Recenze Knight on the Left: 1.Nc3

This is the first full-length book about this interesting opening, unfolding a complete theory of 1.Nc3; including several offbeat lines against semi-open defences like the Alekhine or the Caro-Kann. The author thoroughly explains the basic structures which supply huge scope for creativity. There is broad discussion of move order subtleties andtransposition issues, so that the book deepens your understanding of opening play in general!\"If you have a liking for the unusual and daring, you will probably not find many books this year that are better than this one!\"(Garsten Hansen on Chesscafe, Checkpoint September 2003)Preface:This book covers the opening 1.Nc3. Opening? - Oh, yes! Many consider 1. Nc3 to be just a move, which might be playable, but \"hardly has any independent value\", rather transposing to 1.e4 systems.In this context, Khalifman\'s five volume opus 1.Nf3 - Opening for White according to Kramnik springs to mind. In an odyssey of more than 1300 pages, the former FIDE world Champion proves that the \"knight on the right\" 1 Nf3 is a good move, but not an opening in itself! He doesn\'t at all cover the Reti (with which 1.Nf3 is usually connected), but a multitude of openings including the King\'s Indian, the Queen\'s Gambit (Slav, Orthodox, Accepted etc), the Dutch Defence, the English Opening and even some lines of the Sicilian (namely the Maroczy setup against the Accelerated Dragon); besides, some peculiarities like the Grünfeld without d2-d4. Quintessentially, 1.Nf3 is presented as a very subtle transposition tool, by which - to simplify a bit - undesirable lines of the aforementioned openings can be excluded.So, how are matters after 1.Nc3? There\'s a bunch of established independent concepts, e.g. after 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 or 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nce2. It\'s mostly possible, but not always advisable to stay clear of all transpositions. Typical questions that a 1.Nc3 practitioner will face are:After 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 e6, should he go for a French by 3.d4 or try some independent setup?After 1.Nc3 c5, should he play 2.e4 immediately, possibly going for a Closed Sicilian (3.g3) or for the Grand Prix Attack (3.f4)? Or transpose to a StanSicilian by 2.Nf3 Nc6 (2...d6, 2...e6) 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 and 5.e4?Or strive for the very tricky indepenlines, keeping the option of e2-e4, transposing to some Standard lines, as an \"emergency exit\" in reserve?After 1.Nc3 g6, should he return to 2.e4, should he go for the fierce 2.h4 or should he stay flexible by 2.Nf3 and 2.g3, not yet revealing his intentions?In fact, every leading 1.Nc3 player has his own answers to those questions. Transat a later stage are full of subtleties, which will be revealed in this work. If one wants to switch from 1.e4 to 1.Nc3, this is even an advantage: you may start by playing 1.e4 e6/c6/Nf6 2.Nc3 (reaching some lines from Chapter IV), later on you play 1.Nc3, firstly transposing quite often to 1.e4 systems, then less and less.This book covers every possibility after 1.Nc3 which at least has some indepenvalue. Additionally, some \"secret\" lines which belong to 1.e4 openings but in practice occur more often via 1.Nc3, or which have some features of this opening. For example, such Anti-Caro-Kann lines as 1.e4 c6 2.Nc3 d5 3.f4 or 3.Qf3!?. Typically such lines are neglected in opening manuals.A special focus is on late transpositions (e.g., on move 6) to 1.e4 positions under favourable circumstances! I have excluded only 1.Nc3 d5 2.d4, which leads to the Veresov Opening after 2... Nf6 3.Bg5, to the French after 2...e6 3.e4 or the Caro-Kann after 2...c6 3.e4.Besides transpositions from 1.Nc3 to 1.e4 openings, there are also some in the other direction, e.g. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3!?, 1.e4 d5 2.Nc3!?, 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.Nf3 (a basic position from Chapter V); one can argue that 1.e4 c5 2.f4 d5 3.Nc3 is also truly a 1.Nc3 position.An unrecognised openingUnlike unorthodox openings such as 1.b4 or 1.g4, 1.Nc3 by no means compromises White\'s position, an