After reading just a chapter from this book, I just had to write something about the book. Yes, it is just six games in the whole book but judgeing from the first game, the book is a keeper.

What makes it special? It is another "every-move-annotated-book" but I think is stands head and shoulders above both "Logical Chess" and "Chess: The Art of Logical Thinking" (both are fine books!).

Pandolfini tries to annotate the games both on a, if you like, micro- and macro-level perspective. Me, being a simpleton, was lured into a more active type of reading by the questions ("Will Nbd7 work?") in the text. I think it was less "Learning by nodding" while reading this book. Also, Mr Pandolfini has a few interesting quotes here and there in the text which adds a little enjoyment to the reading experience and perhaps some additional views on what is going on in the game under discussion.

The macro level annotations is perhaps less instructive but that is perhaps due to the fact that no single game is a pure application of a single strategic approach, say "Colour Play". It is of cours much more concrete to analyze if a single move (i.e. micro level) is safe or not.

The book is a few years old (1987) and I am rather surprised that the book hasn't received more attention.

All-in-all, One enthusiastic rant over an under the radar chess book ( )

Six games from the eighties, Cernin-Miles Tunis '85, Miles-Belyavsky '84, Vaganian-Nogueiras '85, Gavirkov-Cebalo '85, Panczyk-Yusupov Warsaw '85, Dolmatov-Rogers Tallin '85 are analyzed move by move. They all illustrate points of tactics, concrete calculation, positional consideration , endgame play in that order of emphasis. The translator or author feels compelled to use expressions like "Black notches up with 5 ...d6" or "Black flanks ...g6." "Black frolics along with ..a1Q" It sounds as, one wit put it, as if the book was "Englished anonymously from Russian".
Notwithstanding, the Question and answer style and Concept intermezzos actually make the book a useful one to study.