10-03-2012, 11:44 PM
I'm reminded here of my first chess book - 'A Pocket Guide to the Chess Openings' by Griffith and Golombek (Revised Edition, 1958). Therein Patriarch Harry Golombek made a comment which was to have a lasting impact upon my understanding of chess strategy: 'The primary object of the English Opening is to attack the white squares not only in the centre but along the diagonal KR1-QR8. I do not myself believe that 1 ... P-K4 is an adequate defence, since it does nothing towards contesting White's objectives.'
Though I rather took this latter point to heart, it didn't prevent me from later preparing a small repertoire book advocating a defence to the English Opening based on the systems 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 g3 g6 and 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 Nf3 f5. This was published in 1985 by Tony Gillam at the Chess Player, Nottingham, and given the unfortunate title 'English Opening - A Line for Black'. Andy's choice here, an early ...h5 versus the Botvinnik structure, was among my recommendations.
Having had 27 years to mull it over, I now feel confident enough to deliver the definitive assessment of the line: 'Both sides stand badly'.
Whatever Clement may be telling us of his thoughts, the reality is surely a lament on the lines of: "Ooooh, nooo. What am I doing involved in this stodge? I could just have played 1 e4!" (and not followed up with 25 moves of theory...). And Andy's outward optimism must also by now be masking deep regrets: "1...e5 - what was I doing? I'm a tempo down on a Closed Sicilian, a light-square palsy's about to set in. I should simply have set about contesting White's objectives straightway - 1...e6! 1...c6!"
Though I rather took this latter point to heart, it didn't prevent me from later preparing a small repertoire book advocating a defence to the English Opening based on the systems 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 g3 g6 and 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 Nf3 f5. This was published in 1985 by Tony Gillam at the Chess Player, Nottingham, and given the unfortunate title 'English Opening - A Line for Black'. Andy's choice here, an early ...h5 versus the Botvinnik structure, was among my recommendations.
Having had 27 years to mull it over, I now feel confident enough to deliver the definitive assessment of the line: 'Both sides stand badly'.
Whatever Clement may be telling us of his thoughts, the reality is surely a lament on the lines of: "Ooooh, nooo. What am I doing involved in this stodge? I could just have played 1 e4!" (and not followed up with 25 moves of theory...). And Andy's outward optimism must also by now be masking deep regrets: "1...e5 - what was I doing? I'm a tempo down on a Closed Sicilian, a light-square palsy's about to set in. I should simply have set about contesting White's objectives straightway - 1...e6! 1...c6!"