Status Updates From The Middle Game in Chess (D...

Neither EZB's nor Vukovic's analysis holds up. Engines find both new defensive resources and tactical shots. This may have been the first time when analyzing with an engine after looking at two different master commentary generated new (to me), understandable (to me) ideas.

Finally got to the Pillsbury-Tarrasch, Hasting 1895 game that Shereshevsky used so effectively in his "Soviet Chess Conveyor". Like other things Shereshevsky copied from this book, the original, (albeit a translation), is better and more complete.

Botvinnik-Flohr, Moscow 1936: This is a great game. I wouldn't have ever looked at it, but it's clear that White made all kinds of mistakes, and when Black finally noticed one, he was so desperate to make up ground that he over reached. White wins in crushing fashion just because Black lost his cool when White blundered. How about that for "how to play chess".

Two tournament books: St. Petersburg 1914 and Nottingham 1936 are key source material for the long examples in this book. It is amazing to me how the ideas from 1938 hold up to both Kasparov and the engine analysis for Lasker-Capablanca St. Petersburg 1914 (finals).