glut wrote on 09/06/11 at 22:19:38:
the big question for me is chapters 28 & 29 - I would hope for the more principled/aggressive o-o but with some detail on o-o-o.
Part 2 also looks interesting as in practical terms when I have played this in the past 3.Nc3 is a common reply (similarly to facing 2.Nc3 against Alekhines).
I can reveal that both 0-0 and 0-0-0 plans are discussed against the trendy 5 Nc3 line. How do I know?
Well, as Carsten Hansen points out in his latest column at the Chess Cafe website, the chess content of Chess Stars books is generally of a very high standard, but there are frequent problems with the English text, which is hardly surprising when you consider that it is generally translated from Russian into English by a Bulgarian (albeit a GM). But for the Petroff book I was employed to eliminate the worst textual problems and help produce a final text that (hopefully) readers will find much more user-friendly, although parts of it were difficult and no doubt keen-eyed readers will still be able to spot some flaws. (I also worked on the new repertoire book against the French, the book on 1 d4 d6, and the introduction to the Gruenfeld book.)
Thus I am very familiar with Sakaev's book. While it did not inspire me to take up the Petroff, I could not feel other than impressed by the effort that Sakaev has clearly put in, evident in his judicious choice of lines, his insights and explanations and the amount of original analysis.
Whether it was wise for Sakaev to take on the challenge of proposing a complete repertoire against 1 e4 is open to debate. I can imagine our forum's keen supporters of e.g. the King's Gambit or the Urusov picking over his analysis with a fine tooth-comb! Others will no doubt be disappointed that he does not always analyse Black's sharpest winning attempts, for example against the Boden-Kieseritzky 1 e4 e5 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 Bc4 Nxe4 4 Nf3 Nxc3 5 dxc3 he proposes 5...c6 6 Nxe5 d5 instead of the critical 5...f6.