Just as it’s sad to encounter a man without a country, so it can be said of a book without an audience. Unfortunately, Grandmaster Lalic, a consummate theoretician, cannot seem to decide if this book is meant for a broad or limited audience, and in the end it is written for neither.

The Classical Nimzo-Indian (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.Qc2) is along with Rubinstein’s 4.e3 and the flexible 4.Nf3 one of the more popular methods for meeting this important defense. In the past decade, it has been also been written about by GM Max Dlugy in NIMZO-INDIAN 4.Qc2 and, most recently, by GM Sokolov in 1995’s NIMZO-INDIAN DEFENSE CLASSICAL VARIATION. Without a doubt, there have been plenty of developments in the past six years to warrant an update.

This book follows a format found in many of this publisher’s openings books. After an introduction, the variations are covered via illustrative games. At the end of each chapter, there is a summary that gives a bit of a wrap up and something of a variation tree. The book closes with an index of the complete games. At the beginning, I would suggest that this format is showing some wear around the edges. For starters, the use of complete games to demonstrate each key variation means that we often get the same first ten or twelve moves listed, which is a repetitive waste of space. Even worse, occasionally the author will toss out some quick theoretical tidbit in the midst of a string of moves that have been covered without mention previously. This clutters the presentation. I’ve reached the conclusion that the tree approach to coverage is generally best for opening books. The one-page summaries also don’t seem to provide much value and could probably be put to better use at the beginning, rather than at the end of chapters.

The book’s introduction notes that the Classical Nimzo-Indian has been played by every World Champion. Of course, this doesn’t mean that they have all played 4.Qc2, rather that they have all been involved in a game with either white or black in the variation. While this is an interesting fact, Lalic decides to make it the focal point of his introduction: he includes games from all sixteen World Champions (Steinitz, Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, Khalifman, Kramnik, Anand). While several of these players have been strong practitioners of either 4.Qc2 or the Nimzo-Indian Defense, there are exceptions. Some of the games in this 16-page section are less than stellar, and one gets the impression the space could have been put to better use discussing typical ideas and themes for white and black in the variation.

After the introduction, the author dives into variations with 4...d5, which get the largest share of the book’s coverage. Of its 120 pages of theory, 54 1/2 are devoted to 4...d5. By contrast, 4...0-0 receives 43 1/2 pages of analysis, 4...c5 gets 11, and all other variations are covered in the remaining 11 pages. While 4...d5 has been getting a lot of attention at the highest levels (in part because of the interest in Romanishin’s idea of 5.cxd5 Qxd5 6.Nf3 Qf5!?), I’m not so certain that has translated into praxis at lower levels; I think that 4...0-0 and 4...c5 have gotten the most workouts at the average tournament player levels. In looking at the variations with 4...d5, I was struck by a seeming inconsistency in presentation of the material. The author notes that many older games have been included, which he believes are necessary “to show the development of variations from their beginning to their current theoretical standing.” This would seem to be directed at players with limited understanding of the theory of the variations presented. That would indicate that the author is seeking to appeal to a fairly broad audience, and that early divergences will discuss some of the less critical continuations.

That, however, is not the case. As an example, a theoretically charged variation arises after 4...d5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.Qxc3 Nc6 7.e3 Ne4 8.Qc2 e5 9.cxd5 Qxd5 10.Bc4 Qa5+ 11.b4 Nxb4 12.Qxe4 Nc2+. The author notes that “this extremely sharp and forcing line is very old and was analyzed thoroughly by the late world champion Max Euwe.” Lalic then does include a couple of old games (as well as some with the latest hot theory). One of these, Pachman-Barcza, Budapest 1948, shows that black practically loses by force after 13.Ke2 Nxa1?. This is well known theory, and it really rates no more than a small footnote; instead, the author spends 1 1/2 pages on the game. This can be chalked up to “explanation” for players with limited understanding of the variation’s theory, but what about the moves that got us to the position after 12...Nc2+? I expected to see a chapter discussing the sidelines available for both players, and there are several. Sokolov, for example, spends a fair amount of time on 9.f3 and indicates that it is promising for white; both Sokolov and Dlugy note that 10.Bd3? is poor for white. From my perspective, the average player would be better served by some mention of reasonable alternatives for both sides rather than decades old crushes in clearly bad sidelines.

The next chapter provides more of the same situation. After 7.Qc2 c5 8.dxc5 Nc6 9.cxd5 exd5 10.Nf3 Bf5 11.b4 Ng3? is another move that practically loses by force. After 12.Qb2 Nxh1 13.Qxg7 Rf8 14.Bh6 black is going to regain the exchange with a clear extra pawn (the quoted game here is Bonham-Wolstenholme, 1949). Most books leave off shortly thereafter, and I think most players could figure it out. Lalic, however, spends over a page on this game. While there is some nice technique demonstrated by white, in an opening book I might ask: where is the coverage of 9.e3 and 9.Nf3? These are both important lines that receive appropriate coverage in earlier books on this line. This isn’t billed as strictly a white repertoire book; I find their absence typical of the book’s spotty coverage – there are too many pages spent on these sorts of common mistakes and not enough on important sidelines.

There are lots of other examples. As an exponent of “theory limiting” systems, I’ve often played 4...d6. This is not an offbeat system lacking in pedigree. Dlugy spends a fair amount of time on the line and quotes games where the black players included Petrosian, Korchnoi, and Nimzovich himself. All that the book provides is 5.Nf3 (5.Bg5 is generally considered the most theoretical line, and 5.a3, 5.g3, and 5.e3 worth theoretical consideration) 5...Nbd7 6.Bd2 0-0?!. Needless to say, the line deserves better coverage. It should be noted that in the more theoretical variations, the author does a reasonable job of updating and presenting the theory, and there are some suggestions for improvements for both sides. However, this further underscores the book’s dichotomy. There is not enough general coverage for the average player but too much old, out-of-date material to satisfy the very strong theory hound.

In conclusion, this book suffers from lack of focus and objective. While the subject matter is important and ready for a theoretical update, there are too many potholes to upend the unsuspecting reader. Meanwhile, those looking for the latest theory will have to page through a lot of filler to find what they are looking for.

YOU CAN FIND THIS BOOK AT