A New Look at the Tayler by David Kane

A New Look at the Tayler by David kane

I: Introduction Technically, it is really the Tayler Variation to the The Tayler Variation (aka the Tayler Opening) is a Inverted Hungarian Defense rather than the Tayler line that has been unjustly neglected in my view. Opening, though through usage, the terms are The line is of surprisingly recent vintage though it interchangeable for all practical purposes. is often confused with the Inverted Hungarian (or Inverted Hanham Defense), a line which shares As has been so often the case when it comes to the same opening moves: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. unorthodox lines, I first heard of this opening via Be2: Mike Basman when he published a cassette on it back in the early 80ʼs (still available through audiochess.com). The line stirred some interest at the time but gradually seems to have been forgotten. The final nail in the coffin was probably some light analysis published by Eric Schiller in Gambit Chess Openings (and elsewhere) where he dismisses the line primarily due to his loss in the game Schiller-Martinovsky, Chicago 1986. After that, the line seemed to all but die out. However, my own analysis (with the aid of Rybka 3 and Hiarcs 12.1) indicates that this judgment may have been a bit too hasty- more on that later. I have continued to play the line since the mid 80ʼs with very good results- in fact, it has been my The Inverted Hungarian is an old opening, dating main weapon against 1. e4 e5. and I expect it to back to the 1860ʼs, at least. Tartakower played it a remain so for some time. few times in the 1920ʼs with mixed results, using the continuation, 3...Nf6 4. d3: a rather In the box with the aforementioned cassette, unenterprising setup for White. In 1981 British Basman included a copy of Taylerʼs article from player, John Tayler (see biographical note), Chess magazine. Unfortunately, I have misplaced published an article in the British publication the article, but I did take extensive notes at the Chess (vol. 46) on a line he had developed time. This present article is based on those notes, stemming from the sharp 4.d4!?. This is a move some of Basmanʼs analysis from his tape, and my which apparently no one had thought to play own research and extensive experience with the before, and one that transforms the sedate line. This then will serve as an introduction to Inverted Hungarian into something else altogether. those unfamiliar with the line and hopefully revive some interest among those of you familiar with it but perhaps under the impression it has been busted.

II: An Early Deviation

Before we get to the main lines, letʼs examine an instructive early deviation. Looking at the first diagram again, you can see In contrast to the Ruy Lopez or the Italian Game, the bishop on e2 looks rather passively placed and also blocks the e-file Tayler 2 on a square that potentially compromises the Now Black has a choice of 4...Nxe5 5. d4! where defense of the e-pawn in some lines. But this White gets a good game regardless of Blackʼs passive placement has a few positives going for it reply, or the slightly better 4...Bxf2 5. Kxf2 Nxe5 as well. Psychologically, it may (and frequently where White has a choice of good moves, 6. d4, does) spur Black to be overly aggressive or to 6. Rf1 and perhaps the strongest, 6. Re1 which dismiss the system as innocuous. More can all be played here with a good game for concretely, the bishop is not a target on e2 as White. opposed to the more “normal” lines of the aforementioned Ruy Lopez and Italian Game After 6. Re1 (diagram below), many of my ICC positions where this bishop is frequently a target. games have continued in tragicomic fashion: This corresponds to Basmanʼs “Non-exposure” theory where he contends that placing certain pieces on passive squares may have compensating factors such as not allowing the enemy to gain tempi from harassing the piece were it on a more exposed square or not allowing a useful piece (such as the White squared bishop) to be exchanged off too early. Also, White has incurred no weaknesses save from the temporarily unprotected e-pawn. But how is White going to engage in any kind of enterprising play? The answer lies below. But first, letʼs look at an early deviation that a lot of lower rated players will play here:

1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Be2 Bc5?! this impulsive move allows the hoary fork trick: 4.Nxe5! 6...Qh4+ 7. Kg1 Qxe4?? 8. d4 Ng6 9. Bf3 1-0

Instead of the suicidal 7...Qxe4 Black can essay 7...d6 with a playable position though White still has the better chances overall. Itʼs interesting to note that this fork trick would not be possible with the bishop on c4 because after 4...Nxe5 the knight would be hitting the bishop on c4. The position of the bishop tucked away on e2 gives the opening certain tactical possibilities not available with the bishop on a more exposed post. The downside is that White may have to lose a tempo to get the bishop off the e-ﬁle at some point.

Assuming that Black isnʼt silly enough to fall for any of that, most of your games will feature 3...Nf6 which will bring us to the main lines discussed next. Tayler 3

III: The Main Line Variations

After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Be2 Nf6 and now the In practical terms, with best play, I believe from energetic move that characterizes the Tayler this position that Black can achieve equality in proper, 4. d4!?, we reach a major crossroads: some lines, but he must tread a careful path through some sharp complications ﬁrst; not necessarily an easy task for even strong players as my game with IM Mike Valvo demonstrates in section A3. Certainly, although White is sacriﬁcing a pawn in many lines, White has clear compensation in most cases and certainly does not incur any disadvantage out of the opening.

Here Black has three reasonable replies:

A: 5...Ne4

B: 5...Nd5

C: 5...Ng4

Black must reply 4...ed to have any hope of equalizing.

If instead 4...Nxd4 5.NxN ed 6.Qxd4 and White is A: 5...Ne4 ahead in development with better central control. Similarly, if 4...Nxe4 5. d5 followed by 6. Nxe5 and White has the better game.

So continuing on after the more or less compulsory 4...ed after 5.e5!?, we reach the main position of the Tayler Variation:

This is the variation that was the primary focus of attention back in the 80ʼs and was considered the Tayler 4 main line. Blackʼs knight is well centralised but compensation. may experience difﬁculties on the e-ﬁle. Tayler gives 6 .0-0!? and from here, Black has played:

A1: 6...Be7 A2: 6...d6 A3: 6...Bc5?! A4: 6...d5!

A1: 6...Be7

6...Be7 this is Rybkaʼs choice in the position but it doesnʼt seem to work out that well i.e. 7. Nxd4 Nxe5 8.Nf5 Bf6 (perhaps better is 8...g6 with an edge for White) 9. Qd5! c6 (or 9...Nd6 10. Nxd6 cxd6 11. Qxd6 +/=) 10. Qxe4 d5 11. Nxg7+! Bxg7 12. Qb4 (diagram below) A3: 6...Bc5?! computers give this is as equal but White has This attempt by Black to hang on to his booty is better pawn structure, better development and a popular OTB, but it causes Black big problems safer king to counter against Blackʼs better center. due to the lack of good escape squares for the knight on e4. i.e. 7. Bd3! d5 (7...f5?! isnʼt much better: 8. Bxe4 fxe4 9. Ng5 Nxe5 10. Nxe4 Bb6?? {...Qe7 is better but after 11. Bg5 Qf8 12. f4! White has good attacking chances} 11. Bg5! and Black is losing his queen) 8. exd5 Nxd6 9.Re1+ and here Black can play 9...Be6? 10.Ng5! Qd7 (the surprisingly common panic reaction, 10...0-0?? is bad due to 11.Bxh7 Kh8 12.Qh5 and Black is lost) 11. Nxe6 fxe6 12. Qh5+ and White picks up the bishop on c5 as in Kane- Krause ICC 1996. Or instead of the horrible 9...Be6 he can try 9...Ne7 10.Qe2 and now Kane- IM Mike Valvo 1996 continued 10...Nf5? (diagram)

A2: 6...d6

This was once thought to refute the opening due to lines like 7. Bb5 dxe5 8.Nxe5 Qd5! where Black is at least equal. Instead, White should play 8. Re1! f5 (now8...Qd5? is well met by 9. c4! with a clear advantage to White) 9. Nxe5 Qf6 10. Nxc6 bxc6 11. Bc4 (diagram) and White has clear Tayler 5

Qe5?! 0-0?? (...Bd6!) 12. Qxc5 where White was winning thanks to the double blunders. Instead of the inaccurate 11. Qe5? White could and we reach a position from the Two Knightʼs have won rather straightforwardly with 11. Bxf5! Defence/Scotch Gambit normally reached via 1. Bxf5 12. Qb5+ and White picks up a piece. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Bc4 Nf6 5. e5 d5 6. Bb5 Ne4 7. Nxd4 Bc5 8. O-O This position is considered playable for both sides/ dynamically equal. A4: 6...d5! Summary of 5...Ne4:

Blackʼs path to equality is relatively narrow here and in general White gets good play in most lines with full compensation in the lines where he sacriﬁces a pawn. This line is seen fairly frequently- around 30%. Of the other major Black alternatives at move ﬁve, 5...Ng4 is the most popular with something like 60% of my games reaching that position. The subject of the next section, 5...Nd5 seems to be the least popular, with it showing up in only about 10% of my games.

B: 5...Nd5

As is so often the case in double king pawn openings, when Black ﬁnds the right moment to play ...d5 he can equalize as he does here.

7. Nxd4 Bc5 8. Bb5

This is the least popular response to 5. e5 even though it seems playable for Black. The normal move for White here is 6. 0-0!? though in internet blitz games I sometimes play 6. c3 here counting on the fact that many of my opponents will blindly Tayler 6 play 6...dxc3?? which of course drops the knight 8. Nf5! with a double attack on the d5 knight and on d5. 6. Nxd4 has also been tried: 6...Nxe5 7. the g7 pawn or 7...Nxd4? 8. Qxd4 Nb6 9. Qg4! 0-0 d6 8. Re1 Be7 9. Bb5 c6 (9...Kf8 and White g6 (9...0-0? 10.Bh6 and White wins material) 10. can claim some compensation in the form of the Bh6 d6 11.Qg3 dxe 12.Qxe5 and White has a displaced king though Iʼm not sure itʼs really worth clear, possibly winning advantage. Indeed, after a whole pawn) 10. Rxe5!? (the simpler 10.Nxc6 is 7.Nxd4 Blackʼs best is probably 7...0-0 8.Nf5 Nb6 possible here too) de 11.Nxc6!? bc 12. Bxc6+ 9. a4 a5 10. Be3 where White can obtain the two Bd7 13.Bxe4 Rc8 and White has two pawns for bishops but has a slight pull at best. This remains the exchange. Whiteʼs queenside pawns look like to be tested. a force to be reckoned with in the endgame thoughRybka seems to prefer Black here (-.48). Even so, I would rather play White. B2: 6...Bc5 From the last diagram, 6. 0-0!? is Taylerʼs move. Black has played three replies:

B1: 6...Be7

B2: 6...Bc5

B3: 6....d6

B1: 6...Be7

7. c3 d6 (of course not 6...dc3?? 7.Qxd5) 8.cxd4 Bb6 9. Bg5 Nde7 10. Nc3 dxe5 11. Bxe7 (11. dxe5 Qxd1 12.Raxd1 seems playable also) Nxe7 12. dxe5 Qxd1 13. Rfxd1 0-0 14. Rac1 Be6 15. Na4 (diagram)

This move looks sensible enough but White seems to get the upper hand after 7. Nxd4 i.e 7...Nxe5? Tayler 7

White can now eliminate Blackʼs two bishops here. 2008) there is a lot more to be developed here Note that Black is ill-advised to grab a pawn here: and undoubtedly improvements will be found for 15...Bxa2?! as White has 16. Nxb6 cxb6 17. Rc7! both sides. OTB, these lines have proved to be and White recovers the pawn plus gets his rook on generally easy to play for White. the 7th rank- White must be better here.

C: 5...Ng4 B3: 6....d6 After 6. 0-0!? we reach the mainline position (diagram below) and the most popular variations encountered OTB. This is generally considered Blackʼs best try against the opening. Indeed, Benjamin and Schiller went so far to give 5...Ng4 an exclamation point in Unorthodox Openings but I think that assessment is somewhat optimistic. White does sacriﬁce a pawn in most lines but I believe the resultant play is worth it.

This looks natural with Black aiming to dissolve Whiteʼs annoying e5 pawn. Play can continue: 7. c3 (again exploiting the pin on the d-pawn) dxe5 8. cxd4 e4 9. Ne5 Nxe5 10. dxe5 c6 11. Qc2 Bf5 12. Nc3 Bc5 13. Nxe4 with a roughly balanced position.

Instead of Taylerʼs suggestion of 7.c3 White has also tried 7. exd6 Qxd6 (Bxd6 is a reasonable alternative) 8.Bb5 Nf6 9. Re1+ Be7 10. Qe2 From this position, Black has played: where White has some compensation- but again, is it worth a full pawn? C1: 6...Bc5

C2: 6...Be7 Summary of 5...Nd5 C3: 6...d6 It seems that White does well in these variations mainly due to the vulnerability of the d5 knight vis- C4: 6...Ngxe5 a-vis the queen on d1. Still, Black can reach playable positions particularly in the B3 lines. Of course, since there have been so few games in this variation (only one is included in Mega Base C1: 6...Bc5 Tayler 8

edged position with chances for both sides. White, for the moment, has the initiative but will have to play energetically to maintain it. Basman likes this variation for White but I think Black can hold on with best play.

C3: 6...d6

Tayler here gives 7. Bg5 f6 8. exf6 gxf6 (8...Ngxf6 is also playable) 9. Bh4 0-0 10. c3! and “White is better” -Tayler. If Black plays 10...dxc3 11. Qd5+ Kh8 unfortunately White does not win a piece as 12. Qxc5? fails to 12...cxb2!. Instead, 12. Nxc3 offers White a small edge.

Again, Black is logically trying to eliminate the irritant on e5 but this move seems a little C2: 6...Be7 inconsistent with the previous 5...Ng4:

6...d6 7. Nxd4 dxe5 8. Nxc6 Qxd1 9. Rxd1 bxc6 10. Bf3! Bd7 11. Rxd7! Kxd7 12. Bxg4+ and White is winning.

Or 6...d6 7. Nxd4 Ngxe5 8. f4 Ng6 9. Nxc6 bxc6 10. Qd4! (diagram)

7. Nxd4 Ngxe5 8. f4 Ng6 9. f5 offers White some initiative. If instead 7... Nxd4 8. Qxd4 Bf6 9. Qf2 Ne7 10. Nc3 d5 11. g4!? leads to a double Tayler 9

This nice centralizing move has a record of as a “debacle”, that game persuaded him to tempting errors from Black in this position. To wit, abandon the opening. I hope the improvement for one ICC game continued 10...c5?? 11. Qe4+ and White in that game suggested in this next section White picks up material regardless of Blackʼs reply helps to reverse that neglect. i.e. 11...Be6 12.Bb5+ Ke7 13. f5! and Black is lost. Another game of mine featured 10... Qf6!? From the above diagram, White plays 7. Nxe5 (as Black wants to play Be7 without losing his g- Nxe5 8. Qxd4 (diagram below) now Black has a pawn) 11. Qe4+ Be7? 12. Qxc6+ -oh dear! problem along the a1-h8 diagonal. As Tayler notes, with the queen controlling that diagonal Naturally, Black should have played 11...Ne7 but “Black has difﬁculty completing his development” in that case, although he avoids dropping material, he still has to solve a thorny development problem on his kingside and that seems to be worth the pawn investment by White.

C4: 6...Ngxe5

Black has played a few different moves here

C 41: 8...d6

C 42: 8...Ng6

C 43: 8...Nc6

This appears to be the critical variation, (for the C 44: 8...Qf6!? time being at least), and White must demonstrate compensation for the pawn if the opening is to be considered viable. Given the lack of available material on the Tayler and the fact that what little is C 41: 8...d6 available boils down to a few disparaging references in various books by Eric Schiller (see This move underestimates the pin of the knight the bibliography section), it seems that the lack of against Blackʼs g-pawn. Play can continue: 9. Nc3 popularity of the line may plausibly be traced to Be7?! 10. f4 Nc6 11. Qxg7 Bf6 12. Qh6 and the previously mentioned game, Schiller- White has recovered the pawn while retaining Martinovsky, Chicago 1986. Described by Schiller attacking chances. Tayler 10

If Black here tries 16...d4 then 17. Bxd4! is one Or White can play 9. f4 Nc6 10. Bb5 Qf6 11. good reply Qe4+ Kd8 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. Qxc6 Rb8 14. Nc3 and with Blackʼs king stuck in the center, White is obviously better. (diagram) C 43: 8...Nc6

9. Qc3! and again the pressure against g7 is annoying: “Black is in trouble”-Tayler. Black has played:

C 431: 9...d5

C 432: 9...Qf6

C 431:

9...d5 10. Bb5 Bd7?! (10...Qd6 is a better defense i.e. 11 Bf4! Qc5 12. Ba4 Be6 13. Bxg7 Rc8 14. Bf4 and Black has an isolated pawn and still hasnʼt solved how to develop his Black squared bishop.) 10.Bxc6 and now 10..bxc6 C 42: 8...Ng6 11.Re1+ Be6 12. Qxc6+ Ke7 and White is winning. Or another game continued 10..Bxc6 11. Another effort to untangle. Play can continue: Re1+ and Black apparently preferred 11...Be7 12. 9. Nc3 c6 10. Be3 d5 11. Rae1 f6 (what Qxg7 Rf8 13. Bg5 with a winning game for White else?) 12. Bh5 Be7 13. Qd3 0-0!? 14. Bxg6 hxg6 to the equally horriﬁc 11...Kd7 12.Qh3 Kd6 15. Qxg6 (diagram) and White has chances on 13.Bf4+ Kc5 14. a4! (14. Qc3 is also winning) the king-side with the immediate threat of 16. Bh6 where Blackʼs king will not survive long. and the idea of advancing the h-pawn in the air. C 432: 9...Qf6 Tayler 11

10 QxQ gxf6 11. Nc3 Kd8 (Nd5 is a threat) 12.Nd5 Bg7 13.Bd2! (with the threat of 14. Bc3) This brings us to the previously mentioned contentious variation from Schiller- Martinovsky, From here (diagram), Black has played: Chicago 1986:

C 4321: 13...Ne5 C 44: 8...Qf6! (threatening 9...Nf3+ winning the C 4322: 13..f5 queen):

4321: 10...Ne5

14. Bc3 d6 15. f4 Ng6 16.Rad1 (the simple 16. Nxf6 is ﬁne too) and White will recover the pawn with a clear advantage i.e. 16...Bf5 17. Rd2 Nf8 18. Bxf6 Bxf6 19. Nxf6 etc.

Note that 13...d6 14. Bc3 transposes.

C 4322: 13...f5 -attempting to move the target Schiller feels that this move leaves White 14. Bg5+ f6 (of course not 14... Ke8? 15. Nxc7+ scrambling to justify his pawn sacriﬁce. That game etc.) 15. Nxf6 (diagram next page) where Black continued, 9. Qe4(?!) Be7 10.Nc3 c6 11. f4 Ng6 has to deal with the threat of discovered check 12. f5 d5 13. Qa4 Bc5+ 14. Kh1 Ne7 15. g4 b5 through some means other than 15...Bxf6 16. 16. Qf4 h5 17.g5 Qxf5 and the rest was a mop-up Bxf6+ where he loses the rook. operation 0-1. Tayler 12

I believe White went wrong with 9.Qe4, a move 13. Bh6 (13.Rae1 is also good) d6 14.Bg7 Rg8 that cedes one of Whiteʼs trumps in the position, 15. Nxf6 Bxf6 16. Bxf6 and White is better. namely his pressure on the a1-h8 diagonal. Perhaps, Schiller was afraid to exchange queens. 9...Be7 is probably the most sensible move, but OTB experience however has shown that White even here Black can get in trouble. Another game has nothing to fear from a queen exhange as his of mine continued 9...Be7 10. Nc3 Ng6? 11. Nd5! activity and Blackʼs development problems give and White regains his pawn with a better position him a good game. i.e. 11...Qxd4 12. Bxd4 with a double attack against g7 and c7. A better White attempt from this position was 9.Qc3 and even though this results in something After 9...Be7 10.Nc3 the attempt to prevent Nd5 of a tempo loss, White won a good game anyway by 10...c6 came to grief after 11. Ne4! Qf5 12. g4! in Stonehouse-Cade, 1993 (Corr.) c5 13. Nd6+ Bxd6 14.Qxd6 Qe6 15. Bxc5 and White is obviously better. Searching around for other possibilities in this position, I stumbled on the interesting move 9...Be7 10. Nc3 0-0 attempting to get out of dodge 9.Be3!? (diagram) which in addition to developing 11.Nd5 Qd6 12.Rad1 Nc6 13. Qf4 Bd8 14. Qxd6 another piece (and not losing a tempo) ensures cxd6 15. Bf4 Re8 16. Rfe1 Ne5 17. Bf1 a6 18 that in the immediate event of a queen exchange, Bg3 and here Black stumbled with 18...Ba5? now White can recapture with the bishop and maintain after 19. b4! the bishop had no satisfactory the pressure against g7. retreat i.e.19... Bd8 and now 20. f4 won material in Kane- Sargon V (1-0 in 43)

9...Be7 10. Nc3 Nc6 is probably Blackʼs best line: White has activity and better development for the pawn. I would assess the position as dynamically equal. Alas, no human games have been played from this position so computer analysis will have to do for now. Fortunately, the results are very encouraging: Rybka 3, Fritz 11 and Hiarcs 11.1 assess the position as at least equal or slightly better for White: +.39, +.45 and +.31 respectively. Engine match results favored White: Rybka 3 vs Rybka 3, 1-0; Fritz 11- Rybka 3, 1/2 / 1/2; Hiarcs vs Fritz 11, 1/2/1/2; Fritz- Hiarcs 1-0 for a total of 2 wins for White, 2 draws and no losses. Note that the draws resulted from the higher rated programs playing Black. In a few of Some lines from the diagram: the games, the non-development of Blackʼs queen bishop was a factor- Black often took a long time The attempt to develop the queen bishop via to get that bishop and the queenʼs rook in the 9...b6? fails to 10.Qe4 which not only hits the rook game. Meanwhile, Whiteʼs two bishops and knight but threatens 11.Bd4 with a nasty double pin. were very active. I expect these considerations will be factors in human games too. 9...Nc6 doesnʼt look that good after 10.Qxf6 gxf6 11. Nc3 Be7 (again, Nd5 is a threat) 12.Nd5 Bd8 Tayler 13

Summary of 5...Ng4: Biographical Note It seems that White is doing just fine in all the variations after 6.0-0!? including the variation that Unfortunately, John Tayler hasnʼt left much of a had previously stymied Schiller. If somehow 9. trace on the internet aside from his opening Be3 doesnʼt pan out in time, then 9. Qc3 looks to variation. What we do know is that he read be a decent alternative. mathematics until 1955 at the University College of Leicester, UK. He was already a strong player Conclusions: at school- around master strength- and he usually played top or second board with good results. It appears that the Tayler is perfectly sound though After school, he worked for GEC/EE Whetstone Black can achieve a few equal positions, mostly in and played for Braunstone Chess Club and the the 5...Ne4 variation, where he can transpose into County for many years. Sadly, he died sometime a well known equal position from the Two Knights in early 80ʼs as a young man- probably in his early Defense. If this remains the case, it means that to mid 40ʼs. He had a reputation as a strong the Tayler is probably at least as good as the county player and was described as “intense”. Scotch Gambit, an opening with a lot more One fellow club mate said “Games with John were mileage on it. The remaining lines offer White a always very tense.” Hopefully, he would be proud combination of traps for the unwary, exciting to know that his opening innovation has become attacks and the joy of the initiative in most lines. internationally recognized and is still a viable line Another point in its favor is the fact that it after all these years. introduces a system of play as early as move three in the venerable double king-pawn opening Acknowledgements complex. This means a high percentage of your games will allow you to exercise your theoretical Thanks to katar (from chessvideos.tv) for spotting knowledge while your opponents will be on the the transposition into the Two Knights Defense back foot right from the beginning of the game. and for his invaluable proofreading skills. Finally, I should mention that a few correspondence games have used Taylerʼs line Thanks to Mike Salisbury, John Dawkins, Sean with generally excellent results for White. Of the Hewitt, Andy Morley and Neal Beasley for ten games in the database, White scored 6 wins, 3 biographical information about Tayler. draws and only one loss. Thanks to Gary Gifford for publishing this There is no earthly reason why this opening is not newsletter. played more, especially when you consider that arguably more unsound openings such as the And finally, thanks to John Tayler and Mike Blackmar-Diemer and the Latvian enjoy a wide Basman for developing this line in the first place. following. Itʼs sad to realize that this is the first work on the opening (that Iʼm aware of, at least) since Basman and Tayler thirty years ago!. Bibliography/ Resources

I hope this article encourages more players (and Gambit Chess Openings by Eric Schiller- Cardoza stronger players than me) to explore its mysteries 2002 and further develop the nascent theory. I encourage you to play the Tayler, and if you do so, Unorthodox Openings by Eric Schiller and Joel please send me your games! TIA Benjamin, Collier Books 1987 Tayler 14

Unorthodox Chess Openings by Eric Schiller, Cardoza, 2003

Taylerʼs Variation (Audiochess Cassette #25) by Michael Basman

Wikipedia.org article on the Tayler Opening

Chessbase Mega database 2008

Chessbase Correspondence database 2006

Online Resources

I have assembled a collection of Tayler games which can be found at http:// www.nationalchessacademy.org/Media/ taylergames.pgn

I have also produced an introductory video (free) on the opening which can be found at http:// www.chessvideos.tv/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4816

Mike Basman is still selling his cassettes at http:// www.audiochess.com

Contact:

David Kane can be reached at [email protected]

301 879 0654 (US)

I would be happy to recieve any games, corrections, praise, criticisms or comments. In particular, I would still like to ﬁnd more biographical information, games and/or photos of John Tayler.