|
||||||||||
When I first began playing chess 18 years ago, like most beginners I was influenced by Fischer and began my games with 1.e4. After all, he did say it was “best by test.” However, for some reason which I don’t remember I soon began opening my games with 1.d4, and continue to do so to this day. I guess my contrarian thinking at the time was, “Well, since most people are playing 1.e4, than I’m gonna open with 1.d4! Yeah, take ‘em out of book on move one!!” Ha, ha… yeah, right. Interestingly enough, according to Powerbook 2008, when White opens with 1.e4 he wins 53.9% of the time. However, when White opens with 1.d4 he wins 55.7% of the time! Perhaps this slight difference in winning percentage is due to the fact that defenses to 1.e4 have been analyzed to a greater depth (such as Sicilians and Ruys) than have 1.d4 defenses. This brings us to the subject of this review: Starting Out: 1 d4! by British IM John Cox. (You can read my review of another Cox book here: Dealing with d4 Deviations.) This first thing I want to mention is that in the introduction Cox states that the repertoire he is recommending consists of some of the most theoretically heavy lines. However, he claims that this shouldn’t be a problem for the class player. Says Cox: The present book is an attempt to do the impossible—that is to provide in one book what Khalifman does in five. In most Black openings I’ve given the absolute main lines: I’ve tried to show where the world’s best are presently fighting it out to establish whether White can obtain real winning chances in the opening.
So hang on, you’ll say, isn’t this is (sic-mj) a Starting Out book? How can players rated 120-160 on the BCF scale (about 1560-1880 Elo) expect to grasp the intricacies of, say, the Botvinnik Semi-Slav? They don’t need to be studying openings where the theory goes down to move twenty-odd when they don’t know the first thing about the game.
Well, first of all, I think that’s patronizing tosh. Lower-rated players may not play as strongly as GMs, and they may not understand, recall, or have need of deep theory in their games to the same extent, but that doesn’t mean they’re not interested to know what that theory is, and it doesn’t mean they can’t improve by looking at it. Still less does it mean they shouldn’t use the most thrilling openings in our game just because a lot of people have played them before (which is all ‘theory’ amounts to). Okay, so there you have it. The author claims that the mainlines he is recommending should be no problem for the class player to comprehend and utilize effectively in his or her games. The question is, is this realistic? I think the answer has a lot to do with the individual player and how much work he or she is willing to put in. If you don’t have a lot of study time, I think the old saying, “a little knowledge can be dangerous” applies here. That is, the one thing you don’t want to do is play 7 or 8 moves of the main line, and then not know what to do after this. Because odds are your opponent will know what you’re suppose to play and if you don’t, you could quickly find yourself in trouble. On the other hand, it’s hard to argue with Cox’s claim that learning the main moves that the GMs play (and therefore put their stamp of approval on) is a bad thing. Indeed, he is saying that the top players play these moves for a reason (because they’re good) and so should you. Which openings does Cox cover? Here are the eleven chapters: Contents 1 The
King’s Indian As I write these words, the battle for the world chess championship is taking place in Bonn, Germany between Kramnik and Anand. So far Anand has won twice with the black pieces utilizing the ultra-popular Semi-Slav defense. So, let’s take a look at what John recommends against this. In chapter 8, on the Semi-Slav, he covers four lines: The Botvinnik Variation, The Anti-Moscow Gambit, The Cambridge Springs, and the Marshall Gambit. The starting point for the first three of these variations (and which can arrive via various move orders) is: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6
The Semi-Slav: “Much sharper than it first appears.” -Cox By the way, you may have noticed that John does not cover The Meran system (5.e3), which is what Kramnik has actually played thus far in the match. Cox explains that in order to “test” the Semi-Slav, he feels that White must develop his queen’s bishop to g5. Judging by the results so far, perhaps Kramnik should take Cox’s advice! Okay, after 5.Bg5, Black has a big decision to make. To go in for the wild lines of the Botvinnik var. with 5…dxc4 (a Shirov favorite, which should tell you something), or play 5…h6 and head into Anti-Moscow territory which can also lead to craziness on the board. (If you want safety, than the Cambridge Springs var. with 5…Nbd7 is your huckleberry. The Marshall Gambit, which Black can avoid by simply playing Nf6, gets pretty wild too.) After 5...dxc4 6.e4 b5 7.e5 h6 8.Bh4 g5 9.Nxg5 hxg5 10.Bxg5 Nbd7 11.g3 we get:
The Botvinnik Variation After 5….h6 6.Bh4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8.Bg3 b5 9.Be2 Bb7 10.h4 g4 11.Ne5 we get:
The
Anti-Moscow Gambit After 5...Nbd7 6.e3 Qa5 7.cxd5 Nxd5 8.Qd2 Bb4 9.Rc1 h6 10.Bh4 c5 11.a3 we get:
The Cambridge Springs Defense After 3.Nc3 e6 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Qxd4 7.Bxb4 Qxe4+ 8.Be2 Na6 9.Ba5 f6 10.Qd8+ Kf7 11.0–0–0 we get:
The
Marshall Gambit After giving you an overview (with variations) of the first dozen or so moves of each line, he concludes the chapter with four illustrative games, one for each opening. Cox follows this formula for each of the book’s eleven chapters. The Bottom Line Whether or not you should purchase this book depends on a couple of things. First, are you interested in learning the “main lines” of the most popular 1.d4 openings? While this book is not even close to being comprehensive, it does give you a reasonable overview of what you can expect from the openings covered.
I can tell you that the benefit of studying a book like this is that it helps improve your overall understanding of the game. Additionally, the next time you see two GMs playing a line you’ve studied, you will be more into the game (than had you not learned the opening) and you will be curious to see where they vary and how it works out. On a scale of 1-10, I give Starting out: 1.d4!
an 8. Other titles by IM John Cox reviewed at Chessville:
|
Advertisement
The
Advertise to Single insert:
|
|||||||||
|
||||||||||
