Latest Updates:
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Modern Triangle by Semkov (Read 4665 times)
PANFR
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 252
Location: Greece
Joined: 10/31/11
Gender: Male
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #11 - 03/24/20 at 19:15:31
Post Tools
I do not get why Black should be afraid of Avrukh's Meran e3/b3 setup.
Actually Avrukh in person has changed his main suggestion (regarding the placement of the b1 knight) from a non-challenging, to a toothless one.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ehpotsirhc
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 66
Joined: 01/12/07
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #10 - 03/14/20 at 18:52:16
Post Tools
Tauromachie wrote on 03/14/20 at 15:58:52:
It is out yet, is it not ?

Somebody already got their copy and can share what the basic outline of the repertoire is in the marshall gambit (4.e4) after 8.Be2 ?


Yes, it is out. I have it but have just skimmed it quickly. Against 8. Be2 in the Marshall, he recommends 8...Na6. He considers several replies for white: Ba3, Bc3, Ba5, Bd6, Bf8
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Tauromachie
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 49
Location: germany
Joined: 07/10/15
Gender: Male
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #9 - 03/14/20 at 15:58:52
Post Tools
It is out yet, is it not ?

Somebody already got their copy and can share what the basic outline of the repertoire is in the marshall gambit (4.e4) after 8.Be2 ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10620
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #8 - 02/27/20 at 12:01:02
Post Tools
I tend to disagree with IM Semkov's

Quote:
However, compared to the Meran, it (tje Stonewall, MNb) is a second-rate opening.


After 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 c6 4.e3 at least according to IM Bronznik and GM Scherbakov the Stonewall fully equalizes. It seems to me that in the Meran without Nc3 White has more chances to maintain an edge.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TD
God Member
*****
Offline


Feyenoord forever!

Posts: 563
Location: Rotterdam, NLD
Joined: 02/12/11
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #7 - 02/27/20 at 09:08:39
Post Tools
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #6 - 02/16/20 at 21:01:15
Post Tools
As far as I can tell there are two possible explanations for the omission of e3 lines: (i) Semkov feels he can get away with claiming that they transpose to "another opening" (the Semi-Slav) and that he is thereby justified in excluding it from a book on the Triangle; (ii) Semkov just isn't happy with black's prospects in the Slow Slav and hopes that (i) is a plausible enough alternative explanation that people will accept it. Personally I can't help suspecting both factors to be at play - though admittedly that I don't see how one could accept (ii) while rejecting (i), so I guess I'm really just endorsing (ii).
Personally my main interest in this book is for its coverage of the Marshall Gambit, as I use and recommend the Triangle move order to reach the Semi-Slav. So for me it is disappointing to see it given so little treatment, although as a counter-point I would note how refreshing it is to see the depth of coverage given to white's alternatives to 4. Nc3 after 3. Nf3 c6, which I believe have been less attention than their theoretical significance merits in the previous works of Scherbakov, Guramishvili and Krasenkow.
I have basically given up the Noteboom in favour of the Botvinnik, but I also retain some interest in that opening. From a theoretical perspective it seems to be in some sort of paradoxical dual-state: in OTB games black has a plus score, while in ICCF games white scores almost 60%; I have seen Stockfish claim assess white's advantage is less than in even the Nimzo-Indian, I have seen LC0 assess it is on a rough par with the Dutch Defence; I have some 2600+ players claim that it is objective mistake to allow it, I have seen other 2600+ players claim it is only a semi-correct opening where white shouldn't find it too hard to prove an objective advantage. At least off the top of my head I can't name any openings that still provoke such a diverse range of opinions, and for if for no other reason than that the Noteboom holds a certain appeal.
As regards winawer77's question my answer is 'no', although in the past I have been a premium member on Chess24 and therefore have seen Guramishvili's series and have taken notes on the Marshall Gambit videos. In general I would say that it does a good job condensing the lines and providing a theoretically sound repertoire. This is true of most of her series, which it is widely believed typically have heavy input from Anish Giri. The main possible exception of the mainline with 8. Be2 Na6 9. Ba5 b6 10. Qd6, where she recommends 10... bxa5!? - a tricky and interesting exchange sacrifice line, but objectively it gives white a larger advantage than the mainline with 10... Bd7. If you're interested in the series then you can check out the first of her two videos covering the Noteboom on YouTube, as well the series' introduction video.
Krasenkow's Chessbase series by contrast I have not seen. However after reading in the review on Chessbase that he recommends 8. Be2 Qxg2?! for black and that even the Chessbase reviewer found his lines unconvincing I feel pretty safe in the belief that I'm not missing out on any brilliant analysis there. (Edit: it has come to my attention that there are two reviews of this DVD on Chessbase. The review I am referring to is the one by Markus Hochgräfe, not by Paul Smith).
Not to mention that at least in the free preview video his delivery is quite possibly the most boring monotone I have ever seen. I understand that this is not an issue at all for some people but as a soon to be high school teacher I have my limits.
« Last Edit: 02/17/20 at 09:32:43 by Jack Hughes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2518
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #5 - 02/15/20 at 16:13:38
Post Tools
I played the Noteboom as my main defense to 1.d4 for a very long time, starting with the old "Play the Noteboom" by those two Dutch players.  I eventually switched to less sharp setups, but have always dabbled with it from time to time.  Anyway the point of that is to say that after decades of experience (and fairly mixed results), I very much agree with Semkov's approach to not hang onto c4 and instead to play ...c5 in many of those positions, seeking piece play.  So I like what I see from the excerpt.

I also agree that Black "should" play the Meran, but I don't know what the best resource would be for a Black player these days.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
winawer77
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 246
Location: UK
Joined: 03/31/07
Gender: Male
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #4 - 02/15/20 at 07:00:48
Post Tools
Jack Hughes wrote on 02/14/20 at 20:29:42:
semper_fidelis wrote on 02/14/20 at 19:01:47:
From what he wrote, he advocates to avoid Stonewall structure at any point. That left me wondering what would he recommend against slow Slav setup (Nf3+e3)... Heading for Meran anyway with ...Nf6 does not seem so clear, having in mind Avrukh's GM Rep, also recent Grand Prix game Grischuk-Duda (iirc.) revealed that no simple transposition to standard Meran exists. A quick look at database reveals that he had no favourite answer as well.

Indeed I was quite excited to read that part of the introduction, because literally all the other recentish Triangle publications that I am aware of (Scherbakov, Guramishvili, Krasenkow) have recommended the Stonewall. Whatever the theoretical status of this version of the Stonewall, stylistically it is a great distance from the Noteboom and Marshall Gambit, so I was happy to see at least someone batting for the other team. Another, often neglected, drawback of this standard Noteboom+Stonewall repertoire is that black would be forced to meet the line 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c6 4. Qc2 with something other than the theoretically approved 4... Nf6, when white can almost force a transposition to the Anti-Meran with 5. e3. Sadly a glance at the table of contents reveals that the book fails to cover not only the Slow Slav but also the Meran/Anti-Meran complex in the Semi-Slav. It's a shame, because the Semi-Slav setup against the Slow Slav has not been covered from the black side at all in any publications of which I'm aware, and 8... Bd6 in the Meran (into which white can practically force a transposition with the move order 3. Nf3 c6 4. e3 Nf6 5. Bd3 Nbd7 6. 0-0) has also been somewhat neglected.
Complaints notwithstanding the book does look quite promising in other respects. Semkov's ability to explain plans and ideas is among the very best and the section in the published sample on Noteboom gambit lines based on e4 exemplifies that well.


All very good points, and definitely the reasons why I was underwhelmed at the extract and variations covered. I was very much looking forward to this book; one of the defenses that interest me the most, written by one of my favourite publishers. I had high hopes.

It still might be good, but the omission of e3 setups and simply saying ‘Play the Meran’ is puzzling. Personally, I would play ...f5 in these structures, or refer back to Kornev in any case. But still, I think it should be covered. Finally, 200 pages doesn’t seem that much, although considering Chess Stars are more densely packed than most other publishers it may be ok.

Finally, do you have the Krasenkow and Guramishvili series on this opening? If so, would you kindly share your thoughts on both?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jack Hughes
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 72
Joined: 07/22/19
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #3 - 02/14/20 at 20:29:42
Post Tools
semper_fidelis wrote on 02/14/20 at 19:01:47:
From what he wrote, he advocates to avoid Stonewall structure at any point. That left me wondering what would he recommend against slow Slav setup (Nf3+e3)... Heading for Meran anyway with ...Nf6 does not seem so clear, having in mind Avrukh's GM Rep, also recent Grand Prix game Grischuk-Duda (iirc.) revealed that no simple transposition to standard Meran exists. A quick look at database reveals that he had no favourite answer as well.

Indeed I was quite excited to read that part of the introduction, because literally all the other recentish Triangle publications that I am aware of (Scherbakov, Guramishvili, Krasenkow) have recommended the Stonewall. Whatever the theoretical status of this version of the Stonewall, stylistically it is a great distance from the Noteboom and Marshall Gambit, so I was happy to see at least someone batting for the other team. Another, often neglected, drawback of this standard Noteboom+Stonewall repertoire is that black would be forced to meet the line 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c6 4. Qc2 with something other than the theoretically approved 4... Nf6, when white can almost force a transposition to the Anti-Meran with 5. e3. Sadly a glance at the table of contents reveals that the book fails to cover not only the Slow Slav but also the Meran/Anti-Meran complex in the Semi-Slav. It's a shame, because the Semi-Slav setup against the Slow Slav has not been covered from the black side at all in any publications of which I'm aware, and 8... Bd6 in the Meran (into which white can practically force a transposition with the move order 3. Nf3 c6 4. e3 Nf6 5. Bd3 Nbd7 6. 0-0) has also been somewhat neglected.
Complaints notwithstanding the book does look quite promising in other respects. Semkov's ability to explain plans and ideas is among the very best and the section in the published sample on Noteboom gambit lines based on e4 exemplifies that well.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
semper_fidelis
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 33
Joined: 01/21/18
Gender: Male
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #2 - 02/14/20 at 19:01:47
Post Tools
From what he wrote, he advocates to avoid Stonewall structure at any point. That left me wondering what would he recommend against slow Slav setup (Nf3+e3)... Heading for Meran anyway with ...Nf6 does not seem so clear, having in mind Avrukh's GM Rep, also recent Grand Prix game Grischuk-Duda (iirc.) revealed that no simple transposition to standard Meran exists. A quick look at database reveals that he had no favourite answer as well.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
tracke
Senior Member
****
Offline


Introite tam etiam ibi
dei sunt

Posts: 450
Location: Kiel (GER)
Joined: 09/21/04
Gender: Male
Re: Modern Triangle by Semkov
Reply #1 - 02/13/20 at 12:22:07
Post Tools
At the homepage of Chess-Stars Publishing there‘s now a preview with introduction and toc.

tracke  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
tracke
Senior Member
****
Offline


Introite tam etiam ibi
dei sunt

Posts: 450
Location: Kiel (GER)
Joined: 09/21/04
Gender: Male
Modern Triangle by Semkov
12/21/19 at 13:29:51
Post Tools
ChessStars has some new books listed as future plans, for example

The Modern Triangle by Semko Semkov
expected in February

In his younger years Semkov has played the Triangle a lot
so he´s certainly a very competent author for this topic!?

tracke  Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo