I bought myself the book for Christmas. I still haven't had time to go through it really properly, but I do have some thoughts.

In a sense I possibly know what Bulldog means, since it does look as though there's often more emphasis on kingside action than on centre-transformation strategy. Maybe I'm being over-schematic but I always thought of the latter as 'the' main strategic idea behind the Botvinnik (against ...e5): specifically, exf5 followed by d3-d4 changing the structure to White's advantage. Maybe the emphasis, such as it is, on kingside play reflects Williams' style?

The book's upholding of the Botvinnik formation against '...c5 without ...e5' setups from Black did make me wonder whether theory had changed its mind on this at all, since the Botvinnik against ...c5 has often been regarded as solid but less impressive than against ...e5. If there's any new thinking here the book doesn't mention it. If Black goes for a KID setup with ...g6/..d6/...Nf6 I still prefer to meet it with a system Tony Kosten has commended on here, namely e3/Nge2 intending d2-d4, which scores well in my database. You can play this against a KID formation whatever, I guess (Ghaem Maghami seems to be the main specialist); if you know your opponent will play the KID, you can even play d4 on move one!

All this said, I do think AOC's point is relevant here -- I find the book's organisation rather confusing, but a lot of lines do receive some pretty thorough coverage, even if (inevitably given the target readership) not on the Marin scale.

I purchased this and it is OK but I don't feel like I'm coming away with a mastery of all the different gears and levers of the Botvinnik.  It's a reasonable opening book but I feel like there's a lot of potential for a more nitty-gritty Botvinnik book that's less theoretical and more about principles and rules.  The book has a short section at the beginning with a handful of annotated games that goes over more general principles.  Most of the games involve waiting for Black to make some mistake and then launching into a kingside attack with f4-f5, h3, g4, Ng3, h4, g5.

But playing the Botvinnik System at a high level, you will rarely get such a kingside attack, instead most of the games are going to revolve around the tension in the center and timing with the central and queenside pawn breaks.  I've also found that it's generally pretty easy for Black to lock up the kingside and reach a closed position where the ...b5 break on the queenside is all that's left.

I am also curious what other coverage there is of the "Botvinnik System" against ...c5 setups (actually a c4 Sicilian).  I poked around a little and couldn't find any other books that cover this line in much depth at all, but it is actually very interesting.  In particular, if you want to play the Botvinnik as a general repertoire against King's Indian setups, you have to be prepared for folks to play a move order delaying ...e5 in which case they can play ...c5 once you play e4.

I haven't tackled Marin yet so maybe he covers these Botvinnik systems in more depth?  Or does he only cover the system against e5/Nc6 as Kosten does?

Michael Ayton wrote on 12/08/20 at 20:07:44:

In the Netherlands it is available coming saturday, https://www.debestezet.nl/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=4759
and in Germany next tuesday, https://www.schachversand.de/the-iron-english.html

Extract of the book: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0080/9284/4094/files/The_Iron_English_extracts...

I see Everyman are publishing this in book format under the title "Opening Repertoire The Iron English" due out November...

MW wrote on 09/28/20 at 22:21:25:


Is that the recommendation against 1...c5 as well, and if not why not.

This course has just been published, done by Simon Williams and Richard Palliser. It has an interesting move order e.g. 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 to get to the Botvinnik. Against e6, it goes 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nc3 with the Mikenas. However, it doesn't reveal the recommendations against two of the soundest replies i.e. 1.c4 e6 or 1.c4 c6. If they stick with 2.Nc3 this would lead to main line d4 lines and lots of theory. If 2.g3. that's still a lot of theory and strategy to leave to the apparent footnotes of the course. Anyone know ?