in the four Knights. I am learning this opening so...I felt I would give it a test run against 2000 rated friend of mine.

On move six has anyone analyzed the alternatives to 6.0-0? or 5. Nxe5. also I wasn't sure about 6.h3 maybe with future g4, 0-0-0 and attack etc.. Probably black goes c6 and d5 at some point

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Blue Flaneur
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 42
Joined: 03/23/08
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #4 - 10/31/11 at 20:58:02
Post Tools
how did it disappoint you?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2050
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #3 - 10/29/11 at 20:07:21
Post Tools
walkingterrapin wrote on 09/10/11 at 22:42:52:
It will be interesting to see the analysis of the Belgrade Gambit in this book.  Maybe it will go past the scope the work done here. 


On the whole the book disappointed me, but the Belgrade Chapter was interesting. For starters the author does not hold the Belgrade Gambit in high esteem and in fact the chapter on it lays out an effective repertoire for Black whic is more or less convincing.

Tops Smiley
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #2 - 09/10/11 at 22:42:52
Post Tools
It will be interesting to see the analysis of the Belgrade Gambit in this book.  Maybe it will go past the scope the work done here.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
Reply #1 - 09/02/11 at 12:20:35
Post Tools
Just FYI: I catalogued this as C47-C49, the Four Knights even though the book covers deviations, some of which fall well outside this range.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Mortal Games
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 587
Joined: 07/24/04
Gender: Male
C47-C49: The Four Knights Game
09/02/11 at 10:53:54
Post Tools
This book came out earlier then expected:
http://www.newinchess.com/Shop/Images/PDFs/959.pdf

Maybe the Kaufman repertoire and the Ragozin will arrive sooner too  Wink
« Last Edit: 09/02/11 at 12:20:52 by Smyslov_Fan »  

It has been said that chess players are good at two things, Chess and Excuses.  It has also been said that Chess is where all excuses fail! In order to win you must dare to fail!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo