Reassess your Chess or My System?
Sort:
Hi there ,
I have both and especialy the Fourth edition of Silman's book which is totally re-written !
I think he has done a lot of firework in corellating and correcting it with the help of some sillicon minds !
Honestly I like the 3 th edition much more ! It seemed more an " original work" to me .
speaking about "My system " , it highly have been recommended for the level above 1800 ,
nevertheless you will have a hard time for digesting it.
Apr 14, 2011
0
#23
To answer the questions, yes it was the 4th ed I picked up. I could ask IM Silman, but your comments have all been good enough to point me in the right direction - the collective answer being "BOTH"! I like the writing style in reassess, so I'll start there. The advocates for My System tend to argue to go directly to the source. But since I can do both, I'll hit the easier one first. To continue the analogy one of you presented, I'll get my Masters, THEN my PhD. In the end defending two thesis' will make you better at your subject matter than simply defending one.
IM Silman, he's not a GM.
Tricklev wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
I've also got both, and tried reading both simultaneously. I definitely found Reassess much more accessible and relevant to a player at my level. There are, however elements of the approach that just don't work for me -- planning based on "fantasy positions" for example I found a little too loosey-goosey for my style.
He has removed that in the 4th edition, I'm also pretty sure I read somewhere that he didn't have as much faith in "thinking systems" anymore, that includes kotovs candidate trees.
Thats true.
Its also less generalized than before.
Honestly, that was my only complaint about the book. It was otherwise fantastic, I may have to pick up a copy of the fourth edition.
Both books are very different.
Apr 14, 2011
0
#28
I would probably start with Silman's book, unfortunately I could not find the book in waterstones (English book store). Nimzowitsch's style is over 100 years old ... I'd guess that Silman has read more chess books and has better understanding of the usefulness of the systems explained in the books, since a lot of chess literature builds upon "My System", and much more modern ideas appeared.
my system is the backbone of chess literature .
gmitchel850 wrote:
There is nothing in My System that you cannot find in recent works and find it
stated more clearly and with more recent examples, better examples, etc. That's to be
expected from a book that's a century old.If you want to read it, to get a falvor of Nimzowitsch
or for the sake of reading a classic or whatever - fine. Take it from one who has My System, Chess Praxis, and Blockade in his chess library -- My System was revolutionary at the time, now it's just tedious .
I can't agree with this , more . My system is The backbone of chess literature and all the great players and Gaiants of the chess world confess this.
- Some years back there was a survey among GMs as to "What book most influenced you?" Only two books made every list: Alekhine's "My Best Games" and Nimzovich's "My System". I don't think it would be any different today.
OK
I didn't read IM Silman's book, and it may be better for begginers.
But the chance that it's quality is better is something like -1 to 100000000000000000
My System
Nimzo mysystem is wack bunch of useless info
"Nimzo mysystem is wack bunch of useless info"
Hey dude@guardianx9, you might need to start taking your pills.I have read both books and IHO My systems is way better.You have to be ready to burst your ass though before reading it.It is not an easy read.Once you read and understand it, then most other postional books become easy reads.
May 18, 2016
0
#37
Why don't you buy my book?
"From patzer to loser. Part 1. How to lose with the Fried Liver"
OMG
really. we just had the "nerdiest" thread ever on Silman. we will now compare it to the very dense and hallowed, My system?
my vote:
neither. I have read enough of both to know they are both hard to apply.
Pfren,
why is "My System" considered by some to be SOME important if you want to be a strong player? Is there Positional Wisdom in that book that is fundemental to become a strong player?
when you say Provocation, do you means that some things are Wrong in the book? or that the concepts are hard to apply?
Lastly would you say that Silman's book, covers the basic revolutionary ideas of Nitzmo? (which I suppose would make My System, old, historical, and useful only if you find my system too hard to understand)
My System did not help me as much as I thought it would. Looking at it now, I think it is geared towards (2000+) players that are looking for a new way to view the board, but who have progressed past the point of basic combinatorial play. In my opinion, Nimzowitsch would be barely useful to anyone below 2000 rating. I plan to revisit it after I have mastered tactical play.
hey good luck with that "mastering tactical play" thing... hehe