In your eyes, what is the most effective way to study chess from a book? Is it to study with a board right in front of you, or to collect pgns of each lesson, in order to quickly review them later?

I have chosen PGNs, so that I may come back and study them without having to set it up on a board each time. If you also do this, what program do you use? Chessbase and the like aren't appealing, as they only allow one to save the games by player names, not page number. It would be impossible to find the PGN, especially if there aren't any players listed. However, Winboard for example, doesn't allow the insertion of variations. So, is there any program which allows one to save the game however one chooses, as well as allowing the insertion of variations?

Thanks,

Chess Novice Extraordinaire, The_Brain9

I like to work with a board while I'm studying a book. I think I learn better if I'm actually moving pieces while I'm absorbing the written material. If I have time I use a combination of methods. I use a board to follow a lesson or example in a book. I'll have the SCID database program open to look up games with similar positions. I'll also have another program open to actually play the position. That way I can follow the example on a real board, see how better players have dealt with that type situation, and actually play it and experiment with variations. I don't often get that kind of time but I like how it totally immerses me in the lesson.

I'm not really decided yet. Behind a board, I find myself reading the book and not really watching the board; whereas when I can just click through the game on a PC, my brain seems to turn off. Lately I study on the train (2x15 minutes daily), and then a magnetic chess set is all I have. OTOH, I plan to make PGNs of some books.

I use Scid, it's free and awesome.

You can still just save by player name (or at least, it'll want you to fill in player names), but there is no reason why you can't use "Page 183" for a player name.

If you use a chess set that's just pixels when studying you will have some trouble using one that's got a bit more in competiton.  You should use a real board sometimes to keep the vision of the board.  For myself and some other long time correspondence players it takes some effort to "see" a real board now since it is so different from what I normally use.  Since I don't play OTB much it doesn't matter to me but for you?

Also, on the plus side of using a computer, is that when the text says "and white is winning", you can turn on Rybka and see if you can win against it. I haven't used that much yet, but it should really help.

On the negative side, it's too easy to just turn on Rybka and follow its variations instead of trying to see simple tactical points etc yourself.

I know it's a tad off the topic in a way, but I find that the Chessbase and chesslecture.com videos are stellar for learning - especially for me.  Here's a quick write up on chess videos in general:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/904029/chess_video_lectures_are_they_for_you.html?cat=19

I use ChessBase, look up the game in a database, play through it using the book. That way, I input the variationa as I go along. Also good is the ability to look at other games played by the same person with the same opening that is not mentioned in the book. I'm not that worried about saving the game with a page number, I just use the player's name or move the game to a seperate folder for future review.