Play Winning Chess

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Hello.
You know I have the Farsi translation of Play Winning Chess under publication. But the problem is that I have an old edition (2003), while there is a new edition (2008) where some errors have been corrected. Unfortunately Everyman chess publication have failed to send me the newer edition and neither did one of my compatriots. Does anyone own the new (2008) edition?

Thanks in advance

[Michael Flatt]

Soheil,

I can only suggest that if you didn't identify any obvious errors in the course of your painstaking translation they can't have been that significant.

It is, perhaps, a job your readers can perform.

Hopefully you wont have to field queries about 'wide receivers'!

Good luck with your next project.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

The problem is that the whole project can collapse because I don't have the latest edition and my compatriot can claim my copy out of date. My copy has some obvious errors that I can correct myself, like ...Qxh1 instead of Qh1, but also some other errors like the use of 'Pin' where I would use Skewer.

I know that the British party cannot trust me as an Iranian (tough I did nothing to them), but the whole project will collapse for a mere skepticism of the British company.

[Michael Flatt]

Soheil,

You need to put things into proportion. A few minor errors shouldn't detract from anyone's enjoyment of the book. Being a beginner's text it might delight the juniors and even some older players to be able to spot the errors.

Qxh1 or Qh1 are both acceptable. My preference is for the first since it signals a capture but others prefer the second because it is more concise.

If your book is with the printers it is getting rather late to pull it.

[Michael Farthing]

I'm sorry Soheil that you should feel that we do not trust you as an Iranian. For myself this is certainly not the case and I do not believe it is the case for most others here. Some of your questions are made harder because we are British and the book is written in American English, and though the differences are not great there are some changes of emphasis that we do not worry about in ordinary speech but which are important to you as a translator. That is the only reason why some have suggested you find an American to help you. Sometimes you are looking for differences in meaning where we can see very little differences ourselves and it is often difficult to think of how to explain the difference without putting new problems into our answers.

[Edit (addition)]
Incidentally, I have searched the book on two suppliers' websites and both are offering only a 2003 version. Are you sure there is a 2008 edition - it seems odd that neither the worldwide Amazon nor the specialist Chess Direct suppliers are not offering the most recent edition.
[/Edit]

Michael, on the Qxh1/Qh1 question I suspect Soheil may have been correcting from Qxh1 to Qh1 because no capture was involved, in which case Qxh1 would always be wrong.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

I'm sorry Soheil that you should feel that we do not trust you as an Iranian. For myself this is certainly not the case and I do not believe it is the case for most others here. Some of your questions are made harder because we are British and the book is written in American English, and though the differences are not great there are some changes of emphasis that we do not worry about in ordinary speech but which are important to you as a translator. That is the only reason why some have suggested you find an American to help you. Sometimes you are looking for differences in meaning where we can see very little differences ourselves and it is often difficult to think of how to explain the difference without putting new problems into our answers.

[Edit (addition)]
Incidentally, I have searched the book on two suppliers' websites and both are offering only a 2003 version. Are you sure there is a 2008 edition - it seems odd that neither the worldwide Amazon nor the specialist Chess Direct suppliers are not offering the most recent edition.
[/Edit]

Michael, on the Qxh1/Qh1 question I suspect Soheil may have been correcting from Qxh1 to Qh1 because no capture was involved, in which case Qxh1 would always be wrong.

Oh, sorry
The only point was that "...Qxh1" is a Black move. Some books write Qh1 instead of Qxh1.

Maybe they have ran out of the 2008 edition. GM Seirawan and Dan Addelman from the Everyman chess both told me there was a 2008 edition.GM Seirawan told me that errors in the 2003 edition were corrected, while Dan denied that there is any difference.

I don't get irritated if you don't answer my questions. Sometimes even Iranians do. I am very talkative! My sorry

[Michael Farthing]

There are revised editions for some of his other books. That may be a cause of confusion.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

There are revised editions for some of his other books. That may be a cause of confusion.

What confusion are you talking about?

[Michael Farthing]

Ah, sorry. I misread your previous post.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

But Believe me. Not only there was a 2008 edition, it was reprinted to 2011!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Play-Winning-Ch ... B009E3HDAY

[Michael Flatt]

Soheil,

If you look at the publishing details on the inside page you will see that the book was published in 2003.
It was reprinted in 2004 (twice), 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011.

A book is 'reprinted' when the original print run has sold out and more books are required to satisfy demand. Essentially the content is unchanged.

A 'new edition' on the other hand would be updated in some way. Perhaps, errors in the previous edition would be corrected, some parts deleted or new content added. If this were the case the publishing details would show it as a 'new edition' and a summary of the changes would be included in a Foreward or in the Introduction.

The link that you have provided is to an extract of the 'Kindle' edition which is a electronic version that can be downloaded (for a fee) and viewed on a Kindle reader.

So, there is nothing new or different in the reprinted copies or Kindle version. I think that you must have misunderstood what GM Yasser Seirawan and his publisher were telling you.

By the way, there is a difference between a 'Pin' and a 'Skewer'. I would expect these terms to be fully explained or easily understandable from the book, although I must admit that I have never read the book myself.

[Barry Sandercock]

Soheil,

A Pin is where a piece is attacking an opponents piece which cannot be moved because there is a more valuable piece behind it which would be liable to be taken. A skewer is where the most valuable piece is the one in front and by moving it, another piece will be taken.

[Lewis Martin]

Soheil,

A Pin is where a piece is attacking an opponents piece which cannot be moved because there is a more valuable piece behind it which would be liable to be taken. A skewer is where the most valuable piece is the one in front and by moving it, another piece will be taken.

Well, you have to be careful with your definition of a pin.

"A Pin is where a piece is attacking an opponents piece which cannot be moved..."

Yes, this is true, only if that opponent's piece is blocking the direction to the opponent's king.

In more general cases, your definition would be true but it depends on the position. The 'pinned' piece (not to its king, for example its queen) can be moved elsewhere to make the position better, in which case, this may be viewed as a sacrifice, or that the pin is a mistake.

[soheil_hooshdaran]

Lwis, you should define what you mean by 'can'.
It can be moved, but it cannot!

[Lewis Martin]

Lwis, you should define what you mean by 'can'.
It can be moved, but it cannot!

With regards to pinning the opponent's piece against its king, it is an illegal move to play this piece to another square that leaves its own king in the path of the attacking piece i.e. in check. So in effect, this means that you cannot move the pinned piece. There may be a few occasions where it can be captured, but I need to show some examples.

If it is against its queen (or a higher valuable piece as stated earlier by Barry), then this also is a pin in terms of it usually being not a good move since the opponent will lose material (e.g. exchanging off a queen for a bishop). But, if it is not a good move, it does not mean that it is illegal. So, in this sense you can move the 'pinned' piece and thereby 'unpinning' it.

There needs to be a few diagrams to show this.