Another random thing I notice is that he gives 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 (or vice versa, as I played it) 3...g6 4.Bb5 (page 141), which I played once 20-odd years ago (winning!), but afterwards concluded it's pretty much nothing for white, so 4.d4 is required. After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 the old good moves were 4.O-O and 4.c3. Nowadays everybody plays 4.Bxc6, so who knows, maybe 4.Nc3 is also good? Except his line ends with "(+0.09)" so I don't see this as much of a recommendation.

On the same page he gives 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 d6 4.d4 (in my opinion the one good move) 4...cxd4 5.Nxd4 Nf6 6.f3 with (A1) 6...e6 and (A2) 6...e5, but no mention at all of 6...g6, which is a pretty big transpositional hole in his repertoire.

His (A1) ends with "+= (+0.23). This knight vs bad bishop endgame clearly favors White.". This seems to me an unfortunate use of the word "clearly".

One random thing I notice is that he gives 1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 a6 3. Nge2 d6 4. g3 Nf6 5. Bg2 Nc6 6. O-O e6 7. d4 cxd4 8. Nxd4 Bd7 9. Re1 Be7 10. Nxc6 Bxc6 11. a4 Qc7 12. a5 0-0 13. Be3 Nd7 14. Na4 Rae8 15. Nb6 f5 16. Nxd7 Qxd7 17. Qd3 fe 18. Bxe4 Bxe4 19. Qxe4 as +=.  That's a line I recalled as considered equal by old theory (for instance in the first Yearbook from 1984, in which 14...Rae8 and 15...f5 were adorned with exclamation marks).

Ray F wrote on 04/29/19 at 21:00:54:

If this book is anything like the last two (and the f3 KI/Gr book), he will have something interesting to say about the practical implications of his selections in getting better positions and winning games.  That is more important to me than the actual lines as a reason to buy the book.  You can draw analogies to your repertoire.

After all, it isn't obvious that what is numerically best for Komodo MCTS from a CCRL ELO perspective is best or even all that relevant for human tournament play between 1800 and 2300 FIDE, for example.  If he can blend the type of analysis he had in the earlier repertoire books  with some of the explanations in the fashion of the Sadler/Regan Alpha Zero book this should be worth reading even if many of the actual lines aren't of interest.  For example, I can't see moving to e4 and playing the Bb5 Sicilian complex myself if that is indeed what he recommends.

There are authors who probably never were 2500. I don't know if current ELO of an author has that much impact on his analysis especially when every serious author uses some engines to check.

I didn't look at the first edition, but I didn't think of the 2nd as dry. I don't know of any author who wouldn't check his work with a computer now, why would you? Kaufman is also a legit GM who is involved with probably the 3rd ranked computer chess program. So he is worth a listen/read.

Another dry book with computer assisted lines?

nocteus wrote on 05/24/19 at 08:14:24:

I would think he would continue with the Berlin given it still features heavily in top level play and remains largely bullet proof. 

Did he give the Grunfeld in an earlier book?