I have not been visiting TWIC much in recent months since John Watson's excellent book review column has been on hiatus. Today, however, I found that it was back--some might say with a vengeance! Watson's review of Chess Openings for White, Explained by GMs Lev Alburt, Roman Dzindzihashvili, and Eugene Perelshteyn is the most important of the books he covers and he presents the most negative review of this book, by far, that I have seen to date. Watson points to several glaring flaws in their analysis, and (most importantly) provides games and analysis of his own to support his case. As I pointed out in my partial review, "Grand Prix Attack, Explained," the near absence of game references undermines the book's credibility on several occasions in the section I analyzed most closely. According to Watson, the problem runs throughout the text.
That's not to say that the book is worthless if you are looking to play these lines. It just means that you had better compare other books, do your own analysis, and look at the most recent master games before you trust what they have written. Watson's review offers much food for thought, and it is a must read for any who have already purchased a copy of their own.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Their coverage of the Grand Prix Attack, my response to the Sicilian, is awful, and their treatment of transpositions lazy (the latter is all too common in opening books).
I have found their chapters on the Philidor and Petroff are very useful.
I think Watson is lazy. He spends all this time complaining about one move, like "What if Nxe5" in the Sicilian," which is their old line from the black book, and not the one they recommend now, and just leaves it at that. If anybody has half a brain they'll find that move themselves. These guys can't give you the world, otherwise the book will ned up looking like the MCO; it's almost as thick already!
Post a Comment