Ametanoitos wrote on 02/13/12 at 15:28:11:


For the record, I was writing my first response while responded to Chessexplained's comment.  This makes a lot more sense now.

This is very usefull of course that he gave a second line against the KID, and a line i quite like in fact because it gives fair practical chances regardless if Black equalises easily or not. Combining Vigorito's much broader coverage of this line in the first volume of his KID book with Kaufman's analysis is a good place to start because both don't consider options that the other one analyses. Of course Vigorito's coverage is much better.

I understand why such a book as Kaufman's has so many "weak spots". You cannot possibly analyse everything in a single volume with a repertoire for both colours! And believe me, i have experience in writting repertoire books! But somethings i cannot understand. As i said his Italian Game coverage is bad (and i mean the classical main lines with c3+d3 or c3+d4). If you compare the Emms' update i mentioned and do some analysis on your own you'll see that White has quite a big plus in this line (again, i am reffering to Ivanchuk-Karjakin game). Also he doesn't give the simplest equalising line available for Black (i am talking about the c3+d4 main line where Black plays Nxe4 and after Bxf7 and Qb3 Black plays Kf8 and Qe7) but on the contrary says some weird things that White gets an edge in that line in general giving inferior moves by Black to supposrt this argument without taking into consideration the most important sources n this subject. I really don't want to list the chapter's complete errors because i don't want to give the wrong impression that i fight against that book. I enjoyed his first one quite a lot and this one also gave me lots of material to start my own investigation and i saw many fresh and interesting ideas. And i don't say these thing to sound a nice person. I think that most of the foroum members here know that i say my opinion without fearing if i sound bad. Maybe despite my many objections on his analysis i still like the book because i like the author. And that is because i am a computer enginner and i repsect quite a lot his work on computer chess.

It seems that Kaufman is sometimes a victim of his engines. In Game 2 he gives the following variation in a note.



And here is evaluation "... White`s inferior pawn strucure gives Black some but not full compensation for the pawn." My problem is that i do not see how White can hold the pawn and at the end White has only an inferior pawn structure and my engines have also not found any way. But maybe my strength is not sufficient. 


It could be a typical engine "over  the horizon" - problem. 
He writes at the start of the book: "There will be positional errors due to the limits of program chess knowledge; I have done my best ot catch these myself, but i am not Carlsen or Anand, and most of what i know about chess is already in Komodo."

Kaufman writes to 5...e5 that this "rare" move "may be the reltively best move here". And i have found here a thread where this move was analyzed and it seems that Black has no problems.

I don't have the book, but it's worth keeping in mind that Kaufman's repertoire is aimed at players up to 2200, so it's not as though GM Repertoire quality and quantity of analysis should be expected. That said it's good to point out any analytical errors so that those who bought the book can patch them up.

Sorry, i should have been more specific on that. Black should follow Giri-Nakamura, Reggio Emilia 2011 where Black doesn't play Nf6 and keeps his N on d7. If then Na4 he can play b5. If b5 a5 he can play Nc5. Kaufman then gives Nb2-Nc4 "with a uge edge" but this is a typical computer misunderstanding of the closed position. Black has a fantastic advantage if he plays the correct plan with h5 (instead of his 22...Bd7, see page 196 sub-variation starting with 16...Rf7) Nh8-Nf7-Bd6 and then Kh8-Rg7-Rb8-Rb7-Re7-Re8-Bc7-Qf6 and finally Nd6! and Reg8 practicaly winning! Long plan yes but i don't see what White can do instead of attacking e5 as he has practicaly closed the whole board by himself! Play at the K-side? This is suicide! Giri tried to sac a pwn with d5-d6 but "Naka" played Be6 and had no problems.

Ametanoitos wrote on 02/13/12 at 11:15:46:


Sorry, I don't understand the line in the KID - 21...Nf6 in particular, the N is already there. In the line in the book 20... b5 is just answered with Nb6. I don't have that Vigorito update so I can't cross check.

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 02/13/12 at 05:41:04:


Chessexplained wrote on 02/13/12 at 09:44:56:


Black does very well indeed with a score of 65%. Another good option is 6...d6 7.e4 Nh6 and ...f5.