For starting theory, Pinski's book is all you really need.
two knights defence and sources
Sort:
Sounds like you've already got all you really need! 
i have already played the two knights defence for a while.i have read half the book and its full of cool instructive games but at the same time i want to start making a opening tree. im gonna go through the whole book because its instructive but i dont want to study variations to deeply only to find out they were refuted years ago. 7 years is a long time in chesstheory
In my opinion, I think you would be pretty well on top of current theory if you follow the book. While there have been improvements, for the most part the book is close enough.
Tommy, that sounds like the kind of thing grandmasters worry about.
i tihnk you are probably right conquistador. lawdog i see your point but i have reached the level where its time to learn some theory and study some games in gameexplorer. if i have one bad and one good line and they take equal time to learn why not take the good one:) usually im ok with second best moves but when the book is 7 years old i have to be sceptic:P
ok anyone who doesnt play the two knights defence should check it out. i cant remember having so much fun with an opening before
OK, so what is the title of Pinski's book on the 2 knights?
i decided its time to nail down some theory in the two knights defence so anyone have any suggestion for sources? i have pinskis book and it looks good but i dont like the fact that its 7 years old