08 Apr 08
more I see books, more sad I am becoming...so much info...so many books, videos, lessons, games...that I can not read/view/understand...
It is so easy to get them...I downloaded 60+ chess books, I printed and binded so many about 10 but I am so slow in reading them 🙁...just a few(3-4) per year...it is sooo difficult...and after that you also forget 🙁
I need more time...time...time...Why they were not available for me when I was a kid in school and I had long summer vacations ? 🙁 damn...
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by vipiuOnly downloaded 60+ books?! 😲
more I see books, more sad I am becoming...so much info...so many books, videos, lessons, games...that I can not read/view/understand...
It is so easy to get them...I downloaded 60+ chess books, I printed and binded so many about 10 but I am so slow in reading them 🙁...just a few(3-4) per year...it is sooo difficult...and after that you also forget 🙁
I ne ...[text shortened]... ere not available for me when I was a kid in school and I had long summer vacations ? 🙁 damn...
I have too many to keep count but now I'm focusing mainly on one and will be doing that till I finish it. I think the goal is to focus and try to do the best. And of course plays lots of chess.
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by exigentskyI don't know why people take offense at the statement of hiom comparing his thoery with the theory of gravitation. The guy's a scientist so I'm guessing he knows the meaning of the word theory in the scientifical field. A theory is nthing based on postulates, supported by experience, that needs to be tested and can be false. That's what the word theory means. Theory isn't a thing that is fixed nor absolutely right. The theories of gravitation and evolution are fine examples of that.
It was an understatement. In any case, The System is not an opening book. It is a grandiose "scientific theory" of chess as valid as the "theory of gravity or evolution." Berliner just happens to use openings as examples.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24091
08 Apr 08
Originally posted by Mad RookIt's taken me a hell of a long time to realise that chess books do not improve your play. Most concentrate solely on the positionla elements of the game with basic principles to be adhered to. If the pawns look like this then i must do that, rooks must be on open files, doubled pawns are weak and must be attacked etc. It's all a load of "BULL"
I'm not even going to attempt to try to give you a "best chess book" list, for a couple of reasons. First, I'm a patzer. Second, I tend to agree with JonathanB that that's a very difficult question to answer. (It depends on lots of factors - Your skill level, your interests, and your chess strengths and weaknesses.)
But I would recommend that before you ...[text shortened]... der the opinions of chess instructors like Dan and the mainstream book reviewers.
Chess is a game of romance, ideas and imagination and attempts by chess authors to sum the whole game up by principals and refine the beautiful game down almost completely to "TECHNIQUE" are very misleading and completely unhelpful to the aspiring player.
Ironically it's a couple of books that have actually led me to this opinion. Rowson's Chess for Zebras and a quite remarkable publication called " THE CHESS MIND" by Gerald Abrahams. a little known classic well worth picking up if you can find it. Both publications are very eye opening and really cut through the Hype.
- Joined
- 16 Dec 04
- Moves
- 56692
08 Apr 08
If you want a bit of a read and some games thrown in then The Russians vs Fischer is good [so far]. I've been playing through some of the games, there's a couple of great battles between him and Tal in there and plenty of 1.e4 games unsurprisingly. Anyway, plenty of the book left to read but it's a good read thus far. It's prompted me to start playing the sicilian and KID as black instead of the usual 1...e5 or Slav, not playing quite to Bobby's standard yet mind!
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by adam warlockA theory is the highest level that an idea can achieve in science. It is the best current understanding of a given phenomena and has undergone rigorous testing, and analysis over a long period of time. In this, it has consistently produced predictable results that can be replicated by others. Calling his "The System" a theory is an insult to science (much like calling Creationism a theory). It is not clearly defined and laid out. Moreover, it lacks the predictive power of a theory and its results cannot be accurately replicated by others (it's not peer reviewed).
I don't know why people take offense at the statement of hiom comparing his thoery with the theory of gravitation. The guy's a scientist so I'm guessing he knows the meaning of the word theory in the scientifical field. A theory is nthing based on postulates, supported by experience, that needs to be tested and [b]can be false. That's what the word ...[text shortened]... nor absolutely right. The theories of gravitation and evolution are fine examples of that.[/b]
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by TalismanI disagree, chess books can help a lot if you select them well and absorb the wisdom they provide. I've certainly learned a lot and improved due to them. Right now, I'm reading Silman's endgame book and I've noticed improvements.
It's taken me a hell of a long time to realise that chess books do not improve your play. Most concentrate solely on the positionla elements of the game with basic principles to be adhered to. If the pawns look like this then i must do that, rooks must be on open files, doubled pawns are weak and must be attacked etc. It's all a load of "BULL"
Chess is a ...[text shortened]... u can find it. Both publications are very eye opening and really cut through the Hype.
09 Apr 08
2 edits
Originally posted by vipiuChess professionals have families and need to eat too. Besides that, if their work is constantly stolen, you can expect that the quality and number of books will go down as well. Consider paying sometimes.
more I see books, more sad I am becoming...so much info...so many books, videos, lessons, games...that I can not read/view/understand...
It is so easy to get them...I downloaded 60+ chess books, I printed and binded so many about 10 but I am so slow in reading them 🙁...just a few(3-4) per year...it is sooo difficult...and after that you also forget 🙁
I ne ...[text shortened]... ere not available for me when I was a kid in school and I had long summer vacations ? 🙁 damn...
BTW: I'm guilty of downloading some chess books too, but I buy the ones I consider good.
09 Apr 08
OK, For somebody who has only been playing chess a couple months...
Out of these two which one is better and why?
Silmans complete endgame course - Jermy Silman
Engame course - Bruce Pandolfini
If you haven't read both please make note of that in your reply.
Thanks again for everybody's help
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by MahoutI agree with your comment on seirawan's books except his endings one. I personally did not find that as good as the rest. Just for everyone else's information, seirawan's books are
All the Yasser Seirawan books are good in my opinion and the title will tell you what they are about - "Winning Chess Endings", "Winning Chess Tactics" etc.
An excellent introductory book on openings is “Discovering Chess Openings”
Building opening skills fromm basic understanding.
by John Emms.
This starts from an explanation as to why 1.a4 is not ...[text shortened]... ryman are good value if you have chosen a particular opening you wish to learn more about.
Play Winning Chess (For players just starting)
Winning Chess Tactics
Winning Chess Strategies (This is a great one! I would put this as the best middle game book for those under 1500 or 1600)
Winning Chess Brilliancies (annotated games)
Winning Chess Combinations (This is a really good one too- kind of a follow up to winning chess tactics)
Winning Chess Openings
Winning Chess Endings (This one I don't recommend, as noted above)
My favorite books that I actually own are
Opening: This is very difficult, since an opening book is useless if you don't play that opening; however, I have found starting out 1.d4 a great one, as well as Lev Alburt's Chess Openings for Black, Explained- if you don't know what opening you want to play, or are less experienced, Seirawan's opening book is great
Middlegame: For less experienced players, Seirawan's strategy book is must; for more advanced players, silman's Reassess your chess if pretty good
Endgame: Silman's complete endgame course is a fantastic one; for the few of you unaaware of how it is set up, it is divided into categories based on rating; you read the part relevant to your rating, shelve it, and then read the next part as you move on to the next rating class; Lev Alburt's just the facts! is a decent book too
Note that when purchasing books, you should not view it in such broad terms; middle game could include strategy and tactics; these could be subdivided into topics like isolated d pawns, etc. I'd also recommend for tactics you either get chess tactics for beginners (goes up to 3 move tactics) or chess tactics for intermediate players (to give you an idea of the difficulty, I am rated 1670 USCF and find most of them on the more difficult, but not impossible side, so intermediate may be too easy or too hard for you); or, you can get C.T. Art 3.0.
Hopefully my comments will help you make an informed decision. 😀
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by CEE DOGI've read parts of Pandolfini's book and own silman's and while pandolfini's is good silman's is better; it is a brilliant book, especially the format as noted in my previous post.
OK, For somebody who has only been playing chess a couple months...
Out of these two which one is better and why?
Silmans complete endgame course - Jermy Silman
Engame course - Bruce Pandolfini
If you haven't read both please make note of that in your reply.
Thanks again for everybody's help
09 Apr 08
3 edits
Originally posted by CEE DOGPandolfini's endgame course book has mistakes in it (somebody forget to proof read it) Glen Wilson set up an errata sight where Chess Players submit corrections:
OK, For somebody who has only been playing chess a couple months...
Out of these two which one is better and why?
Silmans complete endgame course - Jermy Silman
Engame course - Bruce Pandolfini
If you haven't read both please make note of that in your reply.
Thanks again for everybody's help
http://glennwilson.com/chess/books/pec_errata.html
The Silman book is better it's bigger it's got everything you need in it the only thing he doesn't talk about in his book as far as the basics go is the Bishop Knight and King vs King mate.
09 Apr 08
Originally posted by exigentskyMy oh my! Good thing you are teaching what science is all about since I'm obviously lost at this issue. 🙄
A theory is the highest level that an idea can achieve in science. It is the best current understanding of a given phenomena and has undergone rigorous testing, and analysis over a long period of time. In this, it has consistently produced predictable results that can be replicated by others. Calling his "The System" a theory is an insult to science (much ...[text shortened]... a theory and its results cannot be accurately replicated by others (it's not peer reviewed).
Perhaps you wanna read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Real-Science-What-Means/dp/052177229X