Which book to read on Positional Play?

why you don't believe him

Am I right in thinking that many people believe the three volume Pachman is far superior to the one volume version?

Good answer, Sangwin!'

Lol

I don't think anymore that Nimzo's My System is really a useful book, on the contrary. It's written in a heavy style at a time when people still believed that chess is a subject that can be approached scientifically and methodically and explained to masses through manuals so that anyone who studies hard enough can achieve great results. Of course, it has some valid points, but these are few and buried under author's "scholarly" style.

Some contemporary rewrites such as Watson's "Secrets of Modern Strategy" or Dvoretsky's books or Suba's "Dynamic Chess Strategy" are more useful for today's players.

Arkhimeedes wrote:

No idea, I find positional playing quite depressing and boring. We only live once so why not play interesting lines although it might cost some rating points but who cares. It is nicer to loose after interesting struggle than win after really boring 100 moves game. Chess is about fun after all. (Remember that this is only my opinion and I don't mean to offend anyone)

I dont understand why you think positional play is boring?! ;-)

In this order:

1.) Simple Chess by Michael Stean is very good primer for someone just starting out with positional study. Nothing very advanced about it.

http://www.amazon.com/Simple-Chess-Algebraic-Edition-Dover/dp/0486424200/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1388689335&sr=8-1&keywords=simple+chess

2.) Logical Chess: Move by move by Chernev                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Irving

http://www.amazon.com/Logical-Chess-Explained-Algebraic-Edition/dp/0713484640/ref=pd_sim_b_2

3.) My System; Nimzovich

4.) Pawn structure chess: Andrew Soltis

http://www.amazon.com/Pawn-Structure-Chess-Andrew-Soltis/dp/1849940703/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1388689672&sr=1-4&keywords=soltis

5.) Chess Secrets: Giants of chess stragety: Neil Mcdonald

http://www.amazon.com/Chess-Secrets-Petrosian-Capablanca-Nimzowitsch/dp/1857445414/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1388689783&sr=1-1&keywords=giants+of+chess+strategy

6.) Technieque of positional play:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Valeri Bronznik

http://www.amazon.com/Techniques-Positional-Play-Practical-Methods/dp/9056914340/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1388689881&sr=1-1&keywords=technique+of+chess+positional

Silman's "How to Reassess Your Chess" is a classic. That book is enough for you to take you close to 2100 ratings. Even if you have read it, I would suggest you to judge by yourself, "Do you apply the ideas presented in the book in your own games?" If not, then you should read the book again thouroughly and you will be surprized at the result. Previously the positions which seemed tough for you are now crystal clear.In addition to that, you should play training games trying to apply the book's ideas. You should also analyse high quality games and try to explain yourself the reason of every move using the principles suggested in the book.

And one last NOTE:

If you don't feel yourself improved and are not able to apply a book's ideas in your own games. i.e if you don't play better after studying a book, then that book is rubbish(garbage, useless).

And I highly doubt that Silman's book wouldn't lead you to improvement. If you don't feel that you now play better after reading "How to Reassess Your Chess", then you haven't studied the book correctly. And you wouldn't for sure even after reading thousands of books on positional play.

Disagree completely. I guess it would depend on your literacy. If you have trouble reading, Nimzowitsch may be a bit of a challenge. Otherwise you have the grandmaster's ideas preserved as he himself saw them.

Also, be very careful what you are studying. Your 1500 blitz and bullet ratings are respectable, what is your OTB or slow chess rating? What other books have you read?

I'd recommend spending alot of time with a board and an endgame book, this is where you will see the most payoff.

I agree. Watson's "Modern Chess Strategy" does a much better job of showing how modern players approach the game. We have learned a little somthing about chess in the past 75 years.

Watson's book is quite advanced though, isn't it, and well beyond the level of the OP?

Watson's "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy" is in many ways an historical treatise in the evolution of chess thinking.  In fact the subtitle is "Advances Since Nimzowitsch" which pretty well describes his writing. 

I agree that this is a rather advanced book since it assumes the reader is familiar with the work of Nimzowitsch, Steinitz, Tarrasch and others and their style of play.

I'm not a good chess player, but one thing that I'm working on is trying to advance beyond the basics that keep me mired in conservative and boring chess.  General rules such as keeping two bishops, avoiding doubled or isolated pawns, taking time to castle, etc. can also be blocks in thinking of more creative ways to gain advantage, and advanced books help you understand when to break the "rules."  Watson attempts to take you away from being a slave to these general guidelines when the situation demands a different approach.  The book was awarded the USCF Best Chess Book award in 1999 when it was released, and the British Chess Federation gave it their Book of the Year award in the same year, so it has some fine credentials.

I think Silman's approach's very good, esp. for piece play and target recognition.  He didn't put as much emphasis on some concepts, such as prophylaxis, blockade, or restraint, as some other books (i.e. Nimzowitsch's) though.  The issue is that when I try to read other books that do discuss Nimzowitsch concepts, such as McDonald's "Giants of Strategy," I find the terminology challenging, not having learned those concepts in detail before.

I understand that it might be best to read "My System" if it's Nimzowitsch's ideas that I need to learn.  But, I also read reviews saying that "My System" is too mechanical, or too esoteric, or perhaps even somewhat outdated.  So, I found other books (which I have listed) that also discuss Nimzowitsch's concepts somewhat.  To what extent and what level, I don't know - hence this thread on which books to read and in what order.  Based on what I'm seeing here, I s'pose it's prolly OK for me to start with "My System" or to read Watson's more up-to-date chess strategy book.

Another goal I have for learning positional play is to learn proper use of pawns.  Silman was good in describing typical pawn structures, such as IQP or tripled pawns.  Soltis's Pawn Structure Chess's great, but I find it quite opening-specific (I did find the chapters on Caro, Slav, and Sicilian fascinating cuz I play those openings sometimes).  What I want to know about pawns is how to use them to do prophylaxis on my opponent's play & how to use them to undermine the opponent's position whether through pawn breaks or otherwise.  At this point, not as interested in intricacies of pawn structures (of which I alrady know something about).

You might look into "Pawn Power in Chess" by Hans Kmoch (1959) which is a classic and less opening oriented.  It's a bit dated, but the concepts stil apply.  The main criticism I've heard of Kmoch is that he tried to coin terms for his principles that have not "stuck" in general usage.  That, of course, does not invalidate the concepts.

If you want to be better at chess you simply have to read How To Reasses Your Chess by Jeremy Silman. It is about the concept of imballances in a position and how you have to exploit them and make your plans after the imballances.

Update: I started reading "My System" by Nimzowitsch and have found it very helpful so far.

I heard that Nimzowitsch also wrote another book called "Chess Praxis."  Do you recommend that book?

The "interest struggle" appears because you have best position in the table. Look the non-classic games from Morphy. In this games, generally played with relatively strong opponents, the "interest struggle" appears thanks to good positional play from Morphy.