OK, thanks. Very helpful.

I admit I haven't read all these 100+ posts.
But I wanted to ask what, if anything, Jonathan covers in the King's Gambit? In particular, the Quaade? Asking since it is featured in the Shaw book.

TIA!

It took me longer than I expected to buy this, as I've been busy.  With being a fan of this general approach to openings and having 1...e5 as one of my two main responses to 1.e4 (my other favourite, 1...d5 and the Smerdon's Scandinavian stuff, is in a similar vein), though, I couldn't pass it up.  The chapters on the Two Knights Defence in particular are very relevant to my current repertoire, as are the ones on 2.Nc3 Nc6 (I like to "take on" the Vienna Gambit with 2...Nc6 3.f4 exf4).  I'm also interested in some of the other lines such as the Jaenisch Ruy, Calabrese and the Wagenbach, even though I'm not sure that I'll end up playing them myself.  

Also, as someone who has studied the Danish and Göring Gambits extensively, I think 3...Qe7!? is a very good recommendation against the Danish, essentially accepting the gambit but on Black's terms rather than White's.  I also think you did well to cover White's alternatives to 5.exd5 in the Göring Gambit with 4...d5, and I agree that 5...Bg4 is the most challenging response to 5.Bd3 (I have often used that sideline with White).

Some could say I'm old-fashioned but I too tend to prefer this approach of the tree structure and citing illustrative examples along the way, rather than working through illustrative games.

RoleyPoley wrote on 04/05/22 at 19:20:08:


Interesting. First 3 games online I'm playing with this repertoire and I'm playing 3 games in the two knights - 2 with 4. Ng5 and one with d3. "Lets have a bit of Hooliganism" 

I've been planning on returning to playing 1.e4 next season too. I'm already changing one of my lines because of this book (and I guess Lokander because it is a shared line but I haven't started looking at that properly yet).

While I'm not a fan of the layout, I appreciate the current choice packs in a lot more information which I will benefit from when I get more experienced in these lines (and adds value for the stronger players reading it such as those responding in this thread!). 

I really do like the anecdotes, commentary and explanations in the book though. I think they are fantastic (and often make me chuckle).

Jonathan Tait wrote on 03/30/22 at 09:17:45:


I also thought that the Jaenisch is perfectly playable with that 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 Nf6 line, but the resulting positions are pretty boring technical crap, where Black is just playing for a draw. The discovery that 5...d5 is playable as well is simply great, because I have rejected the idea, although I was aware of Nisipeanu's idea. Admittedly I was pretty lazy analysing, and I am glad that you did such a great job working on it.
Regarding the Polerio, I had worked a bit on the 5.Na5 6.Bb5+ Bd7!? line, and my verdict was that it's equal, but IMO your Ulvestad suggestion is at least as good, easier, and more fun to play.

IMJohnCox wrote on 04/05/22 at 21:51:12:


It was 20 years ago. Engines were nowhere near as strong. But really I got the title on the back of lines like 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 Bb5+ Bd7 4 a4 as White

IMJohnCox wrote on 04/05/22 at 21:51:12:


Follow GM Romanishin's example and prepare the opening really well. White's position is certainly easier to play otherwise, which blitz will only emphasize.

Thanks Jon, AOC, it is interesting how opening tastes differ slightly in different places.

I'll work on the Ruy Lopez chapter first and most likely the two knights next, then take it from there.