how is this book for Karpov? target reader level? comparison?
Sort:
How Karpov Wins: Second, Enlarged Edition (Dover Chess) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0486278816/ref=cm_sw_r_awdo_navT_g_57WWPJ0V6KX57DXDHHBM
is this above book great to study? what skill level is targeted audience to benefit most?
and compared with Karolyi's Karpov's Strategic Wins: The Making Of A Champion 1961-1985 (Volume 1) https://www.amazon.com/dp/190655241X/ref=cm_sw_r_awdo_navT_g_KF4J4MZVMZ9GPNHPWSMZ
what's the difference?
not understood. comp
what level is iit
target audience level? compared with the Karolyi book?
Jan 27, 2022
0
#5
This is from the description of the 1st book
The clarity and effectiveness of the presentation will enable players at every level of expertise to hone their skills and upgrade their own play.
The clarity and effectiveness of the presentation will enable players at every level of expertise to hone their skills and upgrade their own play.
Anybody can benefit from studying Karpov's games, even GMs. But the Karolyi book is clearly targeted at a higher level than the Mednis book, which is written for club players.
It's hard to estimate target audience, but I would guess roughly Mednis = 1700-2200, Karolyi = 2000-2500.
Both books are quite good.
I feel different as for a book with too high level, then the thoughts and reasonings are too complicated to understand. and some high level notes preach to conclusions by assuming this reasoning is too easy to list. the le
the thought and presentation need to be appropriate depth to lead reader think more, and not too long to get lost. and about the relevancy, it makes sense as player's thoughts can be ignited if exposed in similar positions or thoughts.
push to extreme. engine moves highest level. but why a 1600 player learn that?
MyHorseyHasOmicron wrote:
When people say books are geared for this level or that level, I wonder if it has to do with complexity of the material or relevance as in whether or not that position will come up in the reader's games. I can understand more actually from the "higher level" rated books because I can see it in context. The lower level books don't complete a thought. They just preach conclusions and I want to see where these conclusions occur. In the supposed higher level books, you can see clearly why the author is pointing out the moves they make.
The question is, will I ever reach that kind of a position in my games? The answer is invariably no. So, it seems like applicability is used more to judge the level of a book rather than actual content.
My opinion is that the more concrete analysis is included and necessary to understand the points being made in the book, the higher the level.
The weaker the player, the more lots of concrete lines will slow him/her down - and they probably won't understand the lines anyway.
I feel the same way about Dvoretsky's Analytical Manual: lots of interesting and sharp analysis, but totally useless for me from the learning perspective because it is just a huge collection of incredibly deep concrete analysis that ultimately means nothing to me. Probably most useful for Super GMs with a masochism complex.
Good Chess Books for Beginners and Beyond...
https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/good-chess-books-for-beginners-and-beyond