Think Again "Albins Gegengambit" by Alexander Raetsky and Maxim Chetverik, 1998 Schachverlag Kania, Figurine Algebraic Notation, Hardcover, 156pp., $17.00 For those of you who immediately cringe at the thought of purchasing a chess book written in a foreign language, "Albins Gegengambit" by Russian IM Alexander Raetsky and FM Maxim Chetverik (given as "Raetzki" and "Tschetwerik" respectively, on the cover and title page) may provide you with a reason to think twice before running out of the room screaming. First of all, one hesitates to even consider this book to be written in a "foreign language", given the fact that about the only German it contains is in the Introduction, which has been translated into English anyway. Secondly, the book's language is barely noticeable, since games are in figurine algebraic notation and notes use universal, Informant- style symbols. And, yes, if you happen to be a fan of the Albin Counter-Gambit, 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e5, you'll probably find this book to be more palatable yet. It is segregated into two parts: Part I, which includes about 60 pages of theory and notes, with material further divided into eight main variations; Part II consists of 239 lightly-annotated or unannotated games, mostly from the mid-1950s through the mid- 90s, and a 10-page Index of Players. There is a total of 156 pages in the book, including a brief one page Introduction. The principal lines that are covered are 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e5 3 de5 d4 (See Diagram) with various 4th moves; 4 Nf3 Nc6; 4 Nf3 Nc6 5 Nbd2 Bg4; 5 g3 and various Black 5th moves; 5 g3 f6 6 ef6 Nf6; 5 g3 Be6; 5 g3 Bg4 6 Nbd2 Qd7 7 Bg2 0-0-0; 6 Bg2 Qd7 7 0-0 0-0- 0. As usual, what we are most concerned about in an opening book is the accuracy, completeness and currency of the material. Given the lofty prices of chess books these days, the potential buyer deserves to know about a work that is severely lacking in any one of these categories. With that in mind, let's examine what kind of a job Raetsky and Chetverik have done in "Albins Gegengambit". A critical line for Black is the variation 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e5 3 de5 d4 4 Nf3 Nc6 5 g3 Be6. (See Diagram) This is cited as one of two main lines in "Encyclopedia of Chess Openings" (ECO) 1998 edition D09 (5...Bg4 is the other) and contained in Paul Lamford's 1983 treatise "Albin Counter-Gambit". One of the main lines runs 6 Nbd2 Qd7 7 Bg2 and now, either 7...Nge7 or ...0-0-0. Lamford calls 7...0-0-0 the "best" move in this position. This move is also a principal option identified by the 1998 "Trends in the Albin Counter Gambit", edited by Chris Ward. ECO does not mention 7...0-0-0 at all but, instead, proceeds with 7...Nge7 8 0-0 Ng6 9 Qb3 Rb8 10 Ng5 Nge5 11 Ne6 fe6 12 f4 Ng4 13 Ne4 Be7 and accords White the advantage. Lamford gives 7...0-0-0 8 0-0 h5 9 h4 Nh6 10 Ng5 Bg4 11 Ndf3 f6 12 ef6 gf6 13 Ne4 Qe6, indicating Black had compensation for his material deficit. Raetsky and Chetverik cite the identical variation as Lamford, adding that it occurred in the 1983 correspondence game Lindberg Schiller, which they consider to be unclear after Black's 13th move. There may be a proverbial fly in the ointment of 7...0-0-0, however. After 8 0-0 h5 9 h4 Nh6, R&C suggest two possible improvements for White, both of which are assessed as yielding White some chances. First, there's 10 b4 Ng4 11 Qa4 Kb8 12 Bb2 Nb4 13 Qd7 Rd7, and then there's 10 a3 Ng4 11 Qa4 Kb8 12 b4 Nce5 13 Qd7 Rd7 14 Bb2 Nc4 15 Nc4 Bc4 16 Nd4, as in Boness Schiller, a correspondence game from 1983. Both 10 b4 and 10 a3 Ng4 11 Qa4 appear to be noteworthy finds, since R&C's other 10/11th move alternatives for White seem to allow Black to hold his own, including 10 Qa4 as in Perkins Lamford, 1980 England (given as 1981 England by Lamford who, presumably, should know best) and 10 a3 Ng4 11 Qb3 rather than 11 Qa4, another Perkins Lamford game. Reviewing Black's 5th move option, Bg4, again it appears that kudos may be in order to R&C for upstaging ECO, this time with an improvement for Black. After 5...Bg4, both ECO and R&C continue with 6 Nbd2 Qd7 7 Bg2 0-0-0 8 0-0 h5 9 b4 Bb4 10 Qa4 h4 11 Rb1 hg3 12 Rb4 Nb4 13 Qb4 Bh3 14 fg3 Bg2 15 Kg2. ECO concludes with Minev's recommendation of 15...Qh3 16 Kg1 Nh6 17 Ne4 when White has the advantage. (For the record, Lamford suggests that 16...Nh6 with Nf5/g4 "gives Black a strong attack, but omits mention of 17 Ne4.) While R&C also include the same line as ECO, they recommend that Black proceed with 15...Ne7 16 Ne4 Nc6 17 Qc5 Rde8 with the idea of 18...f6, leading to an unclear position. Perhaps White's best move after 7 Bg2 0-0-0 is not 8 0-0, but 8 h3. Lamford, in fact, awards 8 h3 an "!" while R&C give it top billing ahead of 8 0-0 (which may have no meaning whatsoever.) All three sources, ECO, Lamford and R&C are in sync after 8 h3 Bf5 9 a3, with ECO and Lamford continuing with 9...f6, when White has no worse than a small advantage. While R&C also cover 9...f6, their main line is 9...Nge7 10 b4 Ng6 11 Bb2 Be7 12 b5 Nce5 13 Nd4 Bf6 (note: 14 Qa4 walks into 14...Nd3+), arriving at an unclear position which, of course, is better for Black than being at a disadvantage. ECO makes no mention at all of 9...Nge7; Lamford includes it in a footnote, citing analysis by Minev that leads to a solid White "plus" after 11...Nge5 12 b5 Nxf3+ 13 Nxf3 Na5 14 Qa4. Lest one believe that R&C have reached that great opening book nirvana with "Albins Gegengambit", there is at least one glaring omission to dispel that lofty notion. Discussing the 5 g3 Bg4 line, Ward in "Trends" writes that "Generally things aren't too rosy for Black." One of the reasons for this assessment is the game Wilde Vatter from the 1990/91 Bundesliga, which saw 5...Bg4 6 Bg2 Qd7 7 0-0 0-0-0 8 Nbd2 h5 9 b4 Bb4 10 Rb1 Bf5 11 Rb3 Be7 12 Bb2 b6 13 Rb5 h4 14 Qa4 Kb8 15 Rd5 Qe6 16 Nd4 Nd4 17 Bd4 hg3 18 Qa7! And Black resigned in view of 18...Ka7 19 Ra5 mate. R&C's main line is 10 Qa4, with 10 Rb1 mentioned only in a footnote, offering the reply 10...Bf5 resulting in an unclear position. It would appear that failure to thoroughly examine 10 Rb1 and missing the Wilde-Vatter game are critical oversights in a key variation of this opening. There are also a few other gripes worthy of mention, such as some German-to-English translation problems in the Introduction. For instance, "Rumanian master Adolf Gambit" ("Adolf Albin" is a better try) and "We have choosed..." are two of the more obvious guffaws. Then there is the issue of the bibliography. There are four sources cited, including ECO Volume D from 1987 (rather than the latest 1998 edition) and Volumes 1 70 of the "Chess Informant" series. Omitted, however, is the Lamford book which, arguably, provided the most comprehensive coverage of this opening until now. Also missing is reference to the German serial publication "Gambit Revue" which routinely contains praxis applicable to the Albin, and Rewitz's 1996 book "Albins Modgambit". All of these works should have been sought out and used where relevant. At a minimum, they should have been reviewed and included in the bibliography. Although the U.S. distributor's (Pickard and Son) claim in a press release that the book contains "lots of original material" may be an overstatement, there is no doubt that it does include SOME original ideas, which already is more than can be said about most of today's opening monographs. R&C also offer current coverage of the Albin through the inclusion of numerous games from the 1990s. As long as the reader remembers to study 10 Rb1 in the 5...Bg4 variation, "Albins Gegengambit" should prove to be a mandatory work for aficionados of the Albin Counter-Gambit. Pickard and Son also deserve credit for having the courage to introduce a foreign language book to the American market (many Americans being notoriously averse to languages other than English), even if the publication does consist primarily of universal chess symbols. One word of caution, however, to those readers who are seeking a primer on this opening: this probably is not an appropriate choice, given the book's absence of text and reliance upon Informant-style symbols for its analysis.