Endgame: Dvoretsky or Silman?

Have read chunks of DEM, having a fairly basic chess knowledge.

DEM is not a difficult book, in the sense that there is not significant pre-requisite chess knowledge or understanding. To illustrate, you won't come across references to obscure opening variations which you're expected to know, or be expected to understand a complex middlegame position at a glance. The book is complex and has dense examples, but very much in a from-first-principles sort of way.

For those with the background, imagine jumping into Wald's "General Relativity" as a first GR book as a postgrad student.

I'm a legit 2100 (aside from all those rated forfeit wins I would've lost or drawn if played out) and I don't think this is such a dumb question. What, everyone rated +2100 is supposed to be an expert on all endgame books? I own over a dozen and not one is by Silman or Dvoretsky which also leaves me out of the loop here in trying to choose between them - or makes me "dumb" if I ask for anyone else's opinion I guess...

Does the following make atahan a "legit 2100?"

The man that started this thread has not logged in for the last 16 months.  Although that does not prevent us from blogging about the issue I find it hilarious.  NimzoDave was the one  reviving the thread so cheers to that!

You know not much has changed in the past four years.

Nimzo, your USCF rating is 1805 according to the information you provided. No, I don't consider chess.com's rating to be a "legit" rating.

But your point is valid. The question is one that deserves a clear answer. Dvoretsky's endgame books are far better than Silman's books.

I agree with other posters that there are some excellent endgame resources available that aren't written by Dvoretsky or Silman.

My own favorites include

 Fundamental Chess Endings by Mueller and Lamprecht, Analysing the Endgame by Speelman,

Batsford Chess Endings by Speelman, Tisdall and Wade,

Rook Endings by Levenfish and Smyslov (even though there are numerous mistakes, it was the book I used to learn Rook endings.)

Mastering the Endgame by Shereshevsky.

For absolute beginners, I like books by Flear and Pandolfini over Silman. I know, nobody likes Pandolfini. But his explanation of the B+N mate is a classic! I really appreciate his verbal explanations of the endgames!

Smyslovfan yes my now long since inactive USCF rating is 1805 (OTB) but I agree that my turn-based rating here hardly indicates I'd be rated the same at USCF now my mostly uneducated guess is I'd be about 300 pts lower USCF CC rated if I was active there.

At any rate be careful of comparing apples to oranges - ie postal ratings to OTB and active to inactive ratings. But in general I agree with you that the ratings here are inflated compared to USCF but these ratings are still "legit" certainly for here (except for cheaters of course) at least and the Glicko rating system is certainly legit IMHO although it may not be the best one out there.

For what it's worth, I'm working through silman's book now and am really enjoying it :0)

Nimzo, I don't mean any disrespect to you. But if you were to go to a chess tournament and start chatting with some of the players there, would you tell them you are 2100 or 1800?

When discussing endgames, I would trust the outdated OTB rating over a current correspondence rating to give me a sense of the quality of the player.

But as I said, your original point was valid. And I wouldn't rely on ratings as much as I would on the quality of your comments to make any judgements.

Dvoretsky is miles ahead of Silman in terms of knowledge and experience.

He may not be as accesible, but his books have more to offer. If you want to improve, you have to suffer a bit.

Silman's books are more accesible, but he leaves out complex positions like R vs. K + B or K + B mate.

The better question is who is better: Muller or Dvoretsky?

You could even add in Nunn. He is a strong English grandmaster who published a two volume series on endgames. He also has his own opening encyclopedia.

Nunn for beginners (Understanding Chess Endgames, otherwise his two volume set is quite good), Muller for intermediates, and Dvoretsky for class B and above.

I noticed in Dvoretsky's "From the author" section of the Endgame Manual, he mentions that he prepared a series of lectures on the general principles of endgame play for the Moscow High School for Sports.  He then goes on to say, that the main ideas of that series became (with his permission) the basis of the book Endgame Strategy by Shereshevsky.  If he is the originator of that content, that is just one more reason why Dvoretsky is the greatest endgame author of all time.

Regarding the general question of Dvoretsky v. Silman, the question is somewhat ridiculous in my view, since the Silman book is so much less complex and dense.  Silman provides easily understandable and very wordy presentations of a realtively small number of important endgame positions, and is one of many beginner endgame books that could be read prior to the Endgame Manual.  Silman, or the equivalent thereof, would be a prerequisite to Dvoretsky.

well, i have the Dvoretsky and i am interested to read the silman . But i can't find the free pdf version of silman on net search. Can  anyone help me- from where can i download the pdf version for free?

Don't think there is a fee download available for that one, if there is one it would be illegal.

I have Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual but my favourite endgame books are

• Six Hundred Endings by Lajos Portisch and Balazs Sarkozy
• Chess Endgames by Laszlo Polgar
• Chess Endgame Training by Bernd Rosen

I like them because examples and explanations are short - 10 min is enough to go througn one example. Polgar is an extreme in this sense - there are no explanations at all, just the required result and the moves. You have to figure out all the rest by youself - this makes you work really hard.

Shereshevsky's book is brilliant. But it doesn't try to do what DEM or Silman's endgame book tries to do. If a person is looking to learn how to play all endgames, Shereshevsky's books (Endgame Strategy and his two volumes on Mastering the Endgame) won't help. They aren't encyclopedic, and they don't focus on basic endgames (when a K+P can beat a K, for example).

Again, Shereshevsky's books are fantastic. But they can't replace a good basic endgame book such as DEM. They complement such basics very well though.

I own Silmans endgame book, but have never read Dvoretskys. Its always checked out at the library, I know I can buy it, but meh. I like taking chess books from the library, something Ive done since I was a kid. But I have read Tragicomedy in the endgame, that was a helpful book

I didn't like SIlman's book.  I much prefer de la Villa's 100 Endgames You Must Know coupled with Nunn's Understanding Chess Endings.

And Encyclopedia of Chess Endings Volume 1 and 2 for practice (for the rest of my life!!)

Shereshevsky Endgame Strategy is a good book, but it's strategic endgame book. While Endgame Manual is a theoretical endgame book.

Anyone who want to improve their endgame should study strategic and theoretical endgames.

Endgame Positions to know by heart :

   Chess Endings : Essential Knowledge by Averbakh

   Just the Facts! by Alburt and Krogius

   GM RAM by Ziyatdinov

   Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual by Dvoretsky

Learning the technique of endgame play :

   Practical Endgame Lessons by Mednis

   Rate Your Endgame by Mednis

   Endgame Strategy by Shereshevsky

   Technique for the Tournament Player by Dvoretsky

Study these books diligently and you will have IM level (at least) endgame knowledge.