Any Use Studying Old Chess Master Games?

Chess newbie here. 

Have been playing since last year only.  I've enjoyed learning from folks on this site and have a question concerning "old" chess master games? 

When looking online (esp. Youtube), I see there are a good number of vids from old legends like Bobby Fischer, Capablanca, Kasparov, etc. 

I'm really wondering if it's a good idea to watch those videos for instructional purposes?  The reason why I ask is that chess is supposedly ever evolving and I've heard it said that many of Fischer's tactics/strategy wuold not necessarly work today (due to improvements and responses). 

Yet, I can't help it, lol.  I am still fascinated by figures like Fischer (especially him!).  And so I watch his games, yet wonder if insights from them should be incorporated into one's own game.  Or is this dangerous due to the time lag?  Would we be essentially learning outdated material that others would know how to exploit? 

I'm literally at beginning stages of teh game, so I want to build a good foundation for myself. 

What value do you guys take from watching these old games?  And how should we approach them (i.e., just as entertaniment value...a cautioned approach to learning from them....etc.)? 

Ideas will generally stand the test of time, even if the exact moves aren't 100% accurate. Try and take a key theme from each game i.e. how to make use of a passed pawn, getting rooks on the 7th rank etc

Playing over "old games" (whatever that means) played by GMs certainly can't hurt, as a newbie I'd concentrate on "really old games" played by Morphy, Anderssen and their contemporaries for starters to learn basic tactics (and alll sorts of opening errors and blunders to avoid playing yourself)

Reading one or more of the following books couldn't hurt either

Logical Chess Move By Move by Irving Chernev

Common Sense In Chess by Dr Lasker

Anything  written by J R Capablanca

Masters of the Chessboard by Richard Reti

Massive use. Watch Anand's wonderful demoition of Aronion from yesterday, then find the game Rotlevi v. Rubinstein, 1907, and play through that. One of the reasons Anand found Bc5 and Nde5 was that he was working from the tactical pattern recalled from that game. Chessbase has a nice article about it up now.

A critical opening line may have been played that has since been refuted. Usually this can be checked. Also none of the players you mentioned are old: They're very much adherents of modern chess. I expect their main plans are very much relevant.

You need to go way back to run into problems: Pioneers like Nimzowitsch and Reti started playing Indian games or games with delayed centre forming. The old masters considered this to be a cardinal sin. Old masters from some 150 years ago by now...

That doesn't mean you can't look at old games. Conventional development with a healthy pawn structure was somewhat favoured here, unless we're talking romantic players. Romantic means ''gambit all you can while you know the opponent will take everything offered also.'' 

Note that structural play is not bad for beginners at all. It takes skill to handle a cramped position or a position with a backwards or isolated pawn. Compensation comes from active piece play. This is something modern masters are better at.

Those old masters you mentioned are former world champions. Studying their games especially the middle game and endgame phase will help very much. 

Studying master games is a great way to improve chess, ESPECIALLY if you have well-annotated games and you cover up the moves of the winning side and see if you can work out what each move is (you might want to play through the first 5 or 6 moves before starting this technique).  Logical Chess Move By Move by Irving Chernev is excellent for this purpose.  33 master games with every move clearly and simply annotated, even 1. e4.  It's a classic that has been around over 50 years and has never been out of print.  Says something about quality.

There's a huge amount to be gained from playing over master games from 100+ years ago and right into the mid-20th century. These players were brilliant, and their winning ideas in the middlegame and endgame will never go out of style. 300 years from now people will still be studying Capablanca's endgame technique.

What has changed in modern times is opening theory. But unless you're a GM preparing to play another GM for a title shot, you probably don't have to worry about that right now. Those guys study incredibly complicated opening lines right up to move 20 and beyond, looking for a microscopic advantage that you and I could never exploit in a million years. The standard Spanish, Sicilian, French, English, and Italian games will carry us well into class A and probably beyond before we have to start worrying about modern theory.

My free lessons course on YouTube addresses the question of what to  study. It all comes down to how much time you have. Everyone has an opinion of what to look at, plus we study what we wish to look at. However, if time is limited, your priority should be to look at your games, and study those so as to improve your own play and analysis capabilities. You can find my videos on my website, linked as my homepage in the "about Me" section of my profile here.

Thanks for teh recommendation for Logical Chess.  Sounds like a good book. 

And I was surprised so many supported watching old games.  Great.  Makes me feel better about it and not as worried now! 

http://calnewport.com/blog/2010/01/06/the-grandmaster-in-the-corner-office-what-the-study-of-chess-experts-teaches-us-about-building-a-remarkable-life/

http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/11/25/to-develop-expertise-motivation-is-necessary-but-insufficient/

motivate studying games, guessing the moves.  I wrote 

http://www.chess.com/download/view/guess-the-move (which is free) for this purpose.  It comes with 500 old master games.

thanks travis.  very very helpful. 

just a quick follow-up, how can we get access to an annotated game?  are there any online?  it'd be neat seeing how a great thinker through his or her games.

thanks and peace!

yes traves ty to u too... btw just search for "annotated pgn" nd ull find lots of games

Exactly. Anand even mentioned that specific game (Rotlevi v. Rubinstein, 1907) in his press interview after the game with Aronian.

One could argue that a good chess education should include playing over master games from the past... IN ORDER. That is... start with some of the real oldies (Labourdonnais, Andersson) and then continue with Morphy, Steinitz, Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, etc.

Alright, thanks, Travis! 

Will bookmark this thread.  I'm not sure I would be anywhere near teh level of play to benefit from some of those books, but perhaps as I progress they may later become useful. 

But, nevertheless, thanks for taking the time to offer help and suggestions!  And thanks to everyone else again!  Good luck to you all!!!

Oh, and, Travis, you should take a look at that link someone posted above...uit's the freakononomics one, I believe.  They have a strategy for improving that is similar or maybe even exactly like yours.  

They call it deliberate practice.  I thought it was cool.  It seems to be really like what you're saying too.

Well, a good part of my understanding in strategy come from studying old master games.

Besides, as a beginner, you should be more than proud to do the same kind of "mistakes" as Capablanca or Lasker !!

Nice thread, glad I stumbled on this!