The Sniper

[COMMENT DELETED by moderator] 

I am not sure this type of openly promotional message is allowed here on chess.com, moderators might want to edit/delete it.

The "sniper" (of course it mainly trasposes to well known and already named openings) is really an interesting repertoire, but something i don't like is the lack of armony inside the repertoire choices. I mean, there are many ultrasharp(ie acc.dragon) lines coexisting with quiet and solid stuff like the shmidt benoni and symmetrical english. It seems to me that most players would find themselves unconfortable with some parts of the repertoire. 

Logically it shouldn't be allowed, but i expressed uncertainty because i never read an official list of the forum rules. Of course one feels like if people are paying for putting ads on this website is not because they can do self promotion for free on the forums, so you must be right.

Charlie, i suggest you to radically edit your message.

i have a 1998 snowblower for sale ... clean ... runs good ...

I dont actually mind the promotion, Khemalnetsky promotes his books in here sometimes, but he always gives something (lesson, analysis, etc.) back in return (and his books are good).

What I DO dislike is the WALLoFTEXTwithNOformattingORcoherence.  If this is any indication of the quality of writing in the book . . . I'll pass.

I think I need to have a second look at that book. A friend bought 1 copy for me and I haven't touched it ever since

did you know that you can get free chess.com membership being a fide master?

http://www.chess.com/members/submit_title_proof.html

Actually, I was interested in that book at first, but then someone wrote somewhere that it is rather a collection of annotated games than a serious effort to try and systematically cover all the evil things White may throw at you.  

what i heard is that the author generally did a good job and showed some interesting ideas, but some sections were lacking in depth (i heard that the dragon section is particularly inadequate) some serious options for white not covered and in general the author is too optimistic regarding black chances (in a notorious thread on chesspublishing he stated that black "at least equalizes" with the sniper). However the book was generally considered interesting. My main doubt (as already stated) is whether it makes sense to allow white such an enourmos number of challenging tryes, leading to every sort of different position, just for the sake of playing the first 3 moves in the same order against everything. 

The variations recommended against the Maroczy Bind and against the Royal Pain 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nf3 c5 4.dc5! are both completely inadequate, and analysed too shallowly: White has a clear advantage. The one against 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 4.dc5 is not much better, either. It's apparent that either the author does not have the grasp for such positions, or he deliberately paints things rosy.

As far as I'm concerned, the author has done quite a bit of work in it, but he clearly lacks the authority to issue a good openings' book. I would certainly not recommend it.

In fact the author has played and lost a correspondence game on chesspub(every form of computer of human help was allowed) in the line you call "royal pain". Indeed it was a royal pain for black since he was constantly under pressure for the whole game. However the humiliating thing is not that he was defeated (being defeated as black while playing an unusual opening against a stonger[corr.IM] opponent is not a reason to be ashamed) but that he just quit the game in the late middlegame, in a position where black was clearly much worse and maybe lost, after posting something like "black is slighly better but white might draw, i have proved my point, goodbye". Childish.

Sorry, in fact it was the third line (3.Nc3) and not the "royal pain"

Uhh... I have found another hilarious forum thread, where the author announces he will run for ECF President.

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3348

Most of his "program" is more laughable than his book.

This is spam pure and simple. IMO he should pay chess.com for advertising or go away. I pay a membership in part to not have to look at ads. 

It is, in fact i expressed the same concern when posting here for the first time, but to my surprise the thread didn't got deleted. 

A get-rich-slow scheme as they go, but spam.

I think the mods are asleep at the wheel... At least Mr. Storey and his book are real and at it is chess content... but I think it's a no-brainer deletion when the moderators see it.

My two-cents to Mr. Storey -- This kind of spamvertizing does not make for good public relations with me and I am less, not more, likely to buy your product now.  

Strange thing is that I am nevertheless still interested in the book ... and I'd also like to see how the idea should be played with White one tempo up.

yitvck nhuyk7togi m6nhjtrckumidth