Comparison: Reassess Chess vs. Amateur's Mind

I recently bought a pair of books I believe will change the way I perceive--and play--chess. "The Amateur's Mind: Turning Chess Misconceptions into Chess Mastery" by Jeremy SIlman, and "Josh Waitzkin's Attacking Chess" by Josh Waitzkin. 

However, I keep seeing this book by Silman, "How to Reassess Your Chess." Has anyone read both of these Silman texts? Are they redundant? Should I forget about reading both now? How do they compare?

Maybe I should read all three this winter. Read the books, play on Chess.com, and spar with a superior chess opponent on Chessmaster 10th edition.

When spring arrives I'll be a different player.

I have read them both, In my opinion the amauteurs mind if for players not ready for the reassess your chess. in other words I would start with the amauteurs mind and then reassess your chess, both are excellent books.

This is judging on your turn-based rating, but either of those books at 1300 level will not improve your chess.

Take this game for example: http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=42460130#

You lost because of repeated tactical mistakes. Studying tactics would have eventually won that game instead of lost it. Almost all games at 1300 level are lost because of tactics.

Studying Silman's Books will only teach you about strategy, a concept you don't need to understand at 1300 level. It will only reduce your improvement because you need to be studying tactics, not strategy, and take it from me - Silman's Books take a lot of time to work through well, and that time would be better used on tactics.

The Silman Books will be brilliant when you stop making common tactical mistakes.