Straggler wrote on 02/29/12 at 10:17:09:


I thought I'd follow up to explain why 4....g6 would be covered by Kaufman after 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Qc2 (or 4. Qb3), but not after 4. Nc3. After 4. Qc2, 4...g6 is a perfectly logical move because it prepares ....Bf5 hitting the White queen. It's also played about 25% of the time in the databases. So Kaufman should certainly cover it, and he does, recommending 5. Bf4, and then giving a fair amount of analysis (a full column on page 145). 

After 4. Qb3, 4....g6 is a dubious move, because again Black is trying to get to a Schlechter when White's queen bishop hasn't been blocked in, and there's no compensating factor like the gain of a tempo obtained by hitting the Queen on c2. 
But 4....g6 is played about 5% of the time after 4. Qb3 so Kaufman probably considers it a border-line case and he gives a quick recommendation: saying in case of 4...g6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. cxd5 cxd5 7. Bg5 and White is better because his bishops are better than Black's. By the way, if you compare the position with a similar one with White's queen on c2 rather than b3, you'll see that here White's queen is tying the Black bishop to the defense of the b7 pawn and hitting the d5 pawn--White's queen makes sense on b3 in an exchange Slav, but not on c2, which is why Kaufman's recommendation after 4. Qc2 g6 does not involve going into the Exchange Slav structure.

I think honestly that trying to understand why some moves are popular with the masters and other moves aren't is an important way to improve. The situation here is a typical case. Amateurs will often make moves like 4...g6 after 4. Nc3 or 4. Qb3 because they're just playing a system irrespective of what their opponent is doing. If you understand what's happening (e.g. why masters only play 4...g6 in those positions very rarely, even though they often play it against 4. Qc2 or 4. e3), you can punish these inaccurate moves when they happen, and generally play better chess. 

It's true that it would be nice if Kaufman explained everything, but he can't in the space he has, and in any case you'll remember best if you figure out these kinds of nuances yourself. I think he does an excellent job in covering the really dangerous responses to the repertoire, and you can build around that by trying to figure out with the help of an engine like Komodo and a database of master games what's going on for the moves he doesn't cover.

EDIT: By the way, I just realized that Kaufman does in effect cover 4. Nc3 g6, by transposition. Since he recommends 5. Nc3 after 4. Qb3 g6, you can obviously transpose into his line after 4. Nc3 g6 5. Qb3 Bg7 6. cxd5 cxd5 7. Bg5 with a nice game. He also points out in his introduction to the Slav that 4. Qb3 works well against 4....g6, but against 4. Qc2, 4...g6 is a good move (and on the other hand 4. Qc2 is better than 4. Qb3 against 4...e6 because it supports e2-e4.)

I think it's reasonable that he doesn't cover 4...g6 in the position after 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3.  According to the databases, 4....g6 is only played about 2% of the time in that position, with the vast majority of games going 4...e6, 4...dxc4, or 4....a6. 4....g6 is a dubious way to try to play a Schlechter, because White hasn't blocked in his queen's bishop.

As Kaufman writes, if he doesn't cover some rarely-played move, you can just put the position into an engine and play whatever move it recommends. If you want Kaufman's recommendation, it would most likely be whatever Komodo recommends, since he created the evaluation routine for Komodo and says he primarily used Komodo in this book. So following that advice, you find Komodo 3 (which is a free program that runs on all popular operating systems) recommends 5. cxd5 cxd5 6. Bf4, which has scored quite well for White in practice. Another point is I don't think there's a whole lot of interesting theory to discuss after 5. cxd5 cxd5 6. Bf4--it's basically transposed to an Exchange Slav that is rather favorable for White.

So yes, one can fault him for not saying anything about what to do against 4...g6, but at some point he has to cut out the discussion of dubious moves. Otherwise he'd  also need to discuss 4...Bf5, and 4....Qb6, and 4....Nbd7, and 4....Bg4, and 4....Ne4, and 4....h6, which also all show up in the databases, and the book would be full of discussions of unpopular and bad moves.

Straggler wrote on 02/28/12 at 23:40:20:


I don't have the book, but does he perhaps cover it from a Grunfeld move order?

By the way, with the move order in your game White should be able to get a pleasant game with 5.Bf4, 5.cd cd 6.Bf4, or even 5.Qb3.  The Schlecter is usually only played after White blocks his Bishop in with an early e2-e3.

Again I think it would be better to have a tree variation approach or show the gamescore no more past move 30 unless absolutely necessary. That would give more space to theoretical discussion. This applies especially to the Grünfeld and Breyer chapters.

bohdan wrote on 02/28/12 at 10:26:45:


I think the book will serve you well. This book is an improved version of his previous work. The opening variations that have been chosen give interesting positions, and in particular if you didn't like some of the dry choices that his previous book made (Moscow variation against Sicilian, Exchange Ruy, Berlin variation) the current book doesn't make those kinds of choices.

He basically sticks to strong main lines. In his previous book, he would choose "second-best" variations (like the Exchange Ruy or Moscow) to reduce the amount of theory that you had to study. In this book, he instead typically cuts down on the amount of theory one needs to study by choosing, within a main line, rarely played moves or novelties that the computer analysis actually prefers to the most popular move. I think that is a great approach.

He also gives a surprising number of options for a repertoire book. For example, after 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6, he gives complete repertoires consistent with both 3. Nc3 and with 3. Nf3.

I think this is a superb book--definitely anybody who liked his previous book should get this one.

Good morning,

Could someone advise how good/bad is this book for not serious and not strong player, who play chess just because he like it and exclusively on internet (no OTB or real-time game, but also not really correspondence)? 

I like the previous Kaufman work very much, but I found his solution to Sicilian and Ruy Lopez  (black and white) as little bit boring when playing many games (sometimes too many) and following all the same road. As well as I could not find myself in semi-slav and continued with Tarrasch. Still found it nice to follow that book occasionally. 

With a new book Kaufman a bit “betrayed” me switching to 1.d4 . However, I can easily accept this as far as the lines offered will give some fun to play them.

So does this book offer lines which will be interesting to play even if it will be only lines someone play? Does not heavy relying on computer take out fun of the game (I stopped using engines just for that reason? Does the book contain reasonable and enough solutions to side-step lines on the way to main line?

Although I have a nice collection of openings books I like the idea to have only one, which I can take with me for example when travelling. And I do not care about lay-out (complete games or trees) as it is matter of personal taste and say nothing about content.

Thanks 
Bohdan

ericmittens wrote on 02/27/12 at 23:40:33:


Completeness?? So what did you expect from 500 pages? I'd say that any book, even the "Grandmaster repertoire" and "According to..." series are not complete. 250 pages per colour is enough to give a decent set of lines not impossible to remember.  It's a backbone to further investigations. Try reading what's in the book and don't focus on what's not in the book. If you would write down your own repertoire, how complete would it be?