Opening

When you first see this book you figure, well the content has to be better than the cover. As amazing as it might sound, the content is even worse. The amount of errors really baffled me and stressed me out. Trying to look up things and the entire layout is just awful. How awful books like this get published is beyond my knowledge. Perhaps someone lost a bet or Schiller owns their soul. Maybe if your a 900 player this would help you break 1000. If your getting this book thinking your gonna be able to defend d4. I guess your gonna have to find out the hard way how shoddy this book is. A bad chess player that writes awful books is a scary thing. I think Ken Smith and Schiller should start their own club. Donate your money to a good charity or buy yourself something worth having. The only use this book has is the hope of being burned when no logs are left.

I like this book very much. I find Schiller's style to be engaging and practical. I have not noticed typos. This book is nicely made and has tons of information. Schiller has great conviction on the Tarrasch, so of you wish to play that opening, this is a great work to have. I also recommend his earlier work with Shamkovich, Play the Tarrasch, which is a more traditional opening treatise. I don't know about the Tarrasch Defense, though. I played it for a while, but gave it up. It was hard for me to have much confidence in it, when I realized that its too most famous exponents, Tarrasch and Kasparov, each gave it up. Tarrasch himself did not have a very good record with it, and simply stopped using it half-way through his career. And Kasparov got beat by Karposv TWICE in the same match using it, and I don't believe he has used it since. So, while this is a good book, I myself don't play the opening anymore.

Schiller is a Tarrasch fanatic, and it shows in this thick (288 pages) well-produced epic on the Tarrasch Defence. It brims with enthusiasm and with tactics, strategies, traps, theory, history--everything you need to play and love the Tarrasch. The overview and typical strategies sections at the beginning are beautiful. Schiller does not sugarcoat this Defence, but he does promise you exciting chess and that by studying this opening your overall game will improve. It is important to learn how to play with an isolated d-pawn. Another great benefit of the Tarrasch is you can play the pawn structure against nearly any opening (even against 1. e4 you can play a French and have the same structure. Even though Kasparov gave up the Tarrasch, obviously it is a worthy opening if several world champions have played it. Solve the problem of the Bc8 being trapped in the most forthright way! Play the Tarrasch, and get this book!

This book is really pretty lame. It has virtually no choice of services, the so-called "translations" (actually cheesy semi-poetic synopses) try so hard to be politically correct that they virtually lose all meaning, and the transliterations are virtually unintelligible. (In my experience, even the poorest hebrew-readers have an easier time following the Hebrew text than trying to puzzle out the choppy and unnatural latin-alphabet version. You'd probably do better to just attend services often enough to memorize the hebrew.) I would strongly encourage you to lobby your synagogue board to invest in the full-length siddur, and certainly don't buy this for your own personal use.

Based upon my limited work with this Siddur, I would say that it bridges the gap between the 1975 G.O.P. and the new Siddur expected to makes its arrive within the decade. This Siddur does not have the variety of services which the 1975 G.O.P. offered, and requires congregations to keep the 1975 edition, which is a terrable waste of space.

When the editors created this book, they should have considered including some of the services (or at least special readings) for the Holidays (i.e. Sukkot, Passover, etc.). This would therefore end the need for the '75 Gates of Prayer.

However, I must say that the title of this review best explaines my feeling toward the newest "Gates" book for the Reform Congregations. It is a good book if one does not mind having only a limited option of services to use.

I find this book a good start to any Jewish prayer book collections. I just moved away from home and need a prayer book for my own use. I found this prayer book a good start and it is easy to carry around and take with you to Temple and on business trips.

This amateurish, cut-and-paste job is a complete waste of time and money. As an aspiring film maker, I consider it important to know about all aspects of the movie business. To that end, I read books on producing, screenwriting, distribution, etc. It's crucial that I not waste time or money and this book did both. What a disappointment! And disappointing beyond belief is that it carries the endorsement of Mark Litwak, who I used to respect, but who seems to have let his personal feelings get in the way!! As a former associate of Ralph Nader, he should know better than to endorse a product solely because of a relationship with the author! This book is a shoddy piece of hackwork - one of the worst I have EVER read!

The main problem with this book is that it is based on a series of interviews and "War Stories", and thus there is really only 1 chapter that has any value. If a person wants to read a bunch of stories of what happened... then this is a good choice. If, however, you wish to read about marketing your movie by "opening the picture and giving it legs"... you would get more value from reading the gossip column of the National Enquirer.

The book is broken down into "case studies" as follows: Romantic Comedy, American Independent Films, Action-adventure, Documentary, Foreign Films, Low Budget & B-movies, Suspense Thriller, Black, and then a section on making trialers & promotions. The first three chapters seemed to get off to at least an interesting start as the interviewees discussed "Four Weddings and a Funeral", "Pulp Fiction" and "Golden-eye." However, it takes a nose dive thereafter.

The chapter on GoldenEye discusses the BMW tie in, and as such was informative. Also, the discussion surrounding "Four Weddings" was such that they gave insight into building a campaign.

Why does it hit a brick wall you ask? The author literally starts quoting people's comments on what should have been done... and does nothing to craft arguments or illustrations that would have improved the readers understanding. For example, he talks about Spike Lee, John Singleton, and the Hughes brothers in terms of their marketability in the Black Film section, but then provides absolutely no examples of how these filmmakers projects are marketed, nor what sorts of special approaches one might consider.

Overall, I rarely try to slam a book. Nevertheless, this book was complete garbage and hours of my life that I will never get back. If I didn't have a strict rule of always finishing a book once I start it, I would have set it down by page 50 of 273. Trust me... read the trades or use your own powers of observation, because this book will not help you beyond that advice.

I felt that this book was very helpful in understanding what goes into marketing different types of feature films. I've read criticisms in other reviews that the book isn't specific enough in as far as critical marketing reasoning or the quantitative process in marketing these films. I agree, the book is sparse in demographics, statistics and what some would call "classic" marketing terminology. But personally, I think that's a plus. First of all, the book is obviously written with the presumption that the reader knows little to nothing about marketing or film distribution. Therefore, the ancedotal information works because it touches on the "real world" reasoning for why certain films were promoted certain ways (and it also gives expenditure breakdowns for each of the films' marketing budgets). Secondly, B-school marketing doesn't fully apply to film--as a "leisure" item, a film is not the same as a consumer product like mouthwash or a car. And regression theory is moot if a potentially influential review in the New York Times pans your arthouse film.

I think Lukk does a good job in compiling information from the marketing executives who work with films, and I found it especially useful that she broke it down in genres. Marketing a self-distributed documentary (which she talks about in the section on the film "Brother's Keeper") is not the same as opening an action-soaked James Bond film (another chapter on "GoldenEye"). Actually, I thought the sections on documentaries and independent films were the strongest in the book. It also illuminated the open secret that it is nearly impossible to sell an African-American themed film to a white audience.

"Movie Marketing" was one of the books I cited in my master's thesis on marketing and distributing African-American independent films. I was so happy to see this book when I was doing my research, in that there is almost nothing published specifically on film marketing. Although the book does have flaws and could stand to be more quantitatively sound ("Entertainment Industry Economics" by Harold Vogel is the perfect example of such a book--but unless you've taken MBA level courses, that book may totally lose you), I think that it is a good resource on a sorely underpublished subject.

This book does not convey much of anything. Save your time and money. Read Searching for Bobby Fischer. The details and honesty are lacking in this made for MTV summary of kindergartener makes good.

Six-year-old Michael Thaler became the National Kindergarten Chess Champion in 1999. The book follows his brief career to date and imparts the life lessons Michael has learned through chess: prepare, focus, win some, lose some, have patience, etc. These are difficult to learn lessons for most adults, let alone children. Still, the author very clearly demonstrates Michael's passion and talent for the game.
The book takes a turn for the worse when the narrative details three games Michael has lost and learned from - and rehashes them in complex chess code without any explanation save an unexplained diagram! Who is this book for? Not for the novice chess player, and not for your average 8 year old. A brief chapter on basic moves, or even a glossary (what is an opening? An endgame? The Scandanavian defense?) is decidedly lacking.
The art design of the book is a little disturbing - the designer opted for contrasting colors instead of chess-themed black and white. The cool tones on the cover are nice, but inside, nothing seems to fit together. A checkerboard motif is repeated throughout, and the border wittily changes from pawns to kings as Michael progresses. Lots of white space makes the book easy to look at, but the readability of the text is very uneven. David Hautzig's photos are evocative, but it is disappointing that the same picture was used at the beginning of each new chapter.
A thoughful afterword by Michael's dad encourages parents to introduce their children to chess, and mentions its benefits. Suggestions for starting a local club or finding a teacher or evening contacting the National Organization could have made a useful appendix.
Hardly a necessary purchase, briefly consider it for chess fans. Best to save your money until - or if -- Michael reaches master status.

This is the best book I ever read! If someone doesn't understand the book, I suggest reading "Modern Chess Openings."
The 3 games taught me: pawns are important, 2 rooks is better than a queen, and gambits are not dangerous, lik the QG. For beginners and experts, chess knowledge blongs behind this book!!!

I had ordered this book hoping to get some tips on ways to start conversations. I figure, the more ideas, the better! From the subject categories, you can tell the book is oriented toward teens, but that's ok.

Wrong. Most of ideas in the book wouldn't work at any party or date I'd go on. A typical conversation starter from the book:

"What is the difference between God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit?"

And another:

"What have you been taught about the differences between races (if anything)?

The synopsis from the back cover reads:

"This little book is packed with AWESOME conversation starters -- over 400 in all, from "What's your favorite Scripture?" to "What animal describes you best?" Keep it handy and you'll always have what you need to get a relationship going in the right direction. Special symbols identify each question by topic: Dating, Money, Friends, Love, Just for Fun, and more."

The book includes a postcard for the "Love Waits" campain, which you can sign and mail to a place in Nashville. The postcard reads:

"Believing that true love waits, I make a commitment to God, myself, my family, my friends, my future mate, and my future children to be sexually abstinent from this day until the day I enter a biblical marriage relationship. Signed: ___ Dated: ___"

In other words, this book isn't of much use for general conversation tips. It is part of the "Love Waits" campain. If that's what you're looking for, go for it

Overall I found this book very helpful in starting conversations---especially when you're at a new friend (guy or girl)'s house counting the lint on your sweater! In addition to lighthearted questions there are also some that really make you think. Great for Christian and non-Christian friends--a great tool to get a God-centerd conversation started and use it to witness to a nonChristian friends.The only problem is that you have to have the book with you to remember the questions, and it's a little big for a purse or pocket. Totally useful in all circomstances--worth the money!

In response to an earlier review, I think you were just too ignorant to realize that the book was geared towards christians and that it wouldn't include any "sexy" and "hot" pick up lines. Just because it wasn't right for you and it may not have followed what you belive in, I think it's a very good book.

The name of this book I find to be deceptive also the claims a bit much. What bothers me is that the author decides what is playable and what is not. The Grob is one of the more popular of the odd openings. So to just dismiss that or not really cover a3 properly is wrong. Fine used to play a3 at times and did rather well with it to be honest. The move is deeper and not so easy for people to understand. I myself have played it and won with it even against a computer. I could not give this book 1 star cuz it did not really have any clear errors. I could not rate it as average because of the falty claims and taking sides. If your gonna make a book winning with unusual openings. Tossing some away as not good is a bit pointless. The problem is not having enough pages to even attempt a book like this. So if nothing else you know your gonna get a sub par product in return. I would just get game collections of weird openings and break down lines from there. If you really feel you have an interest in one of them, get a book more focused on them. The Killer Grob is a good place for some to start. Im really not a fan of any of these openings. Still Im rather open minded about odd openings and interested in the psychology. I used to always play 1 g3 which isnt that normal really. The book should not just dismiss certan things so easily. Thats a problem many have when talking about openings. They say a3 is garbage white can have no chance of maintaining advantage. Or that is just white playing as black etc and all this. The move is only bad if you do not have a plan behind it basically. Granted a3 is better than h4, that don't mean h4 can't be useful. I bet money that most esp U1800 have no set system against many odd openings. So the psychological attack behind them can't be simply blown off. A good book on this topic would give best known theory and new ideas on these openings. Then leave it to the reader what can or can not be played. By already deciding he is tainting the reader with ideas against those openings. So how can you think of winning with them if told they can't be played.

A better idea to divide them might be to have a section for very insane moves. Perhaps stuff like a4, h4, Na3 and Nh3 would fit into there. Maybe put g4 in with b4, mix g3 in with b3 stuff like that. Rather than just saying this is not playable and this is. I think you will gain more from just looking over games played with openings. If none really exist on stuff like h4 and a4, well then study tactics. Or try to play transposing into some opening where you might play one of those moves. Many times playing weird opening idea is to get out of book. So not sure how much a book can really help you play those. Stuff like g4 and b4 perhaps has more coverage. Even stuff like b3 and g3, not to mention f4. So those openings you can probably get a decent book on. Even Nc3 might have a decent book out there, or a3. I honestly can't think of any off hand though. Least there are some fair amount of games using those openings. Might be best to check this book out in bookstore before ordering. Make sure it has enough coverage on openings you might wanna play that are "weird" or "unorthodox", etc.

The book, "Winning Unorthodox Openings," is a book by an English player, IM A. Dunnington, who has a reputation as a trainer for English players who participate in the Olympiad and also an excellent trainer of junior players in the UK. He writes concisely in a no-nonsense style of which I approve. I went through the first few chapters with a fine-tooth comb. I looked for errors in analysis, and I found none. I looked for games that were quoted in error, mis-spelled, etc., and I discovered no mistakes of this type either. I went through the entire book, looking for errors in the diagrams, (this used to be a plague to otherwise good chess books!), and I found none of those type of errors either. The PC and programs like ChessBase are having a huge impact on the field of chess books. Having said that, I must immediately point out a few things that grab my attention. The blurb on the cover, and one in a press release promises, << Complete and concise coverage of all of White's alternatives to 1. e4, 1. d4, 1. c4, and 1. Nf3. >> This is not what you get when you plunk down your hard-earned dinero. First, he classifies the "Unorthodox" openings into two categories, good and bad, (or playable and unplayable). This in itself is a sticking point in my mind. I can understand such openings as 1. h4, or a4, or h3, being branded as bad. However, I find it odd he can label 1. g4, (Grob's Opening) as bad, (beware Basmaniacs!); but can throw Solkosky's/Orangutan Opening, (1. b4,) in the "playable" pile. It seems to me that they both do the same thing, just on opposite sides of the board. I guess players of the Grob will have to get IM Basman's book on this opening. Several other VERY playable openings are dismissed with a wave of the hand. One is Anderssen's opening, (1. a3, ); which is an opening I have personally used in tournaments and never lost with. The author does not seem to realize (or bother to take the time to point out); that this can be one of the most complicated openings you can play. I also used to use it, with tremendous effect on opponents' who are "booked out to the max," but have little or no understanding of the general principles of the game. I also used to make this opening a very effective "Anti-computer" line, when computers were still being allowed to play in tournaments with humans. It can also be a highly transpositional opening and can result in a "reversed" defense being played with an extra move in hand. That being said, there is virtually no Indian game, (Or virtually any reversed defense for that matter!); where the move a3/(a6) would not have come in handy. (Common sense should tell you this.) Another point is that the author covers 1. b4, and 1. b3. However, he does not bother to cover similar/related lines like "The Improved Solkosky's," with 1. Nf3 and then - and only then - 2. b4. (Or 2. b3.) This is a shame because this method has been used by dozens of strong GM's. He also dismisses a reversed French Defense or a reversed Pirc Defense in similar fashion. (I know a Master who liked his Pirc so much, he began playing 1. d3, so he could play The Pirc as White!!) But by now, the reader should get the general idea. The author also seems to confine himself to lines of "independent value."

So exactly what does the author cover? There are five very good chapters of material. Chapter 1, covers the Solkosky's/Orangutan Opening. (1. b4.) Chapter Two covers the Nimzowitsch-Larsen Attack. (1. b3.) Chapter Three covers "The Dunst Opening," or as the author calls it; "The Queen's Knight Opening." (1. Nc3.) Chapter Four covers the "Bird's Opening." (1. f4.) (The From's Gambit is covered in sufficient detail, but the line 1. f4, e5; 2. fxe5, d6; 3. exd6, Bxd6; 4. Nf3, g5; 5. d4!?, g4; 6. Ng5!? [The author gives this move a dubious appellation.] 6...f5!; is probably blown off a little too lightly. [The position is very unclear and contains some of the most complicated lines in chess.] Dunnington stops here giving the impression that White is in trouble, but the fun is just beginning!) The lines recommended in the Bird's Opening are good and the theory is sound. Chapter Five covers, "The King's Fianchetto Opening." (1. g3.) This opening could transpose to an almost endless variety of other openings, but the author tries to concentrate on material that is unique and independent in nature. Chapter Six is the Chapter where the author blows off the reversed French or Pirc and perfectly reasonable openings like 1. c3. (As good or as bad as anything else in the book.) Instead, he gives minor coverage to the Grob's Opening, (1. g4.); and then wastes a lot of time on a game beginning with the move, 1. f3?

Now I think by now you may have gathered that these openings are not exactly my cup of tea. The coverage is not in great depth and could not be in a book of this size. A plus is a very detailed Index of variations. A slight minus is the absence of any Player Index whatsoever. So having said all of the above, could I recommend this book to a potential buyer? The answer is : Absolutely! In other words, if you are looking for something off the beaten trail or something unusual to surprise your opponent, then this book is for you. If you have ever thought about, or played the openings named above in a tournament, then you should get this book. If you are under 1800, were going to buy only a few books (say less than 10), and did not want to play "Main Lines;" then this would be a good book to buy. The author gives many (21) complete and very well annotated games. (I am a sucker for well-annotated games.) He also gives numerous games and lines in the notes and the sub-variations. The material is well thought out and organized very efficiently. If you like the unusual openings or were just looking for an opening to surprise your "booked-out nemesis," then this could be the book for you!

This book covers all white opening moves except 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4 and 1.Nf3. And the coverage is not biased towards either side: quite often the author actually favours Black's position. So the book could be better called "Unusual First Moves by White - Some Good, Some Bad".

I bought this book to get a solid repertoire against openings that are so rare that they are not worth to buy a book on each of them. According to my statistics of players averaging 2200 Elo, the openings in this book occur in 2% of all games if you do not play these moves yourself (which means 4% of my games as black). So I have to meet one of these freaks once in every 50 games.

Some of the reviewers below were pretty harsh, mainly because they disagreed with Dunnington's evaluation of certain oddball openings, or because Dunnington only includes independent 1st move oddities and not all unusual opening systems. The reviews for a book of this kind are bound to be distorted because of this.

But I think that Dunnington has done a good job in giving each opening the coverage that it deserves. If you are like me - studying these openings with a view to meeting them as black - the issue of what white opening move is worth exactly what is irrelevant.

Someone got an idea that went "Hey, let's make a collection of quick opening traps that don't involve really awful play from one side", and an author must have said: "Yeah, I'd love to do that!" I then expect he sat down and realised what a large number 101 is.
This book contains a good number of opening traps covering a very large repertoire. It also contains a lot of stuff that doesn't seem particularly trappy, but just seems to have been put in there because the author had to reach his 101 target, and doesn't qualify as opening stuff, tactics or anything else for that matter.
I suggest giving Mr. Higgins another two or three years to gather more traps to put in there, and ask him to make a second edition, cause there's a good book hiding in there, but there is just so much pointless padding I wouldn't recommend buying it as it is.

In this book you will find how to open your chess game perfectly.

From a historical standpoint, this is a good book. There are a few Gambit lines that are covered in good detail because quite simply they are considered sound or at least popular. The lesser known Gambits are not handled with the same enthusiasm. Listing them in alphabetical order makes it easy to locate as well. Even though Raymond Keene is a great chess writer, he is not infallible. Under the 'Grob' (1.g4) he states this may be the worst opening move if 1.f3 isn't. Of course this was published back in 1992, and recent trends show that a g4 pawn spike can be rather effective even if castled Kingside. My question to Mr. Keene would be: what about 1.h4, 1.Nh3, 1.a4, and 1.Na3? A trivial matter however which just goes to show you don't have to believe everything you read no matter who's writing the book. Buy it if you can find it for less than $10 US.

In this book, the gambits are catalogued variation by variation, with assessments of playability and potential refutations. This is not an in-depth coverage of the gambits involved, but a light, surface volume. Keene's style is, as ever, pleasant, and yet the work is a tad surface for anything other than perhaps a quick look at potential odd blitz weapons one might face.

If you are lookng for the definitive history of the First World War, keep lookng. This series of books are re-prints of Circa 1920 British home front popaganda. The photos though numerous have been reprinted using a cheap photo-static plate process which does not reproduce the quality of the original volumes. The dust jacket leeds one to beleive that the buyer is getting a moderen top quality book . Do not be fooled.

I would expect an American to give a biassed opinion of history- the first history of the civil war was written 4 years after the event. This book is definitive history in the making -12 volumes of it- and if it is propoganda, it is history to us who know so little about the causes and injustices of the times. You won't get anything more factual if you are able to read behind the hype.

"Maritime Supremacy And The Opening Of The Western Mind" is a book that fails, although it fails for a "noble" reason: the author is overly ambitious. Mr. Padfield didn't want to write just a political/social history of the maritime powers and he didn't want to write just a naval history, either. He wanted to combine the two types of history. He also wanted to compare and contrast the maritime powers and the continental powers. Although there is certainly nothing wrong with this idea, the execution, in this case, is poor. Rather than weaving all the material together, the author alternates chapters on naval campaigns with chapters on political/social developments in Spain, France, Britain, the Netherlands, and Colonial America. This "alternating current" constantly disrupts the flow of the book: just as you have settled down to concentrate on a sea battle, the author switches to a chapter on political infighting or government financing. The problem also develops the other way around: just when you've gotten your mind set on concentrating on Lord North or William Pitt or tax-farming in pre-Revolutionary France, it's time to read about broadsides and officers pacing the decks of ships, shoe buckle deep in blood. As a result, the reader feels disconcerted: you are never comfortable and you can never get "caught-up" in the narrative. Another problem with the book is that, considering what the author wants to accomplish, it is too short. The author tries to cover approximately ten naval campaigns, while also trying to explain political/economic/social developments in five different geographical areas, covering a span of 200 years. This is just too much material to cover in less than 300 pages. The specialist reader is likely to come away feeling he or she hasn't learned anything new- as everything is presented in such broad strokes. The general reader will likely be confused by the pace and the amount of information. In trying to do too much, the book accomplishes too little. Perhaps the best that can be said of this book is that, for the non-specialist reader, it may open your eyes to a particular naval campaign or to political/economic/social developments in a particular country. For example, the chapter on the Spanish Armada might lead you to read a more comprehensive book on the topic, such as David Howarth's "The Voyage Of The Armada" or the chapter on the Dutch Golden Age could lead you to Simon Schama's wonderful "The Embarrassment Of Riches". However, I don't think that's a good enough reason to read this book, which is why I have given it only two stars.

Peter Padfield's latest work, Maritime Supremacy and The Opening of the Western Mind is unlike many traditional naval histories, and is indicative of the innovative writing style of this accomplished author. While this work builds on many of his earlier books, in particular Guns at Sea, Tide of Empires, Rule Britannia, and Armada, Padfield has made the leap - quiet successfully - of merging the importance of naval and maritime topics with the larger picture of Western Civilization and the development of societies.

As its subtitle denotes, Maritime Supremacy examines the major naval campaigns that shaped the modern world. From the defeat of the of the Spanish Armada in 1588, to Beachy Head in 1690, to the Battle of the Saints in 1782, these are only some of the key battles that Padfield focuses on. Additionally he includes chapters that relate to the rise and fall of the key maritime nation states, including Spain, the Netherlands, England, and finally the United States.

What separates the author from his contemporaries is his ability to examine the clash of fleets and incorporate their successes, or defeats, into the larger scheme of history. He identifies nation-states as either supreme maritime or territorial powers and it is this interaction, both domestically and internationally that provides the structure for his thesis and according to him, for modern history. The book builds extensively on his two volume Tide of Empires: Decisive Naval Campaigns in the Rise of the West, but unlike this earlier work, which is nearly twenty years old, it incorporates many new historiographical sources, while still utilizing primary resources for much of his information.

The greatest drawback to Maritime Supremacy is its focus on a rather narrow time frame. While it spans nearly two hundred years, it leaves the reader questioning what other maritime influences have impacted on civilization. Also, the lack of an independent conclusion, to tie together many of the key points addressed in his earlier chapters, would have benefited the reader. Overall, Peter Padfield's Maritime Supremacy and The Opening of The Western Mind is an ideal selection for both historians and the general reading audience seeking information on the role of sea in the dawn of modern history. What the reader comes to realizes is that changes in society, politics, trade, and naval capabilities are not independent events, but forces in the development of civilizations.