|
|
|
Home • Shop
• Chess Books • Software
• Magazine • Chess
Sets & Boards • Computers •
Reviews • Ornate
Sets • Equipment
|
|
|
Contact • Links
• Map • Calendar
• Britbase • Bound
Volumes • Bridge •
Go • Backgammon
• Poker • Other
Games
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
BCM Chess Book Reviews : December 2000Return to the BCM Review Index
| Search for other BCM reviews by keyword
| More about BCM...
|
|||||||||||||
This large-format book is the latest from Gambit Publications and, as
the sub-title states, contains 1,001 chess puzzles to challenge all standards
of player, from beginner to grandmaster. As well as various graded puzzles
in different categories, there are 15 tests, each containing 16 puzzles
to solve, for which you are awarded a points score. There is a table which
converts this to your estimated elo rating. Alternatively you can just
use these puzzles like all the others in the book, for fun or tactical
practice. Most are drawn from contemporary games, so there are few old
chestnuts, though you might have seen some in (for instance) recent ‘Spot
The Continuation’ puzzles. That said, there is a chapter of puzzles
drawn from old Soviet Championships, and another amusing section where
you are challenged to find the wrong (but plausible) move. Ideal reading
for the Christmas holidays when your chess club is shut.
This must be a first: a book written by one reigning world champion in
which the title references his rival title-holder. But the book is not
about Kramnik as such. What is more surprising is the preface which states
that this is also not a text on openings, and not about 1 Ìf3 or
at least the Reti opening. Khalifman is playfully trying to engage our
curiosity by throwing in this gratuitous paradox. What is it about then?
As we read on, we discover that he is trying to show us how to build a
white opening repertoire using as a model that of Kramnik; and he demonstrates
that Kramnik’s 1 Nf3 does not lead to a pure Reti but to specific
lines of the King’s Indian, the Anti-Grünfeld (i.e. no early
d4 for White) and the Old Indian. In the end we find ourselves agreeing
with the comment that this is not about the Reti, but not with the one
about it not being an opening book. It is in fact an uncommonly good opening
book if you are interested in developing a white repertoire in the aforementioned
lines. There is a good balance of text and variations, which are not just
confined to Kramnik’s own games. Two more volumes are planned for
this series, covering Kramnik’s other 1 Nf3 repertoire against the
English, and against the Queen’s Gambit, Slav and Dutch.
Another fin de siècle book collection of the games of the
20th century: this one is a personal selection by the US grandmaster,
rating each game on originality, level of opposition, soundness, accuracy
and difficulty, breadth/depth and overall aesthetic quality. Despite this
attempt to set up an objective scale of values (and it is not the first
time this has been attempted), one cannot help feeling that it is ultimately
a question of personal like and dislike. Soltis is inclined to agree with
this in his preface but carries on regardless. After an interesting discussion
of his criteria – and generally he opts for reasonable length, tough
games where both players put up a credible fight – Soltis goes on
to nominate his list of the five most overrated games of the century.
The writer knows he is being controversial here – and it is an undeniably
punchy way to start the book – and debunks a handful of very famous
games. Then, after considering six “near misses” which didn’t
make the final top 100, Soltis launches into his hit parade. Somewhat
surprisingly he starts at the top and works down to the 100th. Games one
and two are tied on the same score, and there is no attempt to apply a
tie-breaker. One is a correspondence game won by Berliner against Estrin
from 1965-8, and the other Nezhmetdinov’s win against Polugaevsky
from Sochi 1958. The reader may well disagree with these and many other
of Soltis’ nominations but that is half the fun of a book of this
sort. His annotations are well written and the pen-pictures of the players
highly informative, with interesting data about the players involved.
The book is beautifully produced and will provide hours of enjoyment.
One of the curiosities of chess is that most national champions worldwide
win their titles in tournament play whereas the ultimate international
championship, the world championship, has nearly always been decided via
match-play. But the US Championship was at one time an exception, evolving
into a match-play system and remaining so from the 1890s to 1936 when
it reverted to a tournament on Marshall’s retirement. This book gives
the background to the event, a very strong 16 player all-play-all from
a golden era of US chess, won by Reshevsky ahead of such luminaries as
Fine and Kashdan. All the games are given, with annotations from the time
and background colour. This is another excellent book penned by the conscientious
Hilbert, to follow the splendid Shady Side, reviewed in the October
BCM.
This is a sizeable tome on the Yugoslav Attack by an author who (in conjunction
with Laszlo Sapi) wrote a book on the same variation for Batsford in 1989.
This seems to be the month for paradoxes; the foreword is entitled “Why
I have not written a foreword to this book?” This, and other comments
made amidst the analysis, occasionally cause the eyebrows to raise: Schneider
attacks other authors for “plagiarism” and the non-attribution
of analysis, and once makes the excuse for a previously published misanalysis
by him and his then co-author (in which a “saving” move which
they had recommended and adorned with an exclamation mark could be refuted
immediately by a mate in three) that they had both been ill at the time
of writing. Nevertheless this is a thorough update of the previous work,
is well laid out and indexed, and will be useful for Yugoslav enthusiasts.
An amiable collection of brilliancies and blunders, masterpieces and
star studies, collected together under various joky or incomprehensible
headings (masked ball, impertinent pawns, giving up is never too late)
written in an English that is funnier still. Up-to-date and readable though
much of the material is commonplace.
This is a reprint of the book of this eight-player double round-robin
event, won by James Mason ahead of Max Judd, Harry Davidson, HE Bird and
Jacob Elson, and others, with games annotated by Elson, BM Neill and WH
Sayen.
A pleasantly chatty volume of Staunton’s famous organ, in the course
of which he reflects on the apparent proliferation of chess literature
and berates himself for being too lenient on some of it: “we... confess,
however, that in our gratification at seeing chess books multiplied, we
have too often suffered them to pass without subjecting them to a critical
ordeal, and we take blame to ourselves for the omission.”
Kling and Horwitz’s magazine abounds in game scores, lightly annotated,
plus many studies and “enigmas” (what we now refer to as problems).
Replies to correspondents are decidedly terse with a tendency to baffle.
One feels for the unfortunate contributor of a problem who was told: “your
problem of five moves can be solved in three.”
The year starts with a consideration of how “unsocial” the
game of chess is in comparison with other games such as whist. One of
the reasons offered for chess clubs not being more numerously attended
is the fact that the clubs were situated in the heart of town and the
majority of players in the suburbs. This is like a modern chess magazine,
with games, studies and news from around the country; although we are
decidedly light on the poetry these days.
Whilst in San Francisco, Zukertort played at the Mechanics Institute,
a popular chess venue then as it is now. There is much discussion of the
constitution of the fledgling British Chess Association, but this is finally
displaced from the headlines by a rancorous statement from Zukertort,
stating his readiness to meet Steinitz in a match on either side of the
Atlantic. In March 1885, Steinitz’s restrained answer is printed,
but he is then doused in more vitriol.
The year starts with the Leningrad-Moscow tournament, where the Czech
player Flohr triumphed comfortably ahead of Reshevsky but Keres and Smyslov
finished in the bottom half. Keres then came back to top Capablanca and
Flohr at Margate. H. Armand de Masi contributes an article explaining
why he thought chess should be classified as a sport, particularly with
a view to its coverage in newspapers.
