542 The British Chess Magazine
frankly wouldn’ t trouble me all that much; if you want any book to give a bulletproof repertoire without using a database you are likely to be disappointed, and this book’ s qualities more than make up for any issues such as this.
Finally, I put the book to the traditional test of comparing it to a recent repertoire from John Emms’ s admirable( although aimed at lower-rated players)‘ Nimzo-Indian: Move by Move’ which recommends the very Reykjavik variation I mentioned earlier.
Sokolov’ s remedy against this is the new idea 9 c × d5 e × d5 10 d × c5 � × c3 11 b × c3 �g4 12 �b1 �c8 13 h3( and not 13 �c2 � × f3 14 g × f3 �h3 15 �e2 �e5 16 �d1 �fd8 17 � × b7 �e4! 18 �d4 �g6 with mate, as in Sadler – Pelletier, Bundesliga, 2003 / 4 – no wonder Sadler gave the game up shortly after this) 13 … �h5 14 �e2 �d8 15 �b2 �e4 16 �c2!( this is Sokolov’ s new idea in this position, which is widely held to be fine for Black).
Theory has no doubt ignored this move on the grounds that it loses material after 16 … � × c5 17 c4( the only consistent move) 17 … �g6 18 �c3 d4 19 e × d4 �a4 20 �b3 � × b1 21 � × a4, but Sokolov gives plenty of analysis to back up his belief that White has good chances for the exchange here.
It’ s hardly surprising that Emms didn’ t consider that( especially since actually this is only his secondary recommendation); he relies on Sadler – Pelletier. In Emms’ s main line( 12 c4, which Sokolov also covers) both books give pretty much the same existing theory, while Sokolov also considers 12 a4, which Emms doesn’ t mention.
However, in Emms’ s main repertoire choice for Black, the Parma variation with 8 … �bd7, it is Emms who has a nuance which Sokolov doesn’ t consider. Sokolov considers that all of White’ s main moves( 9 �e2, 9 �b3 and 9 a3) give him good chances of the advantage. After 9 �e2 Emms’ s excellent coverage( based on the limpid positional masterpiece Lautier – Carlsen, Khanty-Mansiysk, 2005) continues with 9 … b6 10 �d1 c × d4 11 e × d4 � × c3 12 b × c3, and now Carlsen chose 12 … �c7( as opposed to 12 … �b7). As I understand it, the point of this move is, by attacking c3, to slow down White’ s plan of �d3 and c4 by one move, so that after 13 �b2 �b7 14 �d3( as in the game) Black is in time for 14 … �d5, when the threat of … �f4 to trade a pair of minor pieces( almost always a good idea for Black in this set-up) gives Black equal chances. Sokolov doesn’ t consider 12 … �c7 at all( he focuses on 12 … �b7 13 �d3 �c7 14 c4 �fe8, as in Aronian – Leko, Nalchik, 2009, in which Black was crushed). Why a Nimzo expert like Leko should choose what according to me is simply an inferior order of moves like this is a mystery( the answer to which almost certainly involves Leko knowing an awful lot of things I don’ t, of course).
Still, at the least we can say that there is something missing here which Emms explains and Sokolov could have done with explaining. Bottom line, though, a really fine book and a great resource for either White or Black in this line, although perhaps in slightly different ways. These days, the author is a Dutch Grandmaster. www. newinchess. com.
J. J. Cox
�