Has any one else tried to learn or apply Bangiev Squares Strategy?

My take on the material he has presented is that you have to do a lot of work to organize it to make it first understandable and then apply it in real chess games. I think it has great possibilities once you organize it. I know with any thing new there's a learning curve, but his presentation to solid ideas can be a turn off to his Squares Strategy. Does anyone eles think the same way? 

What is that?

I bought the first cd and it is over my head, yet there is a nagging feeling that there is something t it,

I think the explanation is poor - yet I could say that about most chess books

I need more words.

For example, when someone say the strategy is e4 - well, what does that mean?

Do I defend the e4 square, do I attack the e4 square, what pieces and / or formation should I use, do I castle kingside, do I castle queenside, do I make sure to keep my white bishop or my black bishop, should I line the rooks up on the e column, blah blah......

If anyone writes a chess book that uses more words that notation and example games in notation they will make a fotune :-)

Glanced at it.  Then realized that it is clearly not (as in WAY above!!) for my level (1700 USCF) and any promises of a "silver bullet" for understanding positions in a "brand new way" is nothing but sleazy salespitch for snake-oil.

What I will agree on though, is that there are really advanced ideas and that this work should belong on the same shelf as "corresponding squares theory" and "two weaknesses" and is best reserved for really strong players who put in a lot of hard work covering everything they needed to know FIRST, before tackling something like this.

its worth mentioning something else:

I did try to apply what I thought I learned in one fo the few OTB games I played in tournamants and I easily beat a much more experienced player, however, I really don't know exactly how I won................

tony1kenobi, I know once your start to understand and assimilate strategic space into your opening to gain strategic space and middle game plan's aim to control, exploit, or convert you'll start to have better chances to win or draw games.  As far as e4- ...etc.  and the triangles they define, just let the posting of the opponent's king define the strategic space you want to win, maintain, convert, or exploit to gain a space advantage, and posting of own king will define the strategic space you'll want to defend; also, this space will change as your are playing the game because of castling, material exchanges, and tempi...etc. Have fun!  

Thanks for clarifying that, Tonydal.  I'm too weak to have gone ahead and qualified that as hooey ... just thought it was too grown-up for me :)