It would still be nice to know specifically about these errors, especially to their number and severity, that we might form our own judgments.

Then there's the question of how much these errors damage the effectiveness of the book to teach endgames.

Of course just about all chess books prior to the chess engine revolution are filled with errors. Here's IM Silman confessing to this inconvenient truth (while at the same time decreeing chess engines off-limits for amateurs!):

Chess engines and databases weren’t around when I wrote that book (the same goes for the early editions of How to Reassess Your Chess), and I was using pen and paper, with a chess set on the table.

As a result, the Amateur’s Mind was filled with errors. And, of course, once chess engines were a dime a dozen, the know-it-alls not only gleefully pointed this out, they claimed the book was terrible due to those mistakes. 

But, that’s completely wrong. The Amateur’s Mind is an exceptionally instructive book, and like all my work, it’s about concepts that will help most amateurs improve their chess understanding.

http://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-engines-are-not-your-friend

Although, to all, learning anything 'thoroughly' is always an ardent task. Even with databases, explorer etc....no books or any one trainer could ever replace experience playing a certain line in a short amount of period.

Just play!

8)

e4 is more attack mode than e5 i think unless it's fried liver for dinner. Iike e4 on a 30 minute game and e5 on a 3minute game. either way your skill comes to the for front in your win or lost.

It's an educational and entertaining experience to play over old games annotated by world-class GMs, while watching the output from a strong chess engine.

Hey are chess engines easy to come by. Are they free to use. How can I get one or use one. I've heard of them but did not think I played the kind of talent that would make me want to use one. After reading about analysis before chess engines I think using an engine might improve my game. I wonder how many of my past opponents use chess engines. What do you all think. ipcress12---najdorf96--- chicken monster and ziryab do you all use them? How and why?

Stockfish 6 is free, and can use multicores too.  I'd buy a cheap Fritz 12 or equivalent for a good interface and functionality.  It was released before Metro really took off (I still use an earlier version of CCleaner because of the atrocious Metro) so it uses Aero too. 

I bought Fritz 12 for $7 a few years ago which I use as an interface for playing over chess games. It comes with a good enough chess engine, but will work with other compliant chess engines such as Stockfish and Houdini 1.52 which are free.

"Scid vs PC" has a stupid name but is free and quite powerful.  http://scidvspc.sourceforge.net/ However, its interface is clunky.

Even if you don't use the engine, a good chess interface is IMO a must-have for any modern player at all serious about learning the game. It is just so easy to play over games in PGN on a computer without losing your place or being distracted by the mechanics of looking at a book, finding the next move, looking at the board, making the move, looking back at the book and finding the next move -- not to mention checking variations in the notes if there are any.

I use the engine for lots of things, but mainly for going over games of all sorts -- from GMs, amateurs and my own games. It's a way of getting a fast overview of a game without spending a couple of hours on it.

I've looked over hundreds of chess.com games to get an idea of what my competition here looks like. That would be too tedious to bother with if I had to do so with a physical chess set.

In my own games it's the best way to find tactics I may have missed. I know they say to look over your game without an engine and that's good advice. However, if I was a blind to a tactic over the board (in a slow game anyway), I'm often not that good at finding it later.

The big pitfall with engines is that, amazing as they are, they are not the ultimate arbiters of chess. You must not lose your skepticism about engine output. The longer you use engines, if you do so attentively, the better a sense you get of their limitations.

That said, if the engine score goes south after a move, it's worth stopping to have a think if the reason is not obvious. Some of the engine scoring is based on positional considerations.

A blessing of the engines though is the sense of you get of all the possibilities present in most chess positions -- not just the four or five candidate moves most humans consider.

Well stated.

Hey Chicken!

I usually play the French, but played 1...e5 in an OTB game today because I was thinking about this thread. Well, not only that. Paul Morphy's games had an influence as I have been going through many of them lately.

Here's the link to my annotations of my round one game: http://chessskill.blogspot.com/2015/02/taking-care-of-business.html

Thanks Z. I'm going to make a copy of this right now. Appreciate it!

I promise not to study it THOROUGHLY guys ;)

generally which is the best first move e4 or e5

Yes.

Yesterday, both of my games began 1.e4. I won both. Today, both began 1.d4. I won with Black and lost with White.

I do better with e4 over d4. Open tactical more likely with e4. Closed positional more likey with d4.

Yeah, but if you are a skilled player you can open up the game or close it more when you desire (sometimes anyway), or so I am told.

Should I start a new thread called

Learning 1.d4 d5 thoroughly

Somtimes is the key word.

For once, I agree with ChickenMonster. 

I play 1.d4 far more often than I play 1.e4. I teach 1.e4 to my students though, because in order to play closed positions effectively, you need to know when and how to open up the position! 

There are few positions that are truly fully closed. For instance, one of the main strategic struggles of the Nimzo-Indian is for White to play e4 and open up the center at the right moment while Black strives for counterplay.

You don't get away from tactics by playing 1.d4. I think it was Petrosian who likened 1.d4 to someone who serves left-handed in tennis. It's just a different spin on the same game.

But of course, it's ridiculous to claim to want to learn to play 1.e4 thorougly and a few weeks later want to learn 1.d4 thoroughly. 

It has been three weeks. Out of curosity what have you done to learn 1. e4 e5? Do you have a line against the Spanish, Italian, Scotch, Four Knights, and Ponzini? Not to mention the Russian game and the Philidor. What lines or positions are giving you problems? What lines or positions do you like?