I know the feeling, so many great games, but not enough time! I'm about to go back to Lasker and then Capablanca now, having recently done some Kere and Botvinnik.
Garry Kasparov on Modern Chess and other Kasparov annotated game books
Sort:
dubrovnikchessset2 wrote:
I actually read 500 master games cover to cover. Great collection of games.
How long did that take you? I use about an hour going through a well annotated game, but maybe I'm going too slow?
Jan 29, 2019
0
#24
I don’t spend an hour per game. Depends on the game really, usually 20-30m. I move the pieces as fast as I can while still following the position and asking myself what moves pop into my head. But I’m not doing deep analysis on anything.
it took me a long time to get through the whole book.
BonTheCat wrote:
My two cents on this issue: Obviously, these books are great, but I've always personally preferred when the players themselves annotate their own games. Kasparov uses analysis by the players themselves, by other annotators and his own analysis. However, for obvious reasons, he has to be rather briefer in his annotations and in his selection of games. Also, most of the work of gathering and compiling the annotations from various sources has probably been done by Dmitry Plisetsky (not that this would be anything unusual, Karpov has done the same, and so did Max Euwe), otherwise he wouldn't have been credited on the flyleaf. As noblestone says, if you want to study a particular player, you're probably better off choosing their own published game collections. Fischer did 60 of his own games in 'My 60 Memorable Games'. If you buy Botvinnik's game collection (now expanded to a whopping six volumes to include all his games, but worth every single penny/cent/centavo/kopek), you get the nearly 350 games originally selected and annotated specifically by Botvinnik (for the Russian language version of his 'Analytical and Critical Works' published in English by Moravia Publishing as 'Botvinnik's Best Games of Chess in three volumes) plus all the other games he ever annotated in depth in magazines and other books, plus numerous articles and writings by him. Botvinnik was an extremely diligent and honest annotator, who regularly updated his analysis. Also his games are a fantastic schooling for learning positional play. The same goes for Mikhail Tal's 'My Life and Games' - a splendid collection of fighting, tactical chess, also with very forthright annotations.
What do you get in Kasparov's books, however, is a (not always terribly accurate) history of chess world champions and their nearest rivals (such as Pillsbury, Rubinstein, Bent Larsen, Korchnoi etc.), and you get everything in one set of books. Then you have his other series, 'Kasparov on Modern Chess' and 'Kasparov on Kasparov', which also are very worthwhile.
Very interesting; I didn't play for about 40 years, but played since 4y.o.
I found these Botvinnik books for free, in Russian, probably scanned copies, https://whychess.ru/botvinnik.html?page=1
- but acceptable; I will buy in English too, for my daughter (if she becomes interested in chess)
I am wondering: should I still buy such books if those VIP games are available as annotated games from ChessBase Mega Database?
I downloaded free books in Russian, including books by M. I. Shereshevsky and Mark Dvoretsky (why free? maybe Ukrainian website doesn't honour non-existent USSR copyrights? Or maybe this is how well chess is supported in Ukraine (and neighbours)
So, started with Endgame Strategy by M. I. Shereshevsky and I found myself much easier to google 1st game referred in this book, Capablanca vs Ragozin, 1936. I instantly found it on Internet. Much easier to read book on computer screen, and to move pieces on computer screens. I can't imagine how much time was wasted 40-50 years ago on using printed books and real wood pieces...
My question: should I still buy some books, including books by Kasparov "my predecessors", if ChessBase database most probably has all those games with exact same (or better) annotations?
So many changes in 40 years...
BTW I've read (from Nobel prize winner book, "how people think") that information absorbed better if fonts in a book are small and it requires some extra efforts to understand; totally agree! The book I am reading is scanned copy with really bad print quality, but I doesn't disturbs me at all, I can read it.
I actually read 500 master games cover to cover. Great collection of games.
i especially like the organization
3 sections/books: open games, semi-open games, closed games.
Each of the 3 sections organized by chapters on specific openings, and the games in those chapters in chronological order so you can see how each opening evolved from mid 1800s to early 1900s.
ill have to take your suggestion, bc my list started out much smaller and of course once I started getting a taste for other good players I just had to add them to the list. Which on one hand is fun, and the other hand discouraging b/c if I keep going chronologically I’ll be dead before getting to Karpov.
youre suggestion of cycling through sets of games up the list and back again is a good one.