My friend and I have done substantial research on a number of various lines over the years, and now that we are not really active anymore we were hoping to publish some of the gems. Most of the analysis is in uncommon openings (Veresov, Bird's, Budapest) so we are pretty confident that it isn't already known. Our goal was to see some of our lines in MCO or to have a variation make its way into ECO; we think it would be really cool to be using Fritz to look at a game and have it give the variation name as one that we analyzed. How would we go about doing this?
Just a few ideas for you to try:
Have you checked the latest Mega and Corr databases to see if your lines/variations are in there?
If have access to a few powerful engines (Fritz, Shredder, Houdini and many others) run some analyses on them to see how they fare in terms of evaluating your lines.
You can make these engines play against these lines, and have your own "run-offs"
Show these lines to some strong players (IMs and above) and see if you can interest them in trying it out, or at least in getting their opinions. (It would be tricky to find players who have these openings in their repertoire if these are uncommon openings.)
I've personally found the Chessbase folks to be very approachable. (I am talking about quite a few years ago.) You can write to Frederic Friedel and ask to be put in contact with their resident opening experts. If the lines are good, they will figure out ways to add them to their opening books. (But you'll have to do the other steps first before approaching them. I suspect that they get contacted by many.)
Hope that helps.
Josip Asik, the CEO of ChessInformant:
In general, your analysis could be implemented in the ECO series. It would be useful to a to see samples of your work and to let them know if was made mostly as a personal/human chess work or as a computer generated output.
The ECO series is consisted of five bookes (and databases) that are not updated too often. For example, the plan is to produce ECO A and ECO B in 2013 and the openings you mentioned might not belong to those specific series.
In general, they prefer internationally well-known authors with a chess background (GM and IM titles).
Also, they would need further explanations from you and need to know if this is an enthusiastic or commercial based interest.
My recommendation is that you contact
Josip Askik to discuss more with him about this. He is a very approachable person and would be willing to work with you and actually seemed enthusiastic in finding out more about your findings.
I would send email to the authors of the relevant sections of chesspublishing.com . If they like the quality of your analysis, they can share it with the world in one of the site's updates, and then it's published with you as the source. If any book authors decide to use it, they should credit you.
It's unlikely that any analysis will actually be named after you. For that, you should play it in a serious game against strong opposition, the idea should be so special or original that people in the worldwide chess community actually talk about it, and it should also have lasting power. A one-time fantastic novelty that means that variation is never played again won't get a name, but Zviaginsev's 1.e4 c5 2.Na3!? against Khalifman or the Gajevski (10...d5!? in the Ruy Lopez Chigorin) are new moves from recent years that are still played and analyzed, and people refer to them using their inventors' names, so they're basically named after them now.
Also, ECO, being an encyclopedia, can't really contain absolutely everything, they have to edit heavily and only keep the most important stuff. I think it's more likely that your analysis will first end up on Chesspublishing, then in books on the opening your analysis is in, and if the variation stays around and is played a lot, maybe possibly in ECO.