Dealing with d4 Deviations: Fighting the Trompowsky, Torre, Blackmar-Diemer, Stonewall, Colle and Other Problem Openings (Everyman Chess) [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

If you play chess, you'll have to face 1 d4 fairly often. And if you answer 1...Nf6, you may be walking right into a possible Trompowsky (2 Bg5), a Torre (2 Nf3 and 3 Bg5), a London (2 Nf3 and 3 Bf5), a Colle (2 Nf3 and 3 e3), a Veresov (2 Nc3 d5 3 Bg5), or even a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (2 Nc3 d5 3 e4). Even if you play 1...d5, there are versions of all these systems that are still on. I guess one could play 1...f5 (the Dutch), but even then White can play 2 Bg5 or 2 Nf3 and 3 Bg5, or even 2 e4 or 2 g3 for that matter. At least, if you play 1...f5, you'll be able to answer 2 Nc3 with 2 ...Nf6, which might confuse a Veresov player, since 1 d4 d5 2 Nc3 f5 3 Bf4 is ghastly for Black.

Still, most of us will need to find a way to defend against unusual lines after 1 d4 Nf6 or 1 d4 d5. And that is where this book comes in handy. Cox explains how to get back to the lines you wanted or to get a good game against these "problem openings."

After 1 d4 Nf6 2 Bg5, White is clearly hoping to take your Knight and double your pawns. Or, after 2...Ne4 3 Bf4 d5 4 f3 Nf6 5 e4 get a Blackmar-Diemer gambit with an extra tempo. So Cox recommends 2...e6 here, and he gives us some good lines for Black. White can also play 1 d4 d5 2 Bg5, but that's not really the Tromp, and the author shows how Black can do well after 2...h6 3 Bh4 c6.

In the Torre attack, after 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3, Cox does show how to play 2...e6 for Black. But he strongly recommends 2...d5 3 Bg5 Ne4, and I certainly agree. Of course, you will have to be able to defend a Queen's Gambit after 3 c4. The same is true for the London and the Colle. After 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3, Cox explains how to play 2...e6, but recommends 2...d5 3 Bf4 c5 and 2...d5 3 e3 Bf5.

The Veresov goes 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nc3 d5 3 Bg5, and Cox recommends the exciting 3...c5, which means letting White play a Chigorin with a move in hand. I like this line for Black and I think it is worth learning.

Many folks accept the Blackmar-Diemer gambit. But Cox gives us an Awful Warning about what can happen. A Master with Black tried 1 d4 Nf6 2 Nc3 d5 3 e4 dxe4 4 f3 exf3 5 Nxf3 e6 6 Bg5 Be7 7 Bd3 Nbd7 8 0-0 0-0 9 Qe1 c5 10 Qh4 g6 (Black is already totally ripped) 11 Ne5 Re8 12 Nxf7 Qc7 13 Bxg6 hxg6 14 Qh8+ Kxf7 15 Qh7+ Kf8 16 Bh6 mate. So Cox very reasonably recommends 3...Nxe4 here (the Hubsch Defence), in order to answer 4 Nxe4 dxe4 5 f3? with 5...e5. And after 1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3, he wants 3...e5.

The next unusual lines we see are 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 c5 without 4 d5. Cox shows how Black can still play some form of a Benoni or Nimzo-Indian against 4 g3 or 4 Nc3 here. But that leaves 4 e3 as a problem. Black can play a Caro-Kann and defend against a Panov-Botvinnik attack with 4...cxd4. But Black may not want to be on what I would consider the wrong side of an isolated Queen pawn attack, so Cox recommends 4...a6 and 5...d5 (threatening dxc4).

The book concludes with some rare lines. 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Bg5 tries to avoid the Nimzo, but Cox explains that 3...c5 works well for Black here, as do 3...d5 and even the move that White was trying to avoid, 3...Bb4+ (although White will indeed play 4 Nd2 rather than 4 Nc3). 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 aims at a Catalan after 3...d5, but Cox shows that Black can avoid this with 3...b5. 1 d4 Nf6 2 e3 is met by 2...c5. And finally, 1 d4 Nf6 2 g3 d5 leads to a very good version of the Slav for Black.

This is a useful and well-written book, and I recommend it.

It appears as if the people who have reviewed this book on Amazon glanced at a few lines and wrote a great review of it. After taking the time to go through every chapter of this book, writing down the lines and analyzing with friends (2000+ rated) or Fritz, the book comes up far short.

From the get go, the reader should be a little worried. You get through the first two pages of the Trompowsky when all of a sudden a game is not only mis-cited, but also missing a move from white and from black. It's the first chapter, first recommended line (did anyone here READ the variations?) and already the editing is shoddy. Although I went into Chessbase and dredged the game up, clearly the editor should have caught that. This is a repeated pattern throughout the book.

Nitpicking aside, what about the content? Are the recommended lines good? Against the Trompowsky, Cox does a solid job covering how black should play. Unfortunately, it's not one of the books that shows the reader full games (which is useful, since many times endgames in the London, Colle, etc. are very intricate). For the Blackmar-Diemer, the clever counter-gambit is very cool and I've found it's pretty successful. However, after analyzing it for a few hours with some friends, numerous errors and missed moves crop up. Of course there are some lines that have been unplayed, but if Fritz gives a clear +.25 over all the other lines, the author's doing something wrong.

Another problem I encountered is that many times the text is in the wrong place. I have quite a few malicious feelings toward the London and Colle (and Cox offers some witty banter on all the openings as well), but at times the introduction to the chapters are TOO full of the Cox's commentary. There is a de-emphasis on the actual lines and little explication of important move sequences where there should be.

It gets two stars because it gives good lines against the Trompowsky, London (though there are lots of holes the reader needs to work out for themselves), and I suppose the Torre. However, the book is simply too small and too thin to be as meaningful as it should be. The editing significantly detracts from its readibility and many times at the end of variations the reader is left wondering "have I really equalized?" as well as "what do I do now?"

It's a great idea, but if you're looking for a book to cover that hole in chess literature, perhaps it's better worth your money to just buy a book on the Colle or London.

For MANY years, I played (as Black) 1.d4 Nf6, and went confidently into the mass of theory that was the King's Indian Defense, fearlessly fianchettoing my KB and salivating at White's king, fantasizing about the upcoming regicide about to hit White. Even if I lost, I looked forward to a full-blooded battle. Then came a move other than 2.c4, and I started to roll my eyes. White played something I considered "lame" - for example, the Colle System. I ended up losing more games than I should have, and it took me way too long to realize that I could easily handle the full-blooded battles, but when White didn't want to give me what I wanted, I would lose my attention, fall asleep, and give the game to White.

I finally decided that I needed to play something less committal (on my part), and after toying with the Budapest Defense (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5), the Benoni, and the Queen's Gambit, I came to the scheme of 1...e6, followed by the Nimzo-Indian, Bogo-Indian, or Queen's Indian. I played ...e6 first because I'm a die-hard French Defense addict, and I wanted to give White one last chance to right the wrong he committed by playing 1.d4.

While these are less critical lines, and I haven't won as many games with them as I did with the King's Indian, I haven't lost as many either, and I find myself in the game for a much longer period of time than I did when I fianchettoed my KB. But there was an amazing dearth of good books on the annoying sidelines that John Cox covers in this book. Here, he gives coherent, understandable schemes to combat these "mosquito openings" as I call them, these openings that are more annoying than fear-inspiring. Cox writes very well, covering the major sidelines such as the London, the Torre, the Tromp (which was the reason I converted from the King's Indian to the ...e6 stuff), the Colle, and the Veresov (which I haven't ever faced). Cox covers these lines with a respectable system, the basics of which are easy to understand, but doesn't form one of those "systems against everything". His coverage, of, for example, the London System, is MUCH better than that of the "Winning With the London System" book I reviewed elsewhere. Basically, his system consists of ...e6, ...Nf6, and ...c5 or ...d5. He realistically approaches these lines for Black as not likely to put the White openings out of business, but at least allow Black to get through the opening and into the middlegame.

I heartily recommend this book.