Curious. Has it ever happened where 2 players, possibly both young players, who face off against each other, and they both have the exact same opening repertoire? And it's because they use the exact same recommended book. Wouldn't that be funny?
Could I ask some opinions of a few of specific chess books?
Sort:
Dec 11, 2017
0
#23
SeniorPatzer wrote:
Has it ever happened where 2 players, possibly both young players, who face off against each other, and they both have the exact same opening repertoire? And it's because they use the exact same recommended book. Wouldn't that be funny?
I'll bet it has happened many times. One of my biggest frustrations is when I outbook my opponents, which I often do at our local chess club, only to go on to lose. I painfully lost a game that way just last week, to an older guy who either had a better "static evaluation function" and/or could look deeper than I in the endgame. I got the better position and a pawn ahead, which is typical of my play since I know openings so well, but the middlegame got complicated and that's where I think he outplayed me. I might even post that game in the Analysis section if I can't figure out where I went wrong. So far I'm so upset over that loss that I can't bring myself to look it yet.
Moral: Chess is more than the opening. It's also the middlegame, endgame, tactics, static evaluation, and heuristics (especially opening-specific), and more.
RussBell wrote:
... I am not saying that "Winning Chess Openings" by Seirawan is not a useful book. In fact for what it is - a cursory overview of the major openings - it serves its purpose well, perhaps even very well. But it should not be confused as being similar to some of the more comprehensive openings references such as "FCO Fundamental Chess Openings" by Paul van der Sterren (which is an outstanding single volume openings reference IMO). ...
I don't think that there can be much doubt about the case for FCO, if one wants a comprehensive single volume openings reference. However, one might find that such a desire is somewhat in conflict with a desire for a readable introduction to the openings.
"... [FCO] is not particularly suited for players who are just starting out. I would imagine players rated at least 1400-1500 would get the most benefit from this volume. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2010)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626173432/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen128.pdf
"... [Seirawan] writes in a manner accessible to the average reader, and, even if they have not accumulated much in the way of chess understanding, upon reading this book, they will be a lot better off than they were before picking it up. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2013) in the review of Winning Chess Openings
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
SeniorPatzer wrote:
Curious. Has it ever happened where 2 players, possibly both young players, who face off against each other, and they both have the exact same opening repertoire? And it's because they use the exact same recommended book. Wouldn't that be funny?
Hilarious!
To a large extent, my early chess education was based on Reinfeld, Horowitz, and Chernev, but, when it comes to openings, my impression is that Emms and Seirawan are better. However, I must confess to having fond memories of some of the Horowitz introductory openings writings that were based, to a large extent, on sample games. A Reinfeld/Horowitz opening book helped to give me the nerve to play in my first tournament.
"Good - Worth buying" - FM Carsten Hansen 2013 assessment of Winning Chess Openings by GM Seirawan
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
Stauntonmaster wrote:
Seirawan’s books are not good enough as he talks about too many things at the same time and skipping some very fundamental subjects. The best chess books are the ones written in the past like Reinfelds, Horowitz and Chernev.
I disagree. For me Seirawan's book like Winning Chess Strategy is better than Logical Chess Move by Move. Winning Chess Strategy has more diverse topics that are explained well for beginners. I like that this book is thematic. Pattern recognition is easier to attain if topics are arrange by themes.
Isn't it Winning Chess Strategies?
The thing about these sorts of disagreements is that they often fail to take into account the reader. I would guess that it is quite possible that Logical Chess would be better for one reader and Winning Chess Strategies would be better for another. The target audiences seem to me to be somewhat different. Chernev was writing a stand-alone book aimed (I think) for the person who knew little more than the rules. It seems that he did particularly well with that intention. Seirawan, on the other hand, was writing a series and understandably aimed his Strategies book for those who were at least already somewhat conversant with the sort of material in Play Winning Chess. Indeed, if I remember correctly, the Strategies book was third in the series that had already included the Play and Tactics books. The Seirawan books were written about two decades ago, and seem to me to have done well enough since then.
Getting back to the choice between Emms and Seirawan for openings, I think it is largely the same sort of issue. Both are reasonable choices, and the best decision probably depends on what the reader wants and is ready for. The Emms book is primarily an explanation of principles. The Seirawan book is more ambitious, aiming also to work systematically through introductions to the major openings and even offer the reader a start on a preliminary repertoire.
I have been considering the Emms book that VapourTrail-UK asked about - Discovering Chess Openings. Since we started with a question about DCO and WCO, I have been assuming that VT is not yet interested in the sort of extensive specific opening coverage that is found in lots of other Emms opening books. I think it is fair to say that WCO is aiming to take the reader farther than DCO. Whether or not that is a good thing depends, I think, on the reader.
Stauntonmaster wrote:
Logical chess move by move is s classic whereas Seirawan chess strategy is just a normal instruction book with some general rules about chess which can be found in any other cheap book for beginners.
Logical Chess Move by Move is also an instruction book. Many masters actually criticize Logical Chess Move by Move. You won't find in a cheap beginner's book that has the depth and diversity that Seirawan has written in his strategy book. The OP's first book is Play Winning Chess. So it means he does not know important concepts like when is a knight or bishop is superior to each other. Space advantage. Minority attack. Counter attack. Proplaxis.When to attack the king. King attacks. What are pawn weaknesses and pawn structure and how to use your pawns. Weak square. The king power and many more . This book also introduces various great players to inspire beginners. Hence for me this Seirawan book is better as it contains more various topics. Beginner's mind will have diversity on his thinking. Chernver's book contain mostly king attacks.Winning Chess Strategy has many instructive annotations that contains good verbal and analysis on various topics. With Logical book there are many situations in which he keep saying the same things.
Stauntonmaster wrote:
The reason why many people do not like Seirawan’s book is because it is too general and the examples shown for different principals is very few, also the book lacks good amount of exercises. It is a book for just a quick browse but does not contain much info. Logical Chess Move by Move is the favourite of every master because the author has explained every single move in very lucid and clear language and most aspects of tactical and strategical play are covered in the book. That is every master recommends Logical Chess Move by Move.
Many like Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess. It has over 500 reviews at amazon. Does it mean Bobby Fischer Teaches chess is the best book for a beginner?Actually many like Winning Chess Strategy. And many masters also recommend the book for a beginner. An IM even claimed that solving puzzles and studying Winning Chess Strategy alone took him to IM level. At least the Seirawan book has exercises. The Chernev book does not have exercises. Define to general? Did you actually read Winning Chess Strategy book? It is not a book for quick browse as many of the games are nicely annotated with variations good enough for a beginner. It has many good examples. Again Chernev's book lack diversity as it is mostly kings attacks and quick victories. Chernev keeps repeating the things he told and that is a waste of space. For example in every game he has long explanation on 1.e4. Same idea but different wordings.
Stauntonmaster wrote:
The reason why Seirawan’s Winning Strategy never found enough audience is because it is very basic and suitable only for players upto 1400 ELO and second it lacks exercises and the examples are too specific and not broad and comprehensive enough. That is the main reason why chess tutors and chess master rarely or never recommeded it to their students or public. There is another book which is very good and recommended by all chess tutors and masters: Best Lessons of a Chess Coach but unlike Seirawan’s booksit is very hard to find it nowadays.
A player who is above 1400 elo is no longer a beginner. I am talking about a beginner. Many beginners like Winning Chess Strategy. And as i told that an IM claimed that Winning Chess Strategy alone together with tactical study took him to IM level. For me Winning Chess Strategy is a better beginner's book than Logical Chess Move by Move and Best Lesson of a Chess Coach as these books lacks diversity and most short games about attacking. Winning Chess Strategy has a good depth and diversity for a beginner's book. For a beginner's book, the book is comprehensive. I believe you have never read this book as you are wrong with what you are telling. Logical book does not even have exercises.
'Logical Chess Move by Move" by Irving Chernev is a collection of grandmaster games from the first half of the 20th century. Every move of every game is commented on. The book is targeted to the beginner-novice chess reader who is interested in understanding how chess is played at a high level (i.e., good chess). In this sense it is a useful, instructive book for the intended audience.
"Winning Chess Strategies" by Yasser Seirawan is a different kind of book, the focus of which is explaining basic strategic-planning and positional chess concepts, and is also targeted to the beginner-novice audience. For its purpose it is also useful and very instructive.
Each of these books would serve the intended audience well. In fact it would be beneficial to read both books together, as they will complement one another.
Finally, "Best Lessons of a Chess Coach" by Weeramantry (a well-known and respected chess coach) is concerned with analyzing the games of beginner-novice chess players where the author points out typical amateur mistakes and provides instructive commentary for improved play. Again, it should also prove instructive and helpful to the beginner-novice player.
jambyvedar wrote:
.... Actually many like Winning Chess Strategy. And many masters also recommend the book for a beginner. An IM even claimed that solving puzzles and studying Winning Chess Strategy alone took him to IM level. At least the Seirawan book has exercises.
I might try this approach, along with reading My System and Weapons of Chess for enjoyment (I really like the tone of the prose), and watching opening and endgame videos (for some passive learning).
One can get some idea of the lasting scope of the respect for My System by looking at:
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
Still, it might be noted that My System apparently did not occur to GM Yasser Seirawan as something to include in his list of personal favorites, and Aaron Nimzowitsch was not identified by the GM as a very worthy author.
Also, My System has accumulated some direct negative commentary over the years.
"... I found [the books of Aaron Nimzowitsch to be] very difficult to read or understand. ... [Nimzowitsch: A Reappraisal by Raymond Keene explains his] thinking and influence on the modern game in a far more lucid and accessible way. ... The books that are most highly thought of are not necessarily the most useful. Go with those that you find to be readable; ..." - GM Nigel Davies (2010)
In 2016, IM pfren wrote:
"My System is an iconoclastic book. A lot of things in there is sheer provocation, and it does need an expereienced player to know what exactly must be taken at its face value.
I love 'My System', and I have read it cover to cover one dozen times, but suggesting it to a class player is an entirely different matter."
"[Some things] ARE wrong, and it's not easy for a non-advanced player to discover those wrong claims.
Nigel Short has claimed that 'My System' should be banned. Stratos Grivas says that the book is very bad. I don't share their opinion, but I am pretty sure that there are more useful reads for class players out there."
Although he is a fan of My System, IM John Watson similarly acknowledged (2013) that:
"... Not everything in it has stood the test of time, ..."
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/john-watson-book-review-108-of-eplus-books-part-2-nimzowitsch-classics
One last point to keep in mind is that, even if My System would eventually help a player, it might not necessarily be helpful to a player now.
"... Just because a book contains lots of information that you don’t know, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be extremely helpful in making you better at this point in your chess development. ..." - Dan Heisman (2001)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626180930/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf
A My System sample can be seen at:
https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/MySystem-excerpt.pdf
VaporTrail -
If you are interested in an opening repertoire as White and as Black, I think the following two books might be of interest to you. I have both books and not only have I incorporated several of the author's suggestions for my own repertoire, I've benefited by being exposed to instructive ideas for playing more efficiently and aggressively out of the opening. In any event, the suggested openings and defenses are not only dynamic and aggressive, but enjoyable to play. (No slow, boring chess here!) Read my comments on the White repertoire book in my blog and on Amazon (as RLBell)...
"My First Chess Opening Repertoire for White" by Vincent Moret...
https://www.amazon.com/First-Chess-Opening-Repertoire-White/dp/9056916335/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1513051864&sr=1-3&keywords=vincent+moret
"My First Chess Opening Repertoire for Black" by Vincent Moret...
https://www.amazon.com/First-Chess-Opening-Repertoire-Ready/dp/9056917463/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1513051864&sr=1-1&keywords=vincent+moret
In my view, Moret's repertoire choices as well as his instruction are well suited to the beginner-intermediate player; the ideas and plans are clearly explained (not only WHAT to do, but WHY and HOW to do it) and don't require an encyclopedic, photographic memory to learn and begin playing relatively quickly.
The treatment of the openings/defenses comprising the repertoires is purposefully not comprehensive. The point being to teach the player the important ideas and plans behind the recommended lines, while not overwhelming the student with excessive theory (i.e., lines & variations). The approach is designed to quickly get the student started playing, with minimal effort (notice I didn't say 'no effort'!). Also when considering not only the cost, but perhaps even more unsettling, the amount of opening theory to absorb when embarking on the daunting task of assembling a complete repertoire (and perhaps library) for both Black and White from myriad resources.
book excerpts...
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9033.pdf
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9050.pdf
Finally, did I mention that the repertoire recommendations are fun to play?!