Customer Reviews

Big Book of Busts Pb (Competitive Chess)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This is a good book. It's fun, interesting, and sometimes enthralling. The book can be hard to put down.

This does not enable you to beat offbeat openings. That requires years of experience. There is no magic pill. A better player will usually beat you from an inferior position. A master will beat you even if he gives you odds (a free move or a missing piece). This book helps you to compete with players at your own level who are tyring to get an easy victory by surprising you.

Most openings have only about half-a-column of information. Some have several pages, with one or two complete games for illustration. This is not the place to learn a repertoire. It's a place to gain some confidence that you can equalize early.

It's also a place to get some ideas. Why not throw an offbeat opening at your friends now and then? "All openings are playable by non-masters," sayeth a wise man. Have some fun. Create some very strange-looking positions.

As long as you aren't hoping to win in the opening, but only to get through it, this is a very good book.

And it is the ONLY book by Schiller about which the opposite could not be said. Most of his books are riddled with errors, outlined with deceptively useless disorganization, ladden with overwhelming quantities of data, and marred with occasionally suspicious analysis. This book is the opposite in every way. Some people give the credit to Watson's contribution to the annotations, but I think Schiller simply spent more time on this one. His other books show hints of utility but fail in the details.

The point is this: Don't let Schiller's other books deter you from buying this one. It really is a decent book. 3 1/2 stars.

When was the last time you heard that about a chess book? Schiller and Watson have created a great little battle manual for facing all the wild, weird and wacky openings that are popular among a certain group of players. The title is a bit of a misnomer, though. Not every line given is truly "busted" in this book. And some that are rather dubious, like the Philidor Countergambit are not exposed for the frauds that they are. Further, not all the best lines are given (an impssible task in any event) which makes chapters on such important and often-seen lines as the Morra-Smith Gambit in the Sicilian too short. But the unique symbology used by the authors and the overall tone of the book is a lot of fun and worth every penny of the asking price. If you are a regular tournament player you know how annoying garbage like the Grob's can be -- buy this book and be done with it forever!

The vast majority of Schiller's books are junk. This one, however, is actually extremely useful. It is about the only book out there that systematically treats offbeat openings and how you should respond to them. Such openings can be very annoying, especially if you don't win - just ask then-World Champion Anatoly Karpov, who lost to Miles' 1.e4 a6!? This book equips you to handle every imaginable offbeat opening, such as the Englund Gambit (1.d4 e5?, which often results in disaster for the uninitiated White player after the plausible 2.dxe5 Nc6 3.Nf3 Qe7 4.Bf4 Qb4+ 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Bc3?? Bb4! (winning) 7.Qd2 Bxc3 8.Qxc3 Qc1#) and Snake Benoni (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.d5 Bd6?!). So the next time you lose an online blitz game (or, worse, a game in a more serious venue) to some "junk" opening, consult this book and learn how to beat the next guy who plays it against you. Or, better yet, read this book first!

The openings discussed in the book range from the merely unusual, such as 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5, 1.Nc3, and 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Bf5; to lines often seen in non-master play such as the Smith-Morra Gambit (1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3); to the outright bizarre (1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Ne4?; 1.d4 c5 2.d5 Nf6 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Bd2 b5). Schiller's co-author is International Master John Watson, an excellent and very conscientious author. My theory is that he actually checked Schiller's analysis thoroughly (unlike some of Schiller's co-authors) and didn't allow him to write his usual schlocky book.

Seriously, this is an excellent and very helpful book to have. I recommend it to everyone. Just don't decide that since this book is so good you should run out and buy a bunch of other Schiller books.

The above site will provide a more elaborate review and is highly recommended. Jeremy Silman rates this as an essential part of any chess library. If you play at a club and you're tired of facing unusual systems of play, this book is not only handy but quite entertaining. He mentions that the quality of the analysis comes from Watson, something you should be aware of when you are in the market for chess books in general... It's not a perfect book, but then again, can you name any?

An entertaining book, yet lacking any real refutations to irregular openings for the average to club player. Irregular openings are played for a reason, for shock value. Of course highly ranked players usually defeat such openings, not because the opening itself is inferior (in most cases) but because the player facing these openings is quite simply the better player. I have seen highly ranked players use irregular openings with success against players supposedly booked up on how to combat them. If IM Michael Basman and Deep Blue can win with 'garbage' like the Grob against other Masters, then obviously it's not as bad as it's reputation. This book is merely a starting point for ideas on how to combat such openings. If a particular opening is causing you difficulties, get your best software program out and research the problem yourself. If anything, this book shows players who use irregular openings the possible defences/attacks they can expect, which will just confuse the issue even further. I give this book a 3 star rating, which i consider neutral, because it actually helps *both* the player facing these openings and the player who uses them.

Forgot to add, author/contributor Eric Schiller is nothing more than a mouthpiece for Dogmatic ideas. He wouldn't know an original chess idea if it came up and bit him on his you know what. His mentality is the sort that attacked Aron Nimzowitsch's ideas before Nimzo proved his critics wrong. Take anything that Schiller or his associates say with a grain of salt.