Newsgroup: it.hobby.scacchi
Titolo: Libri di teoria: dove stiamo andando a finire ?

Ciao a tutti,
vi riporto il post che ho inviato a rec.games.chess.analysis.
Mi scuso che sia in inglese, ma sono ancora troppo inc...o per tradurre in
italiano un posto cosi' lunghetto.
-----------------------
I just received a copy of Chris Ward's "Unusual Queen's Gambit Declined",
published by Everyman Chess.
It covers the Albin countergambit, the Baltic defense and the Chigorin.
This book was yet another disappointment of many books I ordered online
without viewing the content before.
It is essentially a database dump, with most of the games being played by
obscure players; this may be natural for "dubious openings".
So, you may ask , what do I expect from an opening book and what do I
complain for ?
1- I have my own database; I dont expect a book to simply report the games,
it must show useful comments that help explaining the main strategy and
tactics.
The comments given by Ward are just thrown here and there and are really
very vague: I could to the same comments by browsing quickly through a game
with Chessbase, and I am 2180 FIDE, not a GM.
Very often the "comments" are preceded by disclaimers such as "I suppose
that here White could have done better by...." followed by the infamous "!?"
labels that are usually attached to variations that have not been thoroughly
analyzed, like saying "try it at your own risk, I did not analyze it well".
On the same track, at the end of each chapter, there is a summary of the
evaluations of the lines covered and the usual phrase there is something
like "Game 41 and 42 suggests that the line is dubious": so you go back to
game 41 and you see that it has been played by a 2000 vs a 2050, and there
is basically no comment tothe game except than an enthusisatic remark for a
final tactics at move 35, of little theoretical interest. Game 42 ends in a
draw at move 20 between two unknown opponents, and here, too, no comments.
(the number of the games and of the moves here are generic, I have not the
book right here to quote, but if anyone is interested I will quote
precisely).
So why do games 41 and 42 suggest that the line is dubious or good ? The
answer
is: "based on the result". Now, evaluating an opening line based on the
result of the games, may be acceptable if: a) the game is being played at
high level (GMs); b) the number of games is significantly high.
2- the coverage is not complete; for example for the Chigorin, the author
says that since other books have been published on the Chigorin, he will
focus only on recent fashionable lines. I'd like to know that *before* I buy
the book (e.g., I'll need to get another book to have full coverage).
This could be easonable up to a certain point, but not in this case, IMHO:
there is only one game for the variation 1d4 d5; 2.c4 Nc6; 3.Nf3 Bg4; 4.cd5
Bf3;5. gf3 Qd5; 6.e3 e5; 7.Nc3 Bb4, which used to be a main line, and at my
level it still occurs 50% of the times. Not to mention the 5.dc6 variation.
3- the infamous use of reporting critical lines in a small side note, while
the main game is chosen because of a neat tactical finish between two
woodpushers.
4- if anyone thinks that the above defects are due to these being "minor
openings", I disagree: even back in the 1980s, John Watson wrote an
excellent book on the Chigorin, which at the time was even more minor than
now, after the Morozevich campaign.
Ok, so you know what I don't like of this book.
The next question is: is it unavoidable ? Do I have to accept that openign
books are done this way ?
It is true that Ward is by no means the only author that does this. I will
not mention the many other books that do the same.
Still, there authors that are more honest.
For example, Eric Schiller, Andrew Soltis and a few others have written
zillions of opening books in the last decade. Even if not explicitly stated,
their books are oriented to the <1800 elo club player, giving him simple
recipes for opening, strategy and tactics for a given line. Of course those
overly simplified views will not hold if you employ them at master level,
but this is not the audience to which these books are for, it is clear from
the start.
Instead, when I buy Everyman Books, or Batsford, I expect books that are
good for 2000+ players.
And indeed, this is not asking for the moon: Matthew Sadler's books (e.g.
the one on the Slav and QGD), are exactly what I look for in a book: simple,
clear explanations of strategy and highlight of some key tactics, along with
evaluation of the lines given by the experience, not by the result of the
game.
Joe Gallagher also have written good books such as "Beating the
anti-sicilian" and "Beating the anti-KID".
Emms' "Attacking with e4" is also quite good, and Aagard's "Easy guide to
the Panov", and "A defense vs d4" are quite good too.
So, having stated that it is not impossible to write good books, the next
question is: should I reconcile myself to study the "hard way", e.g. just
browsing the games of an opening line through the Chessbase ?
I may, but it is very sad.
It is sad because: a) I am already using the Chessbase, but when I have such
books as Sadler's or other good books, the results of the study improve by
an order of magnitude; even if i filter the games to select only those above
2400 or 2500 or 2600, I either miss important ideas or have still too much
material than needed.
When a book is well done, it becomes a great companion tool to the Chessbase
student;
b) it is sad, because it would not be impossible to publish decent books,
but it becomes rare;
c) it is sad because I spend money in books and what I get is what I already
have in a database, since the comments are totally unreliable.
Finally: I thnk I have learled one lesson.
NEVER EVER EVER buy a book without being able to open it and read it.
Do yourself a favour: do not buy chess opening books online (unless you
trust 150% the name of the author). Try to find a bookstore that has them.
Go there, open the book, see the general tone of the comments.
That's what I am gonna do.
And I will spend the money I will save in dumb opening books by resuming my
subscription to the New In Chess Magazine, where the up-to-date theory
willbe reported in theoretical articles and annotated games by the top GMs.
I encourage anyone who reads this post to stop buying opening books from
chess editors/authors they are dissatified with, and post their
dissatisfaction. This, IMO, is one way to boycott this stupid market until
they decide to do better products.

Per quanto possa valere il mio parere di NC..............
CLAP CLAP CLAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!