Customer Reviews

Garry Kasparov on Modern Chess, Part One: Revolution in the 70's

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

 

 

The books says 70's, but have a nice game's selection, from different decades, Kasparov knew the key games to explain the develoment of the opening.

Kasparov doesn't give, infinite variation, (like Kasparov used to) he argued the approach at that time, and how new ideas appear, this book in my personal opinion has better redatation from the Great Predecessor's collection, just for the approach.

This book was publish after Prdecessor's colectiion, but is not a sequel, this book focus to the opening, Predecessor focus on players and owesome games.

How does the book work?
The book have been divided in 24 chapter, each chapter approach to one opening. Kasparov marked the approach of the game and opening theory in particular variations, and how the process continues that overturned traditional impression.

All games as seen through the explication of leading player who were at the forefront of the develoment of chess theory during modern era.

My experience with the book?
I just use this for any advise, improve my insigth and help me a lot to understand opening, (acourding to the approach) and i can memorize lines easily. Just in my opening repertoire.

My recomendation?
Any kasparov's book, is a big deal but this book are oriented for opening lover or to improve a repertoire. This book will help any player but beginer player do not expect better result in games, for early result first must study tactic or positional games.

Great book, nice redation, for any chess player. I enjoy this book a lot and help me a lot to improve my repertoire.

Thanks, i hope this rewien help you a little.

This book will probably be of most value to serious or aspiring chess players. Kasparov provides an interesting account of advances in chess theory in the 1970s, with a section in which he asked for the opinions of other leading grandmasters whose comments are also enlightening. A book that probably anyone seriously interested in chess and its history will find of interest and value.

Leaving aside Kasparov's personal greatness at the board, it feels to a certain extent that he is fishing for a subject in this volume. Certainly much of opening theory was revised in the 70s, but the sixties and the eighties also had great revisions of chess theory. I think his point is that the dissemination of information was starting to really pick up speed with the release of Informator, but whether or not that really changed the process of opening research or merely aided it is still an open question. As mentioned above there are some proofing mistakes, but the biggest issue I have with the book is that I'm not sure there really was a revolution in the 70s. Interestingly, if you read the interviews at the end (the most interesting part in my opinion) then you can see that many GMs also think no revolution really occurred in opening theory in the 70s.

My first reaction after reading several chapters of this book was disappointment. The book had the potential to be a much better book ...

First let me start off by saying that the title of the book is highly misleading, a more appropriate title would have been "Essays in Opening Theory". The choice of the title might have been a marketing ploy. A lot of the games in the book are not even played in the 70s. For example chapter 3 (Najdorf variation - 6. Be3) has 12 games only 4 of which were played in 70s.

Very much like the title of the first volume the title of the series, "Garry Kasparov on Modern Chess", is also a misnomer. Maybe Kasparov changed his mind later but as far as I know Kasparov intended a 3 part series: 1) Revolution in the 70s; 2) Kasparov vs Karpov (Revolution in 80s) and 3) Man and machine (Revolution in the 90s). However the 2nd part itself is now 3 volumes and there is no word on the 3rd part as Kasparov has switched to writing a new series on his best games. So if you are only interested in the Kasparov vs Karpov duel you can safely ignore the first volume of the series and only but the last 3 books.

The material in the book is very uneven, some openings get a lot of attention while others have very brief chapters. Moreover this corresponds to Kasparov's opening repertoire which furthermore question the choice for the title. For example Gruenfeld is covered in 2 chapters and 46 pages, Nimzo Indian gets 16 pages in total and finally the 7.Qg4 O-O line of Winawer French gets a little under 2 pages!

Another problem with the book is that Kasparov constantly refers to his "On My Great Predecessors Series" and to the books he will write after this book. Since both series together stand at 9 400 page volumes it is unrealistic to expect the reader to have all these books at his disposal. Not to mention the fact that he refers to books he has not written yet, for example in page 308 he says he will address the Shabalov-Shirov gambit in semi-slav (1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 e6 5. e3 Nbd76. Qc2 Bd6 7. g4!?) in "the last volume of the series Man against Computer".

The book really needs better organization of the material. There are some chapters which are only 3 pages long (like 3. e5 against French) and there are chapter that are 40 pages (main line of Gruenfeld). I think for the latter one needs sectioning and a way so that the reader can find and reread the parts he/she is looking for rather easily. Also instead of gathering the 28 essays at the end it would have been much more helpful if that material had been scattered through the text. For example in the one of the 28 essays Yuri Razuvaev talks very briefly about a novelty of his in semi-slav, now we had that same position in the book earlier. I would prefer that Razuvaev's comments on semi-slav appeared in the semi-slav chapter!

Finally I want to mention that the editors did a very poor job: 1) Lots of typos (texts and diagrams) 2) No index of variations or a way of informing which variation is being discussed when you are reading a page. 3) In the text it is not clear enough who you are reading. Chapter 2 has a part which is written by Sveshnikov and Timoshchenko and chapter 20 is all written by Makarychev. This can create a great deal of confusion: You open the book, you see a nice section on Petroff and after reading it you may have the impression that these were Kasparov's words which is not the case. So if they could change the font for quotes so the reader knows which parts are Garry's and which is by someone else it would help a lot.

Given the book's price tag my advice is not to buy it unless Everyman issues a second revised edition with updates and better editing (I hope this happens, the book is almost 4 years old and its historical content does not need any changing only some parts where Kasparov talks about current trends might be outdated). But if the opening you are interested in gets a lengthy coverage in the book (that would be: Hedgehog, Scheveningen, Najdorf 6. Be3 and Gruenfeld; the Chelyabinsk variation also gets an extensive coverage but Kasparov has nothing new to add to the theory, one would be much better off with "Sveshnikov Reloaded" by GM Rogozenko) then borrow the book and study the relevant chapter.

While I enjoy the material covered in this book as much as I have Kasparovs "My Great Predecessor" series', and the GM interviews at the end are delightful, there's numerous errors in the games throughout the book. For instance the Caro-Kann section lists games as starting out as a French (1.e4 e6), and while it's technically possible to transpose into the CK from the French these don't. The errors occur just often enough to be frustrating.

However it's still a great look back through time at the players and theory that shaped the modern game.

Iwas born and grew up in the city where kasparov had been born and lived, in Baku. My father used to know him well and his long time fellow and driver, Kolya, used to be a frequent guest at our place...
I have been told so many stories about kasparov, read so many books by him, tried to imitated his style of playing...
That book is another one typical for Garry. Impulsive, strong, featured, inspiring... Full of theory and game analysis it will be a treasure for amateur and professional chess players.
Read it or you will lose a chance to face another truth by kasparov. You will either enjoy it or will have some food for thought.

Very inciteful look into the openings played by many grandmasters in the 70's and through today. Gary Kasparov guides you as if personally telling you about systems with exciting games played in them. It reminds me of New In Chess Surveys, but covering the most popular and often played openings explored by the masters. Although sealed in plastic from the publisher I was pleased with the content.

As Igor Stohl aptly commented, Kasparov is doing best on chessboard. Kasparov is arrogrant, that is a fact and sometimes not very cautious in commenting other chess players. But on chessboard and on writing chess, he is in his elements. This reminds me of Bobby Fischer, the behaviour is even more bezairre than Kasparov, but take a look in his " My 60 memborable games ", it seems to be a different person where the comment is candid and impartial. Kasparov also seems now be more rational.
( may be he has retired now???)