Chess book question

Hello. I am wondering what people think about this. Let's say, when you play White sometimes you encounter the Budapest Gambit. Would a book on the Budapest Gambit be something the White player can use, even though the book focuses on the Black perspective? And if so, how much exactly? I'm curious about what people think.

The Budapest Gambit is just one example, of course. I could also have used the Slav Defence etc. 

Mostly applies for me when I play White.

If you're looking for advice about the best moves for white against a black defense, be careful about relying on a book advocating a black defense, often titled something like "Winning with the [fill in the blank] Defense".  Some of these books will try to be objective, but there's always a temptation for the author to exagerate black's chances, and maybe even intentionally fail to mention white's best moves.  They need to sell their books, and masses of naive people are looking for a "guaranteed approach"/"secret weapon" (opening books constitute the vast majority of chess books).  Reading book reviews on amazon.com can help you avoid the most biased opening books.

There are books which are made for Black but players of the white side can conveniently use. Long ago I bought a book on the Benkö gambit by Kinsman & Jacobs and although I play only this opening as White and it's a book mainly aimed at the Black player, it turned out to be a really useful book. Maybe because the book offered a complete coverage of the different lines, balanced assessments, told what is good and what is not, showed some model games by White, and didn't try to hide that some lines were inferior or hard to play for Black.

Unlikewise, some are just unbearable, like "Understanding the Grünfeld". As a player of the white side, it's just infuriating to read such stuff page after page praising Black's concepts and belittling White's ideas, and it's almost a relief to find wrong lines and ludicrous assessments so you can discard the book altogether.

Fair. Doesn't apply to me fortunately. I already have my entire repertoire chosen and that's all existing (=theory about it) stuff that I like. Sometimes I used process of elimination, sometimes I saw a nice GM game etc.

Alright so, it all depends whether the book in question is not too biased?  

Gilasaurus,

Here's your answer:

http://www.amazon.com/1-d4-Guerrillas-Powerful-Repertoire-Sidelines/dp/9056913735

The Budapest Gambit is amongst the items covered.  This should resolve all your problems against offbeat lines.

Of course, it is assumed that you can find your way thru more mainstream openings as there are many books on the Queen's Gambit, King's Indian, Grunfeld, etc, that are objective.  Of course, there are a bunch more that are repertoires, but it's not like the offbeat stuff where some fool writes a repertoire for Black saying how great it is for him when in reality, it's just outright bad!  But yet, it's the only thing published in the last 50 years on said opening.

And whether it's a complete overview or a repertoire. The type of opening also plays a role. I don't think it's necessary to read a full book on the Budapest or the Albin, those lines are very specific, whereas Benkö, Benoni or King's Indian structures are at the core of 1. d4 play and happen all the time in various ways...

That book seems awesome, covering a few things I didn't even know existed. Thanks for that.

Yes that makes sense, I can imagine just 1 answer versus the Budapest, Albin etc etc. suffices. Against Benko I play Fianchetto + Rb1, Benoni Fianchetto system and vs King's Indian I use Sämisch.

One point that has yet to be mentionned is that a repertoire book for the other side gives decent indication what lines you'll be likely to face (as repertoire books tend to be quite popular between, say, 1800 and 2200.)

Indeed but usually you will notice these trends (and much more) during database mining. Most of the time opening books do validate an existing trend, they rarely create a new one.

They may well rarely create a new trend at higher levels, but

1. club player buys repertoire book

2. he plays its recommendation

3. you face it

My point was that those recommendations come from pre-existing master practice, so you don't need to buy the book, a careful look at the databases will do. Even if the book does expose a completely new approach to some line,  there is a high chance it has already been put to the test since the book release.

I'm not saying it will necessarily provide a completely new approach, but the lines recommended will generally be more popular following its release, and one can focus their energy on studying these lines.

For me it's more then enough work to apply one good repertoire book for white. In my case it's watsons "a strategic chess opening repertoire for white". As long as i want to play any line from the book, i don't need any other book. When i would want to change some line, e.g. from the books 4.e3 to 4.Qc2 against the nimzo indian, i would take a look. Maybe another repertoire book delivers good material, maybe there is a single volume on 4. Qc2.

Vigorito wrote a book exclusively on Qc2. My White repertoire is mostly based on Avrukhs repertoire books, however I play Sämisch instead of Fianchetto versus the KID.

Possibly helpful:

A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire for White by John Watson (2012), Playing 1.d4 by Lars Schandorff (2012), and The Kaufman Repertoire for Black & White by Larry Kaufman (2012).

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627105428/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen161.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20140626221508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen162.pdf