Hi.

Speaking of missing lines. This is a minor one but I would have been interested to see something on:
1.c4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.g3 g6 4.Bg2 Bg7 5.Nc3 d6 6.O-O Be6!?
Have played it a couple of times and it has some clear points compared to 6...Bf5. Mainly it's harder to prevent Qc8 (or even Qd7) plus later Bh3, since white should probably spend one move on defending the c4 pawn.

Regards CbT.

Johannes Brahms wrote on 11/05/23 at 12:03:00:

Jones gives two lines for Black after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 OO 6.Be2, namely 6...Nbd7 7.OO e5 and 6...e5 7.OO Nc6. Ntirlis offers lines for White against both of these, and explicitly references Jones' recommendations in his text, so he passes this test pretty clearly.

Johannes Brahms wrote on 11/05/23 at 12:03:00:

As TD has already noted, Ntirlis's move order rules out the Keres system. Against this move order, Delchev and Semkov recommend 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bb4 5.Nd5 e4. Ntirlis does not reference D&S explicitly as far as I can see, but he gives replies for White to all of D&S's suggestions, and analyses much further than they do in his recommended lines. (This is a very complicated line, not to be entered without a lot of preparation.) So, another passed test in my view.

The omission of the QID transposition was an epic fail, and accepted as such by the author and the publisher. Perhaps the publication of the pdf supplement means they have passed the resit?

I just took a look at the variation index available at ForwardChess. Chapter 9 covers the King's Indian Defense (KID). The move order that Ntirlis chose avoids the Gruenfeld.

I'm surprised and impressed to have a chapter on the KID in a book on the English opening. Chapter 9 recommends the bayonnet attack and covers 6 alternatives to the standard 7...Nc6. I consider this to be broad coverage.

I suppose that authors must develop some strategy with regard to existing litterature. At one extreme, one can ignore the literature, and write one's own book, uninfluenced by other authors. Towards the opposing extreme, one can try to rebut claims made by proponents for Black (in this case).

This looks to be a good book for those who want to play the English opening as White. As a consumer of chess litterature, I don't think the problem is that some lines have not been covered. I think the problem is that there is not enough time to cover, and personally evaluate, the lines presented.

Maybe the Keres System isn't mentioned because of 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 ?

Dear all, what is your assessment of this new repertoire book for white? I cannot quite make up my mind on it. 

On one hand, the prose is very readable and Nikos clearly has put in efforts into this book. He suggests interesting lines, e.g., the b3 weapon in the reversed Dragon. He also interestingly elaborates on that even if many lines look drawish with an engine, over the board there is often difficult decisions to be made by black.

On the negative side, I think several major black attempts are lacking. Where is G. Jones’ system from the KID repertoire? I mean, this book is a major release from a very serious expert, and the book is from the same publisher. Then, why is the Keres system not covered? Semkov wrote a book about it (attacking the English) and there are two more books putting forward this as a good weapon for black. Nikos also missed the QID, which provoked lots of debate at QC’s blog. All this, despite claims such as “meets every major option for black”, “5 years in the making”. 

Add to this that the QC editors seem to censure messages regarding this, or why were such not “accepted” for their blog? I bet they had enough already with the serious overlook of the QID… Embarrassing Mr. Aagaard? 

Again, i think the book is good anyway, but I would like to hear what people think…