I was using the book to prepare for my French Cup match last Sunday and I like the material against the Capablanca System, and even more so against the Hedgehog - here he gives a very simple way to play that avoids all those tense, complicated positions where White always has to be on the lookout for ...b5 or ...d5.
I didn't actually use any of his lines, as it so happens, but did do quite a bit of new analysis, which I will put in the Symmetrical English section.

kylemeister wrote on 04/12/19 at 21:36:57:

I'm sure that's correct as far as it goes, but the page counts don't tell the full story. The 2012 version was in the large New in Chess format with double column text, while the 2004 McKay version had smaller than usual pages and single column text with a larger font. All things considered, the 2012 version must have had twice the amount of material in the 2004 one.

TonyRo wrote on 04/09/19 at 14:48:22:

Along those lines  ...if the page count given here for Larry Kaufman's next white-and-black repertoire book happens to be accurate, it is less than the 2012 version (which was less than the 2004 version).
https://www.amazon.com/Kaufmans-Repertoire-Black-White-User-Friendly/dp/90569186...

GMTonyKosten wrote on 04/09/19 at 07:47:06:

I think you can do even better than that. How about

Grandmaster Repertoire: Mastering the Reloaded, Modernized and Revolutionized Dynamic English Move by Move with the Read and Play Method - Improved and Extended 21st Century Edition

... and then make sure to credit the opening's amazing upsurge in popularity to Carlsen on the back cover - people do that with every opening he's ever played.

I still care deeply for my copy of Tony's book, one of my all-time favorite chess books. It was so influential for me when I was coming up the ranks. To me there's power in the small format opening books. I hope to one day write a white opening repertoire book that embraces this philosophy. We've swung so far in the other direction that now even white repertoire meant for actual players are 3 books long and huge. It's too much. No one is getting an advantage with reasonable play from your opponent anyway.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 04/09/19 at 07:47:06:


Don't think about what to add, think about what to take away One thing that made the book so popular was that it is a tiny sliver of a thing yet provided a complete and clear repertoire for white that a legion of club players used.  The biggest problem with modern books is that they are so big it's hard to go through all the material as a busy part-time player.  The idea of reading a book on the flight to a tournament and playing the opening isn't really viable anymore.

I miss books like the Dynamic English and the "Easy guide..." (to the Najdorf, Nimzo-Indian and Classical Sicilian were all classics at least).  Chess-Stars are probably closest with their "Main Ideas/Step-by-step/annotated games" breakdown but still there is still a clear gap in the market for small, simple and clear books.

The real challenge would be to write an up to date complete and practical repertoire in 144 small pages, that might not be groundbreaking or ideal for correspondence, but great for 1800-2300ish amateurs.   The Chesspub book of the year "Keep it simple: 1.e4" was something along those lines.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 04/06/19 at 15:35:47:

Very nice game....couldn't find it in any of the data bases I use so have added to my notes in Demuth's book.

I do prefer it when an author makes a written assessment after each variation rather than simply using an Informant type symbol. Looking at a few opening books most authors seem to use a combination of both. Marin is something of an exception, he is very good at explaining the position at the end of a variation.

Speaking of books, I looked at the Dynamic English yesterday....it's now 20 years old, time for an up-date perhaps...??

Sometimes the move order is different, so in chapter 3 the 'Chapter Guide' gives the book's 1 Nf3 d5 2 c4 e6 3 g3, and yet the sub chapters b) and c) have 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 g3 e6 3 Bg2 d5 4 c4. Is this sub-optimal? Should White play c2-c4 earlier? I think that there should be an examination of move orders earlier, and then the book should stick to one.
Talking of move orders, in this same chapter there is no mention of my game against Nie: 



Still, it may not have been published anywhere. I think I played this particular move order to avoid a Hedgehog, but I'm not sure.