Yeah, the layout is a bit horrendous. A large part of the organization looks like guitar chords or something (e.g. DFCA Line), but there is some sympathy for the reader:

"At some specific places we thought it helpfull (sic) to underscore some parts to make it easier for you to find the main variation. It might not be consistent with the overall layout but may be helpful."

Thanks, editorial team!

In defense of the editing, they do have chapter indices, which helped me somewhat through the maze.

To expand on Stigma's post:

I think the Classical significantly weakens the English Attack.

6.Be3 Ng4! is an improved version of the Najdorf line (Nc6 is much more useful than a6) and 6.f3 e5! is a comfortable Boleslavsky (precursor of the Najdorf). Note that Black can play a5 in one move to play against the knight on b3 and this is at least one favorable comparison with the Najdorf.

For just about everything else besides 6.Bg5 or 6.Bc4, you can play a comfortable Boleslavsky or Dragon (having bypassed the Yugoslav). I've noticed that a lot of amateurs get move-ordered when they play 6.Be2 to try to avoid theory. In this case, the Dragon can be an unpleasant surprise, since they may prefer the Yugoslav but never got around to studying the Rauzer or Sozin carefully. In my experience, a lot of players get confused by this move order.

I think 6.Bc4 should be taken seriously, but I don't think it should be greatly feared either. The modern approaches that delay castling are very interesting. The theory in some places seems less charted than the Najdorf here, so I think you can force White to think on his own more and still get good counterplay. Marin's DVD has an interesting system with Bd7 against the Velimirovic that appears to be little explored.

6.Bg5 is the real monster here. A lot of people know this is the best move, but maybe aren't completely sure why. The Kozul can be very sharp and takes careful study. (For me, this is the biggest obstacle in the Classical repertoire by far.)  It's easy to mess up when you're playing it for the first time. One thing to remember is that Black will often sacrifice a pawn (or sometimes two!) to trade queens and enter an endgame where he has dynamic compensation with the bishop pair and piece activity while attacking White's weaknesses. I think it's an underestimated system often due to some false assumptions. There is a lot of theory to learn here, but I think it has good practical potential if you do your homework since the theory is less known and sometimes less explored than the Najdorf.

@nocteus:

I'm not sure if such abstract considerations are all that useful in deciding what to play. But to go along: With ...Nc6 in Black has more immediate influence on the centre, and moves like 6.f3, 6.Be2 and (especially) 6.Be3 are thought to have less bite there than against the Najdorf. Black also keeps the option of switching to a Dragon structure (without resorting to the somewhat dodgy-looking Dragondorf).

You don't mention practicality, which to me is the main selling point of the Classical. The Najdorf is so heavily theoretical that if you play it, it is probably your first or only choice. The Classical being less theoretical means it can work as a second choice or surprise weapon, or for people with little time or a bad memory.

This is largely because the Richter-Rauzer is in many people's opinion the only critical try, which is both a blessing (less theory to remember) and a curse (maybe it wins by force!?). And in spite of that, 6.Bg5 against the Najdorf has been analyzed in even greater detail than the R-R.

ChevyBanginStyle wrote on 02/29/16 at 06:22:38:


That seems curious (on the part of K&J).  14...e5 was also thought to be better than 14...Bxe4 in such old books as ECO and NCO.

IMJohnCox wrote on 02/29/16 at 00:49:01:

By force?! Assuming you're not joking here, that must be bad news for the book's sales (likely already hurt by the frequent complains over the layout).

I wonder where the book crosses paths with the recent Marin DVD, and whether he can offer any hope?

I played the Kozul a bit several years ago and have some sympathy for Black's cause, but if it really is in such a sorry condition I won't play it again any time soon.

Interesting, because after working my way through Marin's three volumes on the English, I'd say i really like the presentation and explanations, i.e. great for learning genraöly about the opening. But he has missed quite a few critical lines (already played but incorrectly noted as novelties, engine lines that were pretty clear cut, or logical continuations that were not mentioned e.g.), i.e. not always that great theoretically speaking. This has been discussed before. My question is, was this just specific for those books and has changed now?

I tried to, but got stuck with "....uh....uh...uh".