Hi, I'm new and I need the next step

I agree with Shivsky. Chess should be learned backwards. The FIRST thing to teach someone whould be how to checkmate with a queen.

If someone said "hey I've done a couple books on tactics and I don't drop my knight on move 10 anymore, what should I do now", then i'd recommend an endgame book.  The Pandolfini book is a good one, despite its errors.  It covers basically everything that Silman does, but it's in workbook form.

HOWEVER, any good tactics book will cover/teach endgame basics as well IMO.  Bain's tactics book contains some basic endgame themes in it, although it's  mostly a middle game tactics workbook.  Ivaschenko's tactics books cover technical endgames as well.  

This is not what anyone is talking about.

Telling someone "read the first section of Silman's endgame book so you know how to perform simple mates when up tons of material" isn't in the same league as "go buy Nunn's endgame book and study it".  The latter recommendation is absurd.

What are you the forum police? lol. Read shivsky's post.

If you're going to argue against someone, you should know what their argument is.

To the OP:

Make sure you study the basic mates.If you do not know how to mate with just a queen, and other basic mates, you are wasting your time learning anything else yet.

I am not going to get involved with this thread other than to let you know that.

I don't like wasting my time arguing with angry old assholes like SilentKnight who goet their rocks off by being forum bullies. How sad...another piece of advice. don't turn out like that loser.

Wait, what are we discussing then?

You can't get better than Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual. But be prepared to work hard.

http://www.chess.com/blog/OldChessDog/mornings-with-dvoretsky

Whether or not someone who doesn't know the basic tactical motifs should be studying Nunn's endgame book as a start to getting better.  It was right there in the post I quoted saying it was terrible advice.

Go back and read the original post, and the post you took issue with -- he recommended studying basic endgame technique.  Nunn's book was cited because it was on sale for Kindle at the time, something the OP specifically asked about.

If you're going to argue against someone, you should know what their argument is.

Learning basic endgame technique is worthless if you're down a rook.

This guy knows what he's talking about.

Hey look, the same advice.  Another gold star.

I thought your issue was specifically with the book that was recommended.

So now we are disputing whether studying basic endgames has any value?

It would be easier to know what your argument was if you held one consistently.

Someone else who thinks Nunn's endgame book is dumb advice.  Silver star.

"You have to start people out with tactics and the basic mates or else they will get shredded instantly" - Jeremy Silman

You don't see him recommending opposition or square of the pawn or any other "basic endgames".  Tactics and basic mates (which is tactics anyway).

1. Game
2. Set
3. Match

Appeals to authority aren't very convincing when authorities aren't in complete agreement. For example Capablanca states:

"In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before everything else. For whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middle game and opening must be studied in relation to the end game."

Beginning from the simple {fewer pieces} and working into the more complex {more pieces} isn't a radical theory in learning something. Learning tactics from a couple pieces on the board, basic mates and pawn endings, along with knowing how pieces interact with each other can set a great foundation for learning other chess aspects later on, as well as save dozens of should be losses into draws and wins too. The more endgame material you master, the better you'll learn the other phases of the game and probably more easily. Any beginner in my opinion would do well to learn tactics/mates/pawn endings/ rook and pawn endings/ and other endgame material as the primary focus before working on the other (and many!) chess material available. It'll serve you best in the long run.

1. GAME
2. SET
3. MATCH

And you argued with me. "Game set and match" is easy when you choose both sides of the argument.