MarinFan wrote on 07/26/16 at 20:56:44:


Hi, sorry for my delayed response; thx for the answer. I agree to the position being within the 'playable for black' limits, although I would probably choose white (after 10...Nb6). What  about 11.Be5, with the idea of taking the knight on f6 and then winning the d5 pawn? Is that what you meant with 'further down the line black loses a pawn'? (Any concrete variations up your sleeve?)

I am not greatly worried about this, but is it so clear that black really can claim any space advantage then, with full compensation?

A sample line is 11.Be5 Qe7 (11...g5!?) 12. Bxf6 Qxf6 13. Nxd5 Qxd4 14. Rd1 Qc5 15. Nhf4. White has centerlized knights, and the e4 pawn looks a bit weak to me? Maybe hit with 15... Bxf4 16. Nxf4 Bf5? 

Got the book now, and my impression at this time is favourable too - no doubt, some serious work behind this, and I like how they give multiple suggestions at places. However, I am rather suprised to see how D&S dismisses the following line (i.e., the move 4...exd4) as "somewhat ridiculous": 1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 c6 4.d4 exd4, p. 22. As I understand it, this very variation was suggested in D.Weapon's as a 'clean equalizer' against 'Kostenites', with the idea of playing Na6 and Bc5. E.g., 5. Qxd4 Na6!? 6. Nf3 Bc5 7. Qe5+, and then either 7...Qe7 or the Komodos 7...Be7. I have looked at these lines to some extent (e.g., also with other moves than 6.Nf3 inserted), and it indeed looks pretty equal to me. Anyone who feels that 'ridiculous' indeed is a suitable label for this whole system?

Let me again stress that the book looks very good and substantial, with lots of ideas explained, theory, games, and there is lots of sidelines covered.

I also wonder if the following line is totally even (it surely is close to, but perhaps just a tiny better for white):  1.c4 e5 2.g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 c6 4.d4 e4 5.Nc3 d5 6.Bg5 Bbd7 7.cxd5 exd5 8.Qb3 Bd6 9.Nh3!? (a sideline in the book - good that it wasn't omitted) h6 10.Bf4!? (where also Bxf6 is discussed). To be honest, it doesn't strike me as an attacking position against the English, although it must be totally playable, right? But if any side has any kind of tiny edge there, it must be White?

Any comments on all this welcome

Sounds good - I am interested in the 'normal' Keres' lines with 2.Nf6 before playing c6, which (if you ask me) equalizes fairly easily against the 2.g3  (as suggested in D.Weapons', was it Pallister again?) but I understand that this book suggests 2.c6 instead. Having said that, I of course realize that the concept of 'equalizing' is a complex one, and it is interesting how Marin thought there still is some advantage for white.. I personally don't see any, and, for what it is worth, Komodo, Hiercs & Houdini tend to assign slightly negative numbers in these variations (e.g., after the 3. Bg3 d5 4. d4 c5 5. Qxd4 Na6). Anyone in disagreement with this, by the way?  (Although, perhaps, slightly off topic).

Will be interesting to see how the lines of this new book compares to this..

Edit: my memory did let me down; the book apparently discusses both 2.c6 and 2.Nf6 3.c6. Then, no doubt, a very interesting book ...

Did anyone get it yet, any first impressions above what is apperent in the sample pdf?

I like the idea of Bb4 in the Four Knights English, lets see the book, it is going to be published very soon if I am correct.

If one is going to adorn 1.c4 e5 2.g3 with '?!', it makes you wonder how objective the book is going to be. It is convenient that the standard counter of d4 to ...c6 isn't mentioned in the introduction, as 2.g3 c6 3.d4 e4 4.Nc3 d5 5.Nh3 (following the 'grab all the space' strategy) is meant to be a little better for White.

There is another little point. 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bb4 5.Bg2 O-O 6.O-O e4 7.Ng5 Bxc3 8.dxc3 is very similar to 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Nc3 g6 5.O-O Bg7 6.e5 Ng4 7.Bxc6 dxc6. Fans of Tony Rotella's The Killer Sicilian might not particularly enjoy playing against their own repertoire.

I suppose they aren't covering 1 Nf3 d5 2 d4, but this would certainly put me off playing 1...d5 as I don't have the Queen's Gambit in my repertoire.

Not until Chess Stars publishes the contents, no.