Has Anyone Read "How to Study Chess on Your Own"?

Has anyone ever read Kuljasevic's "How to Study Chess on Your Own" or any of the 3 workbooks?

Just curious, at a high level, what he says in the first book, like does it recommend you never pick up another book, or should the classics be read, etc?  Does it suggest only studying your own games, especially losses, or should you look at other games, be that of certain GMs (Capablanca, Alekhine, Botvinnik, Petrosian, Korchnoi, Karpov, Kasparov, Anand, Carlsen, etc) or certain openings (i.e. the ones you play), etc?

Then the workbooks - are rating ranges accurate?  I have been over 2100 back about 10 years ago and declined partly due to age back to the upper 1900s (over the board, not here).  If the first book is worth it, tring to figure out if volume 1 (1800 to 2100) or volume 3 (2100+) would be more appropriate.  My strategic level is about 2100 to 2200, but am tactically weak, as many at the club would say.

The other set of books I am looking at is the 3 books on "Rock Solid Chess".

Anybody that has read any of there have incite on them?

I haven't read them but I've just listened to Adras Toth's review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fK9bn-jvEb4

He seemed to be talking more about the 2 workbooks. Workbook volume 1 (the green and yellow one) is aimed at 1800-2100 and workbook volume 2 (the blue one) is aimed at 1500-1800. It seems weird to me that volume 2 is rated lower than volume 1 - but I've double checked this on Amazon, and these rating ranges are indeed what is written on the covers. Anyway, Andras Toth says that he thinks the exercises are more difficult than those rating ranges suggest.

He gives a solid overview of what training resources are there (in 20/21) and how they should/could be used. He also gives his opinion which field of improvement and what effort level different training methods yield.

He also gives for example a detailed approach how he would study (including collecting material) a certain position type.

He gives tips on how to create study plans based on your needs and shares his own. He does not give preset study plans based on your rating, time availability or age. That is where criticism stems from IMO. You have to do that on your own, like, study chess on your own…

His own plans are the ones of a mid-to-late teen rated 2100+ doing school and soccer aside. So hardly useful for most people. But great examples nonetheless.

If you do the boiling down to most peoples age, time and rating (all less then his) you end up in the vicinity of Studers 1/3 rule for a study plan.

The book is very good though and offers a lot of high-level how-to insights. It‘s a manual providing solid answers throughout- also insisting you have to put in real effort if you want to improve, he says that at the start.

Its not a dinner restaurant, you cook your own menu.

Sounds interesting! Might look forward to it. Does anyone has a link?