I am sorry for disappointning authors of dem018 lesson, but in dem019 lesson they made the same mistake.

The Silent Consensus

In this lesson Jeremy Silman explains very good thing, but the evaluation of the final position is slightly incorrect. The final claim is:

"It's clear that the combination of black's two Bishops, his pressure down the e-file (which will significantly increase after ...Re4 followed by ...Rce8), and white's weakened King, should lead to nothing but suffering for White. The game continued 22.h3 Re4 23.c3 Rce8 24.Rf3 Ba4 25.Rd2 and now (instead of my second best 25...Bb5, which also led to a black victory) 25...Qe7 26.Nf5 Rxe3! would have been devastating."

First of all - the 25. Rd2 is again a blunder, wich has totally lost at once after 25...Qe7 as it is claimed in lesson, but insteed of blunder white can make good move and hold a draw!

For second - after 25...Bb5 white has no easy win! Silman says it is "my second best", but with correct defence white has some chances for a draw in most lines. So it cant be second best. In most continuations after 25...Bb5 black can passively resist any white's activity, so white will be forced to exchange peices to sail into drawish endgame (with black best moves). If white do not exchanging then his main advantage - light squered bishop - may became partially useless, while whites knight and bishop both can defende his pawns and other black squres. Look for this line as most demonstrative: 25... Bb5 26. Qf2 Bc4 27. Qg3 a5 28. Kh2 Qb6 29. Bf2 a4 30. Re3 and light squred bishop has no targets at all (that was not the best moves by both sides, just short example). The winning line for white was 26...Qe7, but after that there is still a lot of tactical complications, for example after 27.b4 Bb6 28. Nf5. In real game it was played not 26...Qe7, but 26...Bxd4 - after that there is a draw everywhere! White just lost this game with the final blunder - he hangs his rook with 29.Bb6, but with 29. Qh4 white has firm draw.

And for third and most important - white can make other 25 move, not allowing black 25....Qe7 at all. For example 25. Re1 or 25. Rd3 still has chances for a draw, or even dare 25. Ra1 Bxd4 26.cxd4 Bb5 27. Qf2 and there is no clear win at all! So the final claim must be totally rewrited.

=========

It is just very grievous to see how the good lessons, with correct core and very wide full explanation ends up with such a mistakes... Why dont you put somebody who would check the sources of all present or upcoming lessons?

Thank you for your feedback on demo lesson 19. Here are my thoughts:

"First of all - the 25. Rd2 is again a blunder, wich has totally lost at once after 25...Qe7 as it is claimed in lesson, but insteed of blunder white can make good move and hold a draw!"

The lesson is not meant to play the best moves for the white side. This lesson is actually going over a real game and therefore white's blunder is an instructive mistake. We should not look at this lesson as a scientific study but rather a learning tool.

"For second - after 25...Bb5 white has no easy win!"

Actually according to the Rybka chess program 25...Bb5 is the second best evaluated move and therefore the "my second best" claim is valid.

"And for third and most important - white can make other 25 move, not allowing black 25....Qe7 at all. For example 25. Re1 or 25. Rd3 still has chances for a draw, or even dare 25. Ra1 Bxd4 26.cxd4 Bb5 27. Qf2 and there is no clear win at all!"

Again, we are not to look at this lesson as a scientific study trying to find the absolute correct line of play upon every move. The author is just showing how the game went rather than how the opponent could have improved. And the claim "should lead to nothing but suffering for White." is a valid claim as Rybka chess program evaluates the position in favor of black at -0.75 after 21...Rfe8

I admit you are right, but that omissions just soil the perfect example, while it example from real played game. Wouldnt it be better If indicate all missed content in the final claim and explain that omissions? For me - i just wanted to see WHY the Bb5 is second best, so i opened the game from chessbase database and saw that Bb5 ends up with a draw in that game and i dont know why and where, so you must understand my "distress". I hope other players just belive the claim and will not open the real game played.

I have been trying to lock in on a single teaching tool to help my game and I love Chess Mentor. The problem is that I can't decide whether I want the online version or the one that installs on my computer.

How are they related? If you buy one do you get the other or at least a break in the price? The local version is great when I don't have Internet Access, but it seems like with the online version there are more courses.

On the other hand, I don't like the time feature because I generally do several things at the same time. I'll take a phone call and by the time I get back to the lesson, I have lost 10 percentage points!

Decisions, decisions ...

Thanks,

Mario

From Chess Mentor I have had to unlearn some things I heard ago. I was playing King's Indian Defense at a practice game in the club and the Expert chided me for posting a knight on the side.   Old theory of course has been

decimated by modernl analysis  and Deep Blue.

I am confused by the instructions at times because the hints change with the changing situation. Sometimes I have to button "Ignore lesson".

I gave up  on a lesson when I made a move and critic said "use the target

you already have before you start a new target. But in my following attempt

the critic said just the opposite, "Start a new target"

I am also consfised as to whether i am actually taking a lesson or an Examination.

I don't have opportunity for discussions as to why I try an idea, as I had remembed in the past. Here  there was  Kings Indian and the Mentor encouraged Black to post Knights on files a and h, which I never did since I was "twitted" by the Club Expert. I was successful playing White in king's Indian but of course I did not play GM's

Please excuse my typos.  Things like cataracts eventually catch up.

I guess you need to go by time to properly allocate your resources, but for us slow people by lesson would be better. I guess a basic question might be; where is the best place in chess.com for a slow person to start?

The time limit is only for the rating's sake. The timing and rating I presume is because of the increasing internatonal importance of short time ( 15 minute) tournaments. One can go back and repeat the lesson as much as one wants.

Perhaps all lessons should be annotated as to what is the game lesson all about, a real game or one with the best move possible.

It might provide an insight and avoid the comments posted here. I have not yet reviewed these demos as I amwaitingfor all bugs to be worked. I can do the analysis but I would rather do it on a known event.

a bit confusing,im a diamond member so i can access all lessons.  The lessons are never ending ,always adding new ones or do they end and you cant go any further? an imperfectworld where the answers are sometimes unclear,makes me smack my head

We do add new courses and lessons each and every month.

I think CM is fantastic and is a tremendous learning resource. It blows me away.

I sit here and shake my head at some of the dummies on this forum who blast it and say it's worthless.

Like anything in life you get out of it what you put into it.

I'm especially fond of using the advanced custom training options. For example, I can say i want to study minor piece endgames with problems rated between 1000 and 1500 and viola all of a sudden I'm engaged in a specific chess problem. Learning, thinking, calculating, and interacting with a board that gives me hints and advice as to why a move I chose wasn't the best. Or if I want more continuity, I can go thru one lesson sequentially. It's like a series of really good chess books that you can interact with that keep getting chapters added to them. I mean what more could you want?

Anyways that's my .02 about it.

Definitely one of the best things about this site for players like me who are trying to get better.

    I love the Chess mentor, it is way better than a chess book. As I go thru the lessons I can take a guess at the move, if my guess is wrong, the problem resets. If I can't solve the problem, I can get a hint. If I use a chess book I must look the answer up in the back of the book. So the book is an all or nothing, and the chess mentor lets me try ideas out. If I am still stuck, I can ask Chess mentor what piece is moved. I still don't have the full answer, but this is usually a major hint. I also like to repeat the lesson immediately, because that helps me lock down the concept.

                                                                             Cardman