What's the proper way to study Chess?

I've been trying to properly study chess for some time now and my only conclusion so far is that what I'm currently doing (playing more games) is obviously not working.

I can see how practicing end games and memorizing openings can be considered "studying," but how about studyng general aspects of the game? How is it normally done?

Is it about visualizing ways to force moves using a knight and a rook, two bishops and a king, etc?

Have a look at these two books:

http://blog.chess.com/farbror/paddy-patzers-pile-of-books-studying-chess-made-easy

 

http://www.amazon.com/Chess-Training-Budding-Champions-Jesper/dp/1901983471/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1272329177&sr=8-1

Chess mentor has to be the best invention ever.  That along with tactics trainers and all the computer workout courses.

Put a good chunk of hours into those as often as you can and it can only help you.

i love using videos; they seem to really help me where other mediums do not.  :)

Record every game and go over it with your opponet and later with someone who plays better than you do, an expert would be even better.

I'll tell you when, and if I quit SUCKEN at it myself.

Since I've taken a serious look into chess... First, I blundered pieces badly. Working tactics and playing games to gain experience helped this. Then, I found that sometimes, I just didn't know what to do after all my pieces were developed. Studying a few Morphy & Anderssen games helped my figure methods of attack, and Seirwan's winning chess strategies (and a long ago reading of How to Reassess Your Chess) helped me to spot weaknesses in the opponent's armor. Then, I found that if my attack didn't lead to mate, I screwed up every possible endgame scenario. I'm currently working through Silman's endgame book, and learning quite a lot. I'm finding though, that my move selection isn't always the best. I don't use my pieces as an army, I use my non-pawns to wreak havoc, then scramble for an endgame. I'm not sure what the solution to that is... Hopefully going over my games to find flaws and going over GM games to see how they do it better. So, to answer your question... Try to figure out where you're hurting most and plug the hole. Endgames are exceedingly deep and important, as are tactics. I don't think your opening matters asking as you can make your middlegame create the endgame you desire. (Edited to try to add line breaks. Can't figure it out, sorry for the monster block of text!)

Great response, JimSardonic!

One very useful approach is to avoid distractions. It's almost strange how difficult it is to actually be studying chess itself, instead of surfing web pages and posing questions about chess, for instance. I see there's a user on the front page right now who has posed completely inconsequential questions, four of them on the front page (!), in General Discussion about Chess - I would say that user is not studying chess in the proper way.

But it's also a question of perspective. Let's say you want to create chess pieces. Your study of chess would then involve examining prior experiences, the selecting and curing of wood, woodworking, design, etc.

My chief recommendation would be to consider any time not spent working on your repertoire and depth to be a complete waste. Maybe also work on tactics, instead of question posing skills.

Wasn't your rating just 1540 or something like that a couple months ago?

can anyone tell me what's a chess mentor?

is it a real person or just a program or something?

---

 Who ?