Here is the rebuke from Mr. Silman
http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_js/js_rapid_chess_improv.htm
Who would I prefer as a teacher:
A guy who has studied chess tactics for 8-12 hours a day for a year to go from 900 to 2000 elo. Not explained how he has a life and a job with so little time left to do anything else (just as well it is possible to read chess books on the toilet). Has only trained himself and no one else. He burnt himself out with this crazy chess fanaticism and then he gave up after one year.
Or
An international master (2400+) and professional chess mentor and author who has taught everybody from promising juniors and chess hacks like me how to improve at their own pace.
Studying tactics is very important to improving and Michael de la Maza just states the obvious and provides unrealistic study timetables for real people. In my opinion, it is better to use the chess tactics trainer here or elsewhere (checkout chessbase DVDs as well) than follow this lunatic. Also, ignoring chess strategy as this guy advocates, is ignoring one of the main reasons why chess is a great game.
I can't help but be curious about this book. "Rapid Chess improvement:A study plan for Adult Players" by M. dMaza. It provides anecdotes and criticisims on typical coaching style of certain coach/authors systems which are not really applicable to class players.It even has criticisms on Sillman's books (balanced criticisim of course.
).