I just saw a McKay (Random House Puzzles & Games) softcover copy of MCO-15 in a store here in the USA. I'm disappointed that it appears to use a cheaper quality of paper compared to my Batsford's MCO-14 copy. I'd have been willing to pay an extra $5 for nice, glossy, white paper rather than the dull, pulpy-looking paper that was used in the McKay book. Considering this cheap paper quality, I definitely wouldn't pay the $30 retail price in a store. If I do buy it, it'll be through Amazon at a big discount. I might also wait to see if a Batsford's copy comes out soon, and if it will have a better quality of paper.
Edit - Sorry, for those not familiar, MCO-15 stands for Modern Chess Openings, 15th edition. (By Nick De Firmian)
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by Mad RookMy MCO 14 has kept up one of the legs of a table for years now while looking none the worse for wear, clearly the MCO 15 has a lot to learn.
I just saw a McKay (Random House Puzzles & Games) softcover copy of MCO-15 in a store here in the USA. I'm disappointed that it appears to use a cheaper quality of paper compared to my Batsford's MCO-14 copy. I'd have been willing to pay an extra $5 for nice, glossy, white paper rather than the dull, pulpy-looking paper that was used in the McKay book. Cons ...[text shortened]... not familiar, MCO-15 stands for Modern Chess Openings, 15th edition. (By Nick De Firmian)
Originally posted by diskamylHmm, I guess I'm not sure that it's necessarily better than something like fritz.ctg. Bedlam has decided that it's best used as a shim for a table leg. 😉
what is it with MCO that makes it better or more practical than any digital opening book, say fritz.ctg, or sheebar.ctg?
MCO does give a small amount of discussion at the beginning of the major sections, and that tends to help patzers like me to get an inkling of the various plans. Also, I'm not always in front of a PC. I guess the downside of MCO is that it doesn't contain all of the openings. Also, when you or your opponent decides to make a move not in MCO, then you are literally out of book (pun intended).
I think there's a John Watson review on Silman's site that compares MCO and NCO. I think I remember him saying that a single volume book like MCO wouldn't be too helpful to experts or above.
Edit - Oh, and I mainly just use MCO as a reference book to look up what move I should have made after I've made an opening blunder in an otb game. (After the game, of course.)
Originally posted by Mad Rookof course! you guys play real otb!
Hmm, I guess I'm not sure that it's necessarily better than something like fritz.ctg. Bedlam has decided that it's best used as a shim for a table leg. 😉
MCO does give a small amount of discussion at the beginning of the major sections, and that tends to help patzers like me to get an inkling of the various plans. Also, I'm not always in front of a PC. ...[text shortened]... ve made after I've made an opening blunder in an otb game. (After the game, of course.)
seriously, I'm so far away from playing otb that it really didn't occur to me it's completely rational to have an opening reference on paper which you can carry around.
I never had anything like MCO before and decided to get the latest edition as a reference. I'm finding it interesting but am surprised by some of the recommendations. I expected it to be a compilation of main lines but some of the variations are rather offbeat. There is definitely some original analysis.
As for the comparison with the Fritz engine book, this isn't valid. It's very different and certainly easier to assimilate this way. The hard work is done for you and there are actually evaluations. The Fritz engine book is just a database with lines considered good for Fritz's strengths. It doesn't say much about the lines themselves. It's quite superficial.
Originally posted by exigentskyI think the stat's that are provided in ctg format books are a very good way to evaluate lines.
As for the comparison with the Fritz engine book, this isn't valid. It's very different and certainly easier to assimilate this way. The hard work is done for you and there are actually evaluations. The Fritz engine book is just a database with lines considered good for Fritz's strengths. It doesn't say much about the lines themselves. It's quite superficial.
I'd expect a little elaboration on that... In my experience, like all databases, it is easy to see various lines but that's about it. Whether the lines are green or not reflects little on their status and more on the strengths of Fritz. These aren't human books and aren't meant for this use.
BTW: I should mention the obvious. GM Nick de Firmian obviously had access to all the databases, engine books and as well as normal books when selecting the lines for MCO 15.
Originally posted by exigentskyI'm not comparing the two. and I don't know much about the green and red lines, I've always ignored them.
I'd expect a little elaboration on that... In my experience, like all databases, it is easy to see various lines but that's about it. Whether the lines are green or not reflects little on their status and more on the strengths of Fritz. These aren't human books and aren't meant for this use.
BTW: I should mention the obvious. GM Nick de Firmian obvious ...[text shortened]... the databases, engine books and as well as normal books when selecting the lines for MCO 15.
I just thought the performance rating and original rating shown in those electronical books is a pretty good guideline to the success of lines.
for example, if a certain move is played by more than 20 2500 players on average and their average performance rating is significantly lower even though they are white, this tells you something.
I don't know how to handle black moves though, because it's hard to tell if the rating drop (from original to performance rating) is due to playing with black or the move itself.
While the performance ratings might be interesting for more popular variations, they are statistically meaningless with only 20 games. You need hundreds of games for statistical relevance - even when the statistics suggests a big difference.
Moreover, the statistics are in general a poor guide to the objective status of a position. There are often just a handful of variations that change everything. Suddenly a position considered favorable is equal or advantageous for the other player. However, the statistics may not change because news spreads fast and the master players will simply not play that anymore.
Originally posted by exigentskyI think fritz.ctg is useless. MCO is a good overall reference book but you need to augment it with books on your favorite openings. Watson's Mastering the Chess Openings are also fine books dealing with many of the strategical ideas behind the openings.
While the performance ratings might be interesting for more popular variations, they are statistically meaningless with only 20 games. You need hundreds of games for statistical relevance - even when the statistics suggests a big difference.
Moreover, the statistics are in general a poor guide to the objective status of a position. There are often just ...[text shortened]... y not change because news spreads fast and the master players will simply not play that anymore.
Originally posted by exigentskyah. you're right in both. thanks.
While the performance ratings might be interesting for more popular variations, they are statistically meaningless with only 20 games. You need hundreds of games for statistical relevance - even when the statistics suggests a big difference.
Moreover, the statistics are in general a poor guide to the objective status of a position. There are often just ...[text shortened]... y not change because news spreads fast and the master players will simply not play that anymore.