I don't really mind if a novelty deep down a tree isn't mentioned. You can't analyze/show everything, the book is already rather variation-heavy (for my liking at least). Books are good for general and new ideas, for the latest theory I always use databases. 

I would have welcomed some content on d3-spanish-variations reaching a chigorin-setup with e5-d6-c5, for example there is a number of move-orders which can lead to the following position (even though a 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d3 move-order):
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. d3 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. Re1 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. Nbd2

I was also a bit surprised that the following trap is not even mentioned:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 Nd7 12. Nbd2 exd4 13. cxd4 Nc6 14. Nf1 cxd4 15. Nxd4 Nxd4 16. Qxd4 Ne5 17. Ne3 Bxh3 
This may not have any theoretical relevance, as already 14.Nf1 is considered non-critical, but in my Blitz-practice, this is one of the most common variations on the board!

I do have "the chigorin bible" by both Ivans. Although I mostly like what I have seen thus far, and I like the fact there is a part with annotated games and plans, I am really rather disappointed that the two authors didn't seem to have worked (or talked) together at all.

For example, in game 1, after 
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 Qc7 12. Nbd2 cxd4 13. cxd4 Bd7 
Ivan Sokolov states:
"Modern theory does not consider 13...Bd7 precise and the main line nowadays is 13...Nc6 [...]"
However, going to the theory-part of the book, Ivan Salgado Lopez sates, for the same position:
"[13...Bd7] My favorite move in this position. This is the most flexible square for the bishop and Black connects the rooks"

To make things even more strange, he then goes on with
14.Nf1 Rfe8! 
"This move has not been played a lot but in my opinion it gives new life to the 12...cxd4 variation. I'm not sure how big White's advantage is"
15.b3!

Now contrast this with a variation of game 22, which transposes to the same position!
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 Qc7 12. Nbd2 Bd7 13. Nf1 Rfe8 14. b3!
"applying the Keres-type middlegame plan with 14...cxd4 15.cxd4 [...] does not work here, as Black has no counterplay to compensate for the d6-pawn weakness and White's space advantage".

At the end, he concludes:
"[...]leads me to conclude that 14.b3! simply kills Black line  11. d4 Qc7 12. Nbd2 Bd7 13. Nf1 Rfe8 setup!"

So, while one of the authors claims that Bd7 + Rfe8 is the best setup after the exchange on d4, the other author things Bd7 + Rfe8 is not playable, even though it can by force transpose to the other variation!

Now, I wouldn't mind if the two authors disagreed about a position, if they would say so. But they don't mention that there are mixed opinions about the same position, and I doubt they were aware of this. Each author simply wrote his part of the book, without bothering even looking at the co-authors part.

Brabo what is the link to the blog article you wrote about corr databases? Please and thanks!

So what's happening in the Keres line with 11...Nd7 and 12...exd4 these days - is the "main line" with 12...exd4 13 cxd4 Nc6 14 d5 Nce5 15 a4 Rb8 15 axb5 axb5 16 Nxe5 Nxe5 17 f4 Ng6 18 Nf3 Bh4 19 Rf1 Bg3 20 f5 Ne5 21 Ng5 just bad for Black, and if so, where should he deviate?

kylemeister wrote on 12/03/18 at 21:07:00:


The book lacks the 'refutation' of 12.-Bd7 given by Khalifman in his Anand series: 

13.Nf1 Nc4 14.Qe2!   

This has been played over the board at least twenty times...

Thanks for the links.

fjd wrote on 12/15/17 at 21:47:23:


I download games from The Week In Chess. From 2012 to 2016, white scores only 51% after 11...Nd7. I think theory is also positive on the Keres line. If you are just catching up, like me, the surprise is that after 12Nbd2 black prefers exd to the earlier cxd. The idea is to go into a Benoni type structure after 12Nbd2 exd 13 cxd Nc6 14d5 Nce5. At a glance it may not look like much. However black has some interesting resources on the king side. After 15Nxe5 Nxe5 16f4 Ng6 17Nf3, black can consider 17...Bh4 or 17...f5.

I prefer the Open to the Closed Ruy Lopez, but dabble in the Closed from time to time. I think black should always consider d5 by white. I suppose it could be labelled the "ultra-closed" variation. How does black best arrange his pieces after white separates black's king side from his queen side?

ChessPublishing has provided a variety of opinions on 12 d5. These are from various annotated games, and, possibly commentators:

"I continue to think that this move is excellent and leaves the Keres Variation under a cloud."

"This looks premature as Black is well placed to launch  a counterattack with ... f7-f5."

"Although this is good in many lines of the Closed Spanish, in this position it gives Black excellent counterplay."

"For a long time it has been established that Black should not fear this position. Keres himself thought that this move was premature. In fact, the present game seems to show the opposite, and puts the whole Keres variation in doubt."

For me at least, the next step would be to put eyes on the board and play through some games.