My System - advice

I'm planning to spend part of my Xmas present book token on My System by Nimzowitsch.  I intend to get the 21st Century Edition - I understand the moves are transcribed to algebraic notation.  Can anyone confirm that & does anyone have any comments?  I assume that is the best edition to get?

Thanks, Chris

Yes "My System" is in nf3 bc6 etc. form. Its a great book but might be a bit confusing and might need 2-3 reads to understand its full concept of what he's trying to say.

the 21st edition is algebric ...yes ....confirmed , its a great classic but not to be the first book to read in the subject.....another advice , Watson book "secrets of modern chess strategy" (which is not less advanced) but considered a continuation to what nimzo had started and includes more recent trends and games.

If you're working your way through My System, don't forget to check this out.  :)

http://blog.chess.com/likesforests/my-system---join-the-adventure

Thanks for the advice everyone.  I borrowed my local library's copy recently & thought it was as good as its reputation states - but that was descriptive, & it's a classic so I should have my own copy anyway :-)

Pity about the typos though - maybe I'll ponder before I jump in & get it.

Nice blog likesforests - will make sure i work my way through it - maybe I don't need the book after all :-)

Has anyone got this edition of My System (the cover below)?  Does it use algebraic or descriptive notation?  Any other comments?  (bbracken advises that the 21st Century edition has lots of typos - is this any better?)

Thanks for any advice.  Chris

I have it. It uses algebraic and it's quite readable. Watson writes a harsh review, but realize Watson and Aagaard are engaged in a long-running feud.

That's great - thanks for the reply, likesforests - I'll probably get it. 

(I'm also tempted by the Watson book recommended above though - but maybe that will have to wait until next Xmas ...)

Here's an excerpt from both editions:

1.By development we mean the strategic march of the troops towards the border

The procedure is the same as the advance at the beginning of a war: both combatant armies seek to reach the border as quickly as they can in order to penetrate into enemy territory if it is possible.

   "Development" is a collective concept; one is not developed if one has only brought out 1-2 or even 3 pieces, but the idea is much rather that all the pieces should be developed. It is good -- if I may say so -- that the period of development be marked with the spirit of democracy. For example, think how undemocratic it would be to allow one of the pieces (your officers, as it were) to go on a long walking tour, while the others were sitting at home extremely bored. No, each piece will make one move -- then mark time.

from My System, Quality Chess Edition

1. By development we mean the strategic advance of the troops to the frontier line

The process is similar to the advance on the outbreak of a war. Both armies seek to reach the frontier as quickly as possible in order to penetrate into enemy territory.

Development is a collective conception. To have developed one, two, or three pieces does not mean that we are developed. The situation demands that all pieces be developed. The period of development should be inspired by a democractic spirit. How undemocratic for instance, it would be to let one of your officers go for a long walking tour, while the others kicked their heels together at home and bored themselves horribly. No, let each officer make one move only, and... dig himself in.

from My System, 21st Century Edition

That's great - the Quality Chess Ed is a much better translation it seems.  Really appreciated, likesforests - thanks again.

Well, yeah, I had said this before in a previous forum post, but Nimzowitsch tends to write for the audience of the time (1925), who might not even see, let only read, or own, but a few chess books in their lifetime.  He tends to self-promote a bit (which was common for authors of that time, though we frown on it these days, since they also had to use the book to convey their relatively unknown reputations due to a lack of mass media), but the ideas are sound, and have proven themselves over time.  That he uses his own games a lot, probably was to reinforce his own revolutionary (at the time) ideas...

You'll have to bounce around through the text quite a bit to get anything out of it.  It's definitely not a book for someone just starting out at chess.  But I think that you could certainly improve your game by working through it.

I have the Chess Classics version and it too uses algebraic.