Report an issue with this product or seller
"Grandmaster Opening Preparation" is not mainly focused on opening theory. Ehlvest instead focuses on more general topics such as how to build your opening repertoire, critical/key positions, computer preparation vs. human common sense, etc. The author also goes through the evolution of the isolated queen pawn (from Tarrasch to Kasparov) because the IQP is a thematic pawn structure which arises from many openings for both colors. Ehlvest is a former top-10 player, so it's worth listening to what he has to say.
I found this book to be very instructive, especially chapters 2 and 3 (Evolution of the Isolated Pawn, Key Ideas and Positions). The IQP section was insightful in a way that doesn't overlap with some other works on the IQP (for example "Chess Structures: A Grandmaster Guide") as it focuses on the IQP through the lens of the Tarrasch defense, which is not your usual IQP because White gets a lead in development (reducing the dynamic chances for Black) and can quickly fianchetto his kingside bishop (reducing the chances of a kingside attack, especially toward the h2-pawn). For those reasons, Black should have less dynamics than normal in the Tarrasch version of the IQP, yet strong players like Kasparov have still played the Tarrasch for Black. Why? The author sheds a lot of light on this topic, showing many dynamic and strategic ideas that Black could try which were not obvious to me, focusing a lot on the long-term strength of the IQP (space, possibility for better minor pieces in many cases, etc). I was more used to using the IQP to start an attack against the king, so this book broadened my horizons. Chapter 3 also presented new insight for me despite having studied similar topics extensively before. I agree with the author's concept about critical positions (although the evaluation of the critical positions and which positions are critical can be up for debate, and new resources can be found in many of them which change known evaluations) which isn't explained in most opening books. To my memory, I don't remember anyone (or any study resource) explaining what critical positions in the opening were. This is a very important topic and is often referenced, but players can be confused when a critical position is referenced (if they aren't taught what a critical position is and don't figure it out on their own). Other than the definitions and practical advice on the topic, I found some specific advice useful. I've spent a lot of time analyzing the Sozin structures (I recommended the Fischer-Sozin and Velimirovic Attack in my Chessable e-book '1.e4: A Comprehensive White Repertoire' and probably have spent hundreds of hours analyzing them) and I didn't know one of the early nuances that Ehlvest explains. I found myself telling one of my NM friends about this nuance, and it was news to him also. This shows that "Grandmaster Opening Preparation" can help masters as well as club players.
The text on 'Computer Preparation versus Human Common Sense' is useful for understanding what role computers should play in preparation. The chapters 'Modern Trends in the Opening' 'Memorizing Opening Lines', 'Overview of Critical Positions' and 'How to Build your Opening Repertoire' is less content intensive than chapters 2 and 3, but annotated games and specific analysis of specific openings are still present. Lots of general advice is present in these chapters.
One downside to this book is that the author isn't always objective about his usage of mistake and inaccuracy symbols. In one extreme example, he annotates one opening move with a ?? symbol and without any annotations for the next 10 or so moves, then claims the side that made the 'blunder' could have obtained adequate counterplay with a specific move/plan. What? Is a blunder not a losing mistake? Where was the mistake from the opponent to allow the equality? I engine checked this example and the move itself might have been ?! or ? at most, and even then, it was more of a practical mistake than an objective one. There were other examples of this sort of exaggeration in the book, but it's not a huge deal as he often clarifies the reason behind the mistake. So what if he's exaggerating? We can still at least learn why the move was inaccurate. This issue was not a big deal enough for me to lower my review from 5-stars (especially since there are relatively few example of this - under 10 if I remember correctly), though it's something I noticed which could be relevant to some readers.
Another problem is that sometimes generalities are given without clarifying qualifiers. This is a common problem in chess books, and Ehlvest isn't immune. For example, he will say something like "knights are always better than bishops in isolated queen pawn positions" casually without much explanation, when it's clear that this is dogmatic and even the generality might only apply to a specific sub-structure of the IQP. Reasoning is required to understand what the qualifiers are in cases when Ehlvest does this (for example, in this case the structure was a Tarrasch and the side who was winning the bishop in the majority of the examples lost at least 2 tempi to do so in most cases. Engine checking with some of the puzzles, I concluded that the bishop was not usually worse, but the knight was sometimes better at fighting for key squares when the IQP threatened to advance or for supporting the blockade, so the trade can be considered in some circumstances (generally relating to the center and/or trying to get a better version of the IQP structure by advancing), and the side with the bishop can often allow the exchange if the side who threatened to win the bishop pair lost time to win it). Again though, I'd like to add that this wasn't enough for me to lower my review from 5 stars. Many (most?) chess authors have this problem up to some extent, and I suspect that this is because many of them became IMs/GMs largely from intuitive learning when they were young rather than heavy analytic work when they were older. Therefore, they don't always know why they know what they know, and can struggle to accurately explain some aspects of chess. Most authors can't meet the analytic standards of heavyweights like Aagaard and Dvoretsky. Regardless of this issue, Ehlvest does a reasonable job of analytically explaining most aspects of his book, so I can forgive him for not clarifying a minority of his claims. I'd like to note that the lack of analytic explanation in some cases is more likely to impact adults than kids, because kids have excellent intuitive learning and are more likely to be able to subconsciously figure out what the qualifiers are from the examples without needing to use reason to determine them.
In conclusion, this is an excellent (though not perfect) book which can be instructive to both club players and masters. I highly recommend "Grandmaster Opening Preparation" to players who are interested in understanding the IQP/Sozin/Scheveningen structures better and to those that would like to understand the nature of opening preparation better.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Additional Details
Small Business
Shop products from small business brands sold in Amazon’s store. Discover more about the small businesses partnering with Amazon and Amazon’s commitment to empowering them.
Small Business
This product is from a small business brand. Support small.
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Page 1 of 1 Start over
- Playing the French (Grandmaster Guide)PaperbackEUR 8.81 shippingOnly 4 left in stock (more on the way).
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews. Please reload the page.
- Reviewed in the United States on June 7, 2019Format: Paperback
