Play 1...Nc6!

[CWisnewski]

Hello all!

For those interested in an opening repertoire that is unorthodox, aggressive AND sound, my new opening book "Play 1...Nc6!" (Everyman) is out now!

Best regards,
IM Christoph Wisnewski

[GameOverZiggy]

if i play nc6 against d4 and u push d5 that is called the Bozo Indian. Cool name huh

[Dame]

CWisnewski, welcome to the forum. I'm looking forward to seeing your participation here

Good luck with your book!

[Chuckychess]

I read "A Complete Defense for Black" my GM Keene and IM Jacobs, a book which recommended 1...Nc6 against all first moves! Aside from being more "up-to-date", how does your book differ from the one above?

[CWisnewski]

You may visit http://www.niggemann.com for a full table of contents (just do a quick search for "wisnewski")!

[Dame]

Yeah, I'm curious to hear an answer to that as well, Chuckychess -

CWisnewski, maybe you could tell it to us here ?

[Chuckychess]

I just checked out the Table of Contents, and can report the following:

1 e4 Nc6 2 d4

Keene and Jacobs: 2...e5

Wisnewski: 2...d5

1 d4

Keene and Jacobs: 1...Nc6 2 c4 e5

Wisnewski: 1...d5 (Question: How come the book is titled 1...Nc6 when Black doesn't even play 1...Nc6 against 1 d4? The title of the book is misleading!)

2 c4 Nc6

[CWisnewski]

Only a little. The sypnosis of the book reveals that I am advocating the Chigorin Defence, so this should not come as a total surprise.

[Chuckychess]

Some buyers of your book might (mistakenly, in this case) believe that the book is actually about 1...Nc6. But almost half of the book is NOT about 1...Nc6! The title is extremely misleading and should be changed at once!

BTW, I'm not claiming that you (the author) or your publisher are trying to pull a fast one...I just don't think that either you or the publisher thought carefully enough about the title.

[subasis]

Here is where I start to appreciate Spanish ortography which makes a difference between: ¡Play 1...Nc6! and Play 1...Nc6! The title, of course, has to be a bit commercial and this one looks more honest than "Win with anything!" sort of. This defence is generally played by the (much) stronger player to avoid a deep preparation of the other side. That explains its outstanding statistic of some variations in databases. As for myself, I am not against the move and play it against the programs sometimes. It's just one tempo down compared with 1.Nc3 which I play against humans. I call the latter "The Romanian Opening" because it was extensively analysed by a former Romanian Champion (and my first coach). Bellon, who played it quite a lot also learned it in Romania (from the author). They called it Dunst, although I could not find that player in any main line. The first game won against a GM (by an IM) is Suba-Lengyel, Varna 1975. The same fate has another defense initiated by Capablanca (as child), analysed by the same trainer (G.Alexandrescu) and popularized by the author, to the point that Nogueiras, M. Gurevich, Gelfand and Karpov played it, and was called "Fort Knox"! (1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2/c3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Bd7!?) Nowadays, its expert is a former club colleague, Rustemov.
Comming back to 1...Nc6 or "The Nimzovich/Bogoliubow", the critical lines are:
1.e4 (d4) Nc6 2.d4 (e4) d5 3.Nc3! and
1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3!? d6 3.Bb5! where now:
-3...e5 is the old Steinitz Variation in Ruy Lopez.
-3...a6 is scoring very well in the database (Mega 2007), but the only relevant game is of GM Rogers against a 300-less-ELO opponent (and draw!)
-3...Bg4 where Milov won a (blitz) game with Black, after being a pawn down. Returning to old variations is not appetising. It's true that I'm fond of transpositions, but only the ones used for gain, not for refuge.
If the author provides sound analyses in these variation (and I think that would be the right thing to concentrate on), than the book is an explosively good investment for a large range of players. The logic behind such provoking moves in the opening is a latent energy, which I call "dynamic potential". Besides the surprise factor and the motivation of their player, a "trench principle" gives such openings a good chance, and even better against Thomases!. Of my play against various defences, the less enviable is against Owen, just because I once was told by an authority: "You don't have to prepare against such openings". An opening like "Sicilian Chamaleon" appears in Joel Benjamin's "Unortodox Openings" although it'a a completely normal Sicilian, just catching the Najdorf/Scheveningen fans in offside by move order and transpositions. Most of my games in "chessgames.com" are classified under "other" Are "English" (transposing to QG, Karo-Kan or whatever you like), "Modern Benoni" and "The Hedgehog" hmy: other openings? Shall I play either "Petrov" or the King's Gambit" to be considered a serious player? Without any praise to unorthodox openings: do you remember Karpov-Miles? (1.e4 a6). Advanced (>1900 ELO or equivalent) players can find more things on breaking with classic dogma, in my book "Dynamic Chess Strategy" http://menssana.co.uk