I'm thinking of moving this thread to General Chess since the book is meant to cover gambits arising after 1.d4 and 1.c4. However, I don't own the book so I don't know how much of the coverage is classified under 'Daring Defences'. Is the majority of the coverage on the Benko and Blumenfeld?

gwnn wrote on 01/11/12 at 10:50:27:


In the line you're talking about, don't you just play 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 e6 3.c4 c5 4. Nc3 (your move order) 4...cxd4 5.Nxd4 and now 5...Nc6 or 5...Bb4, as TN pointed out?  You've avoided the Semi-Tarrasch and could still have aimed for the Blumenfeld after 4.d5 b5.  What am I missing?

gwnn wrote on 01/11/12 at 08:54:46:


You can't reach this line after 1.d4 Nf6. You can reach it with 1.d4 e6 2.c4 c5 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3, for example, but it's difficult to play the Tarrasch using an 1...e6 move order unless you play 2...d5, in which case you have restricted your options somewhat against the d-pawn Specials. It is possible to play the Semi-Tarrasch with 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 c5, avoiding the Exchange QGD and some of the Bg5 systems, but that's a different opening altogether.

Sorry, i didn't even read the original question well. Of course, if White plays Nf3+Nc3 then Black should take on d4. It is page 333 in GM 10.

Taking on d4 is not the best choice as it opens the position in White's favor. Black (and White in this position) wants to be flexible and to choose the right structure (will i have the IQP or my opponent?) when it is favourable.

I agree that it is not a repertoire work in the sense of "Grandmaster Repertoire" for example, but i found in it much more than i expected plus some top notch analysis of some critical theoretical positions! (for example the "old" main line of the Benko with the fiachettoed King is covered excellently). In the "hot" g3 line he doesn't offer a 100% solution but he comes really close in my opinion (i had to discover the real solution myself, meaning the improvement over Avrukh, but it was in the line Alterman gave as sound for Black). Also, in the f3 line (discussed in some depth in chesspub in another thread) he gives a pretty solution that maes me want to play that way again for Black (i chose to defend the position with bxc4 and Qa5+ that Markovic likes a couple of times in practice but Alterman says that White has a slight edge there. I have gone that way because the lines offered in Pinki's book seemed to me clearly chaotic but Alterman makes life a lot easier there!)
Alterman also has some nice things to say in the b6-declined line.

As i said, i got much more than i was expecting from theory's perspective as i had his first book which was much "lighter" in theory but had offered an excellent structure in order to study or teach the systems he examined.

gramsci wrote on 12/24/11 at 07:36:38:

Ah, okay. I´m not a native speaker myself so I understand your problems. On first reading though it sounded somewhat harsh. 
gramsci wrote on 12/24/11 at 07:36:38:

This book is not a repertoire work. If White does not play 3.d5 he recommends the Vaganian Gambit as I wrote above.

The chapter against 1.c4 is entirely different and has nothing to do with the Benko. Here he takes a look at the English Defence 1... b6 with emphasis on 2.d4 Bb7 3.Nc3 e6 4.e4 Bb4 5.f3 f5 6.exf5 Nh6.

I like the book but surely you have to do some independent work in most lines if you want to play them.

Fllg wrote on 12/23/11 at 21:29:14:


I rather think that the writer meant to write 'the same as'.
Many non-native speakers here. English as International Language (EIL) paradigm. In such cases language is often more direct, nuances lost. Some inadvertent offence not surprising, we have to try to read positively looking for intended projected meaning. Suspect this here. Certainly reads that way.

Alterman lectures were cheerful, but too wishy-washy, Dzinzi habit of leaving key stuff out. As an example, The Milner Barry French series was notable for that.
Seems as though the Black Gambit Book may be better produced, more rigorous. Will have a look.

Willempie wrote on 12/14/11 at 22:53:23:

What line does he reccommend against the English? I'm thinking of buying it but I want to be sure it ins't a copy of Pedersen's "Play The Benko Gambit".

Just got the book from the real santaclaus. It looks very good. I just browsed through it and it would seem like a good mix between explanation and theory.
The meat is the Benko, Blumenfeld and the "Vaganian" and the rest is about d4-specials (torre and the likes) and the English defense. Seems like he is quite good at "teaching by example".

Will come back after I have actually done more than just browsing

Or perhaps http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles415.pdf

Mark, your link is to an article focusing on  Jennifer Shahade's excellent book, Chess Bitch. I really enjoyed the book, but I don't see what it has to do with this discussion.

How does Alterman's book compare to Play the Benko by Nicolai Pedersen ? Do they cover exactly the same ground ? Am I right in thinking that the Pedersen book is aimed at a higher graded audience with more experience of these openings ?

In that case, as I mentioned, Alterman gives excellent instruction for the "starting out" group. But I guess I expect the very best books not only to provide a good explanation of the opening but also "secret" weapons that the owner of the book can use to good effect.

Again, I really do think Alterman's instruction is excellent on ICC, it just doesn't go the next step.

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 11/01/11 at 10:33:48:

I just think the same. The "Gambit Guide" is mostly a motivation series. On the other hand I really love this style of presentation and it strongly reminds me to Moskalenko's French books (he also feels free to sidestep critical moments if they are not convinient to him). But (and this may go for Alterman's books as well): we are not Super-GMs but mere amateurs and as a starting point - to become familiar with various opening lines - this kind of presentation (I would even say: he should not point out flaws to deeply - because then you miss your own way of investigation which is needed to really understand what is going on.) is optimal for the target audience of ICC.

My copy arrived yesterday, I have not had the time to look at it yet, I have hardly time for any chess at the moment except some posts at this forum.

The Vaganian Gambit is indeed the same line as the Kasparov Gambit.

Thanks, that would indeed make sense, since that would be sort of declined Benoni

The only Vaganian Gambit I'm aware of is in the Trompowsky: 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 c5 3.d5 Qb6 4.Nc3 Qxb2 5.Bd2 and so on. 

But there White is playing a gambit, not Black. So possibly Alterman has something else in mind.