Behind the 'Chess is Massively Undervalued' Message: The Reality of Lilov's Instructional Package

In the press room, I always count the questions no one asks. This analysis reveals that. The promotional article for IM Valeri Lilov's six videos opens with a title—'Chess is massively undervalued'—attributed to Turlov. But there is no direct connection between this quote and Lilov's product. This is a classic example where a brand or educational platform tries to board prestige for its product using a quote with no primary source. Lilov's package is primarily a Black-side anti-system repertoire. It lists the Colle System, Trompowsky Attack, Torre Attack, London System, Catalan, Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, and Richter-Veresov Opening. Lilov claims that these White 'system' openings are 'extremely dangerous' for the players who face them. But this claim is marketing hyperbole. Elite-level players are generally comfortable with these openings; their preparation is deeper in main-line theory. The real 'danger' is for club-level (roughly 1500-2200) players, whose preparation may not be as deep. So where is the real value of Lilov's package? It is a definitive repertoire solution. White's low-theory openings (like the London System) have grown as an elite-level trend. The London System, which is low-risk and low-preparation-dependent, has become popular among top-level players in recent years. This is a commercial catalyst: the education market is tracking this trend and selling specific problem-solving modules. The only respectable signal in this article is the growth of the low-theory opening trend and a datapoint on the 'definitive-repertoire' content economy. Everything else—Turlov's quote, the 'dangerous' claim—is a marketing message. Having an IM title on an educational product is not a reason for customer trust. Customers should check themselves: Lilov's potential game-related data, match-rate, or ACPL data to make their decision. From my experience—after 18 years of industry observation—I know that I trust a system only if it can explain its own failure. In the case of this educational product, the 'chess undervalued' quote is just a marketing hook. There is no economic or competitive proof behind it.