Wow, awesome, is that any good?
Yes and no. It is great for the history of the opening, as you can see how it developed, plenty of games by Larsen and Nimzowitch
It is also great for ideas, for example it has little chapters on obscure stuff like Bayonet attacks (lines with g4) and a chapter on the Birds move order.
What it is not so good for is as a pure opening manual as many of the lines are now suspect, and were still being developed at the time. For example here is a line that was all the rage at the time
This line is now known to be good for black. White now plays it differently with 8.Nc3 and this is a much better approach, but not mentioned in the book, as it had yet to be arrived at.
Like I said the theory was still quite young in the 70s but it is great for getting a feel of the opening, and is not biased to white, as black does well in some games,
Half of the book is devoted to the 1,Nf3 d5 2.b3 move order, which imo and many others is the best way to play it. Those chapters are generally much easier to play for white than the ones where white allows black to play e5 and d5. Theory has also remained more static in these lines, so much of what is written can still be relied upon.
If you can find a copy it is well worth owning , but more as a collection of interesting games than an opening manual.
One thing I did learn from it is that 1.Nf3 c5 2.b3 ?! Is a bad idea for white as black can set up a Botvinnik structure with pawns on c5 d6 and e5 which really blunts whites bishop, especially as white has already played Nf3 making f4 more difficult as a mean of prizing open the diagonal. I had been playing b3 after c5 and did not realise it was considered dubious.
Wow, awesome, is that any good?