Review: The Secret Life of Bad Bishops by Esben Lund

Title: The secret life of bad bishops.
Author: Esben (Silas) Lund.
Publisher: QualityChess.
Pages: 194.
Price: 19.99€.

I want to dedicate today's post to this obscure book from the QualityChess catalog. Esben (he has legally changed his name to Silas now) Lund is a IM from Denmark that has already a book with the same publisher (Rook vs. Two Minor Pieces). I say obscure because the author is relatively (for me it was totally) unknown. To add to that fact, he is not even a GM, hence normally one would not even consider buying this book, but QualityChess rarely disappoints, hence I decided to give this book a try.

The first thing to note is that the book is short. It comes with a reduction of price relative to normal QualityChess titles, but it was not clear for me if the 5€ reduction in the price tag was because the unknown author or the shortness of the book. My guess is that it is for the later.

The book explores one topic: the bad bishop, which the author insists in calling double edged bishop (DEB in many future references). The main point of the book is to show that generally those bad bishops are not really that bad, but have a hidden potential.

The book is structured into a (very big) introduction where the topic is presented, a chapter on exchange sacrifices, a chapter on opening theory in the advanced french defense and an endgame section of bishop vs rook and bishop vs knight. To finish the book there is a collection of problems where we are supposed to use the new knowledge acquired in the book. Lund tries to demonstrate in these chapters how the play in the examples revolve around a DEB (accepting his nomenclature). The idea is to show his point in the middlegame, the opening and the endgame.

In general the prose is good, but the explanations not always convince me.  I have never been afraid of a bad bishop. I have been playing Slav, Caro and French since I was young, and in those openings you can have a bad bishop lying in c8 (or b7) inside the pawn chain. The consequence is that I had little need for someone to explain me that this bishop does have a future if the conditions are right. But I felt that Lund tried very hard to prove that the play always revolved around a bad bishop. For example in the exchange sacrifice chapter, I sometimes felt that he was stretching the point too much. In some positions he claimed that an exchange sacrifice was played to isolate a DEB (i.e. bad bishop), but I felt that the game continuation would have been equally good had the other player had a knight instead of a DEB. You sacrificed an exchange in order to get a powerful mass of central pawns or a passed pawn or the control of some key squares.

On the same note, the  chapter on endgames had for me little connection with the main point of his thesis. Bishop vs rook is not about if the bishop is a good or bad bishop, but as Lund points out, about if the bishop side can improve his position or if it becomes stagnant and lost. The discussion of bishop vs knight can be treated as a bad bishop vs a knight or a good bishop vs a knight, but Lund does not follow this path either, concentrating too much effort in very simplified endings where the bishop isn't good nor bad, just a bishop.

With the analysis I have mixed feelings. There are places where the analysis are deep and Lund makes really good points, showing some hidden possibilities. However in some (admittedly far less) cases the analysis is just flat (especially in the introduction). I got the feeling though that the material exposed in the book was always checked with an engine, hence I had not to worry that the author was only an IM, the engine is far stronger than any GM wanting to write chess books.

So, do I recommend it? The review is harsh, that I cannot hide, and I'm not done with it yet, but I have a very difficult time answering the question.

On the one hand: Yes, it is a short book from an unknown author and the discussion in my view is sometimes forced. Moreover (yeah, I told you I was not done) there is a whole chapter on a variation of the advanced french. Well, I play the french, hence I should find it interesting (and I did) even though I never played that particular variation. But what if you don't play it? You through away 30 pages of an already short book?

On the other hand: The thesis is interesting and the arguments compelling. Even if you do not agree with it, it is thought provoking, and that is something good. Everything that makes you think and not read and nod is good. The chapter on opening theory will explain you a pawn structure you most probably have no experience with, a pawn structure that at the first sight seems really bad for black. That's not the case though, as Lund shows. Hence even if you are never near a french defense, your chess knowledge will expand (this same argument applied to Flores' Chess Structures). The ending chapter is interesting (I'm a huge fan of endings) and the exchange sacrifice one should appeal you by definition. Hence there is much to love in this book, even if you think it is not always about the infamous DEB.

So at the end of the day, the point that remains is: Do you have 20€ to spend on an interesting but short book? That is a very personal decision. I'm quite happy with the book and have not regret the money spent. I'm even considering buying the other book by Lund. But there are definitively other books which will improve your chess more, other books that will offer you more chess for a little more money (and the ratio time enjoying the book / money would increase), so I cannot recommend the book in good conscience.

But there's the catch: If you want a book that is definitively different and thought provoking, well written and that shows that the author has put his heart on it and if you don't mind much the money (or on the other hand, the shortness), then go for it, and please tell me afterwards what do you thought, because it is a book I think we'll enjoy more the more we discuss its points.

Review 100 Endgames You Must Know by Jesus de la Villa

Today I want to make another review from a  book I enjoyed. I think it is more fun for me and more profitable for you, but give me time and I'll reach bad books with time.
The subject of this post is:

100 Endgames You Must Know Vital Lessons for Every Chess Player by Jesus de la Villa Garcia

This book is an elementary treatise on endgames. The author's objective is to explain as clearly as possible a minimal set of very important positions. The arbitrary number of 100 endgames which he considers most important should be simple yet with high theoretical and practical value.

The book is divided into a first set of 10 very easy positions which should ring a bell to almost anybody. Afterwards a set of positions is presented as a test. By solving this test we get a gauge of our level of understanding of the positions we are going to study across the book.

I remember vividly that I stumbled upon a rook ending where it was not possible to reach the Philidor position and I knew the correct move was to place the rook behind the enemy pawn. Maybe in a practical game I could have saved it, and indeed the correct move was the one I chose, but certainly I did not know all the nuances (or anything except the first move). I scored it as a correct solution.

After this, the rest of the important positions are studied thoroughly and lastly we get another test to see if we have understood the material.

I always have liked endgames books, and I studied such boring books as Levenfish & Smislov on rook endgames and Maizelis' Pawn endgames. This book is a whole different beast.It is not planned as a reference book, but a book aimed with beginners in mind. The author is quite happy to remind us that the plan is to get as much practical information as possible with the minimum work. It should be said, though, that it does require you to do a lot of work. Endgames is a difficult subject, but it will give you the most you could possible achieve with it.

I quite like the format. The material is exposed really well and is accessible for all levels. The analysis is as detailed (at times overwhelming, but not often)  as need be and the commentaries are spot on. Is a fun book to read and a good book to study.

The test are a great addition. No more reading and nodding. You should study the material in detail if you are to have any hope in the last test, but more interesting than that, doing the test you will notice where you are lagging behind.

If I were to cherrypick some flaw, I would go with some of the positions chosen. I think the author has done a great job teaching you the basics of every type of endings, but there are some very important and practical missing endings, as in rook endgames where the strong rook has a lonely passed pawn on the queenside while there is pawn-equality on the kingside, or 4 vs 3 on the kingside (also with a rook for both sides). I understand those endings are maybe very difficult and lay outside the scope of the book, but rook + bishop vs rook is also really complicated and I'm sure its practical importance is not higher.

De la Villa goes out of his way in the introduction to prove statistically that he is making the correct call,  so maybe it is my experience, but I never had a rook + bishop vs rook.

All in all I would recommend this book wholeheartedly. A friend lent it to me and I read it cover to cover, and afterwards I liked it so much that bought the ForwardChess edition because I wanted to have my own copy to study it seriously.

If you are already an experienced player, you could go to your local store and try the first test. If you are able to solve all the problems, maybe your knowledge is enough and you don't need this book. What I experienced, though, was that maybe I knew the theoretical result of many positions (the rook endgame anecdote above), and I maybe could have played some good moves on them, but I was for sure insecure defending these endgames. After studying this book I feel more confident in reaching them.