* chessbug@chessbug.com

First, world champions and other super famous players are going to be published even if their work as writers is not the best. For example many people bought books by Capablanca, Fischer, and Karpov but not all the books that these giant players wrote were helpful. Publishers will publish anything signed by a world champion. The case is different for relatively unknown players. A publisher will publish an obscure player only if he has something really interesting to say.

The second reason to read unknown chess writers is that a writer that writes his first or second book is still quite fresh. A new writer still has enthusiasm, and ideas that he accumulated for years before writing the book of his dreams. A famous writer, on the contrary (I have some names in mind but I will not share them) may be already have the routine of writing one or two books per year. The over-worked writer does not have enough time to fill his batteries from one book to the other. He may start to repeat himself and you may find in the new book material that you already had in an earlier book by the same author.

For these reasons I was optimistic when I started reading a book by an author unknown to me, a Danish FIDE master by the name of Esben Lund. After I read the book, I can say that not only was I not disappointed, but I even added Lund to the list of chess authors whose next book I look forward to read! Lund wrote a book that promises to deal with the subject of rook versus two minor pieces but it actually gives much more – it teaches how to train for chess improvement. Before I tell you all the things I like in this book (and the one thing that I like less) here are the chapters of the book:

Part I: Theory

1. Theoretical Foundation

2. Fundamental Endgames

Part II: Practice

3. The Nc6 Catalan

4. Evaluation Exercises [for the Catalan]

5. The Scotch Endgame

Part III: Training

6. General Exercises

7. Solutions to Evaluation Exercises

8. Solutions to General Exercises

The first chapter, the theoretical foundation, is the best introduction chapter I read this year (2006). Before I read the book my sense of the rook versus two pieces imbalance was that I always prefer the two pieces over the rook. I knew that theoretically the rook is better the closer we get to the endgame but I never quite understood why. After reading Lund’s 23 page introduction, I was shocked with how much was added to my knowledge. Lund does not claim he invents the wheel but gives you such a clear and easy to grasp summary of everything ever written on the subject that he actually does invent the wheel. Lund cites chess authorities, such as Dvoretsky, Suetin, Marin and others but he wonderfully synthesizes the great teachers’ opinions. The way he talks about static and dynamic evaluation has really opened some new ways of thinking for me. I see myself as a rather advanced chess reader, but some ideas that I found too complicated earlier (dynamic evaluations, color complexes etc.) were made clear by Lund. The author of Rook Vs. Two Minor Pieces knows how to teach. He is clear, he repeats himself when necessary and he is thorough.

In the second chapter Lund explains the basic endgames that occur with the imbalance of R Vs. two pieces (usually a bishop and a knight). When reading this chapter, I started to understand that Lund wrote a book that is more than a guide on a specific subject. In reality this book gives you a model of how to learn any other imbalance in chess – you start with getting a wide perspective, based on the middlegame and general understanding of desired and undesired endings (e.g. the side with the bishop and knight does not want a pair of rooks to be exchanged, the side with the rook wants to hold his 'h' pawn and/or his 'a' pawn and so on). After learning the basics you study the typical endgames to a point where you know them by heart (this is what Lund helps you do in the second chapter). And then you work on openings that will get you to the middlegame with the imbalance that you know well.

Chapters 3-5 are about positions that arrive from the Catalan and Scotch opening. Since I do not play any of these openings in any color, I did not have a lot of interest in these chapters. Still, I tried the evaluation exercises and they were fascinating and challenging. The solutions were detailed and helpful but I will talk more of these as I get to the general exercises. From chapters 3-5 you can see that if you play neither the Catalan nor the Scotch opening then the book is rather short. The first two chapters take 40 pages and the rest is only the chapters on the Catalan and Scotch and the exercises. However, if the only bad thing I can say about a book is that I would like it to be longer then it is an excellent book. Not only that, but the exercises and their solutions have a much higher value than in an average chess book.

The exercises in chapter 6 are a wonderful training tool, as they are complex and the solutions are always long and well annotated, so all of these exercises (31 in total) actually develop into annotated middlegames or endgames. My experience was that in most cases I was able to see some part of the solution but when I turned to the solution pages I saw that there was much more to the position than what I saw. Many times I found myself annotating the game and totally forgetting that it started from an exercise. During the work on the exercises I got another opportunity to repeat the patterns taught in chapters one and two, the instructional capabilities of Lund are remarkable.

Simply put, I just love this book. Rook vs Two Minor Pieces teaches you on a specific chess imbalance but it also teaches you how to train on a new subject. Take an imbalance that is recurring in your games, read the relevant literature, learn the patterns of the basic endgames and the more complicated ones, and then understand the connection between your opening repertoire and these endgames. Lund gives the best role model of how to do this (in my opinion even better than Dvoretsky’s classic training book) and he does it with a pleasant and humble tone. Lund reminded me that I am allowed to expect a deep and meaningful learning experience when reading a chess book. The next time I will see the name “Esben Lund” on a chess book cover I will use Nunn’s rule – good chess writers make good chess books.

The Good Things:

• The book will significantly enhance the positional understanding of a 1500-2200 player
• Lund covers all that was written on the subjects and adds more
• Lund explains clearly and methodologically. He analyzes complex positions into easy to trace patterns
• The exercises and the solutions are in themselves substantive material

The Bad Things:

• For readers who are not interested in the Catalan or in the Scotch opening the book is rather short

Quote: “Kasparov afterwards claimed that the position was winning for him, when Kramnik ironically responded that Black was certainly not lost. In any case, White has a potential passed pawn on the queenside but it is very difficult to clear the pass for it […] in this dispute I agree with Kramnik.”

The Bottom Line: If you buy one chess book by an unknown writer this year, buy Lund’s Rook vs Two Bishops.  

Rating: 9.5/10 (10/10 if you play the Catalan or the Scotch)

Review written by Chessbug.

More about Endgames in our June Endgame Mania

Read more of our book reviews