Pasting a comment on this guy from chessbase
moderncheckers 4 hours ago
This article got me interested in the book and in its author, Lyudmil Tsvetkov, and I spent the last couple of hours reading some of the author's contributions in Talk Chess, Rybkaforum and chess dot com. Unfortunately, the recent contributions seem to me to consist mostly of: the author's boasting of his playing strength of 2600 or even 2800 level; pasting the games he has won against the top engines with a massive time handicap (as far as I could see, the engines never get more than 2'+2''/move); responding not always diplomatically (despite his diplomatic past) to the critique; and declining any proposals of a match against an engine played in controlled environment (often saying that the current engines are "too weak" for such a match to make sense) or of any other way of verifying the author's playing strength. I failed to find any real programming suggestions. I apologize if my search was not thorough enough, and if the suggestions are indeed there.
I find it strange that the author of the book claims he has been spending five hours every day on chess – and yet somehow he could not find a week to play in an OTB tournament to test his ideas, or even play any games online.
The book was written before the AlphaZero – Stockfish match, by the way.
Given that Nimzowitsch and Kmoch were among the best chess players of their days, while the credentials of Mr. Tsvetkov are unknown, I am afraid that the worth of the book might be closer to "English As She Is Spoke" by Pedro Carolino than to masterpieces such as "My System" and "Pawn Power in Chess". An open-minded chess player might still find some inspiration in it, just as an English speaker might likely find some kind of inspiration in "English As She Is Spoke", but I myself would rather stick to well-proven methods.
An idea is never good just because it is new. In fact, most ideas are bad:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Most_ideas_are_bad
Before spending my time on a new chess method, I would like to see some proof of its potential efficacy, which the author has not really provided. For the time being, I see no reason to accept his extraordinary claims (e.g. that the French defence is losing for black or that the assessment of the two positions diagrammed in this review – the main difference between which is the presence or absence of light-squared bishops – differs so much that one of them is losing and the other one is winning for white).
I find it strange that the author of the book claims he has been spending five hours every day on chess – and yet somehow he could not find a week to play in an OTB tournament to test his ideas, or even play any games online.
The book was written before the AlphaZero – Stockfish match, by the way.
Given that Nimzowitsch and Kmoch were among the best chess players of their days, while the credentials of Mr. Tsvetkov are unknown, I am afraid that the worth of the book might be closer to "English As She Is Spoke" by Pedro Carolino than to masterpieces such as "My System" and "Pawn Power in Chess". An open-minded chess player might still find some inspiration in it, just as an English speaker might likely find some kind of inspiration in "English As She Is Spoke", but I myself would rather stick to well-proven methods.
An idea is never good just because it is new. In fact, most ideas are bad:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Most_ideas_are_bad
Before spending my time on a new chess method, I would like to see some proof of its potential efficacy, which the author has not really provided. For the time being, I see no reason to accept his extraordinary claims (e.g. that the French defence is losing for black or that the assessment of the two positions diagrammed in this review – the main difference between which is the presence or absence of light-squared bishops – differs so much that one of them is losing and the other one is winning for white).
Well, that didn't take long. Game on then.