So?? You bought yet another Opening book?
Sort:
Apr 20, 2008
0
#2
I have too many opening books as well. Buying them is like a drug you have to resist. 
I often add new chess books to my library simply to have a more impressive chess library! I am sure I am not the only one who does this. I have 10 books, or more, only on sicilian defenses ! While over the 35 years I have been collecting chess books I have averaged buying less than 10 chess books a year. I have actually been through (cover to cover) maybe a dozen of these books! My latest additions were the Kasparov books on his great predecessors which I did read all of them from cover to cover without going over the games.....I plan to go over the games next time I read them.
Well, I have a decent library of endgame books and I haven't read them all. I don't see the harm in it... and it sometimes helps! I tend to jump around alot when studying a specific ending... each book offers different insights and depths of coverage. :)
Apr 21, 2008
0
#6
Chess books are addictive. What I did at one point is I took a break from the chess book cycle and bought myself a nice wooden set. I've gotten more use and enjoyment out of that set than most of my chess books.
BTW if you've too many chess books, and they're in good shape, see if you library would like them. Its a great way to reach people semi-interested in chess. Another alternative is to give (not loan) them to your chess club.
Haha I really want to face the standard happy smile opening.
I thik it's interestig but I have one that is move you 2 pawns (in front of your queen and queen) so if he moves his pawn (in front of his rook) then his rook up you can kill his rook with your vishop
I find that buying chess books are addictive. But I pick like one opening and I have extensive books on it. It is the French for me.
Happy Face vs The Bongcloud attack (as black) would be a "crowd pleaser"
May 1, 2008
0
#12
I have owned 40+ books. Most of them stayed at my parents when I moved out.
Now I am getting back to playing I stop of a pick up a book or two when I stop by.
Basically I'm using my parent house as a library so I don't get overwelmed with to much information at once.
mrhackcomic> Basically I'm using my parent house as a library so I don't get overwelmed with to much information at once.
Good idea. I bought yet another opening book yesterday, but after skimming through the introduction, I found enough self-discipline to shelf it. ;)
People use opening books these days???
I always findbooks are very 'slow' compared to using software/databases. Thats given that the information contained in both are equal.
i could use some help defending openings
Jon_Beale> There is something really fun about new chess books but something very boring about looking at every single possible notation for an opening
There's an easy solution: buy more books about the same opening. For example, this week when my book buying bug bit big I bought (say that five times fast!) "Chess Explained: The Semi-Slav Meran" which fits in well with my last acquisition, "Play the Semi-Slav".
my theory - I buy a chess book to quench 'chess thirst', not to improve my chess playing.
by this I mean that I want to immerse myself in the language and poetry of chess even when i can't get to play a game (which is most of the time).
the first chess book i ever read was O' Kelly de Galway's 'The Sicillian Flank Game' - a highly technical analysis of an opening line I had never played and have never played to this day.
It was completely useless as a way of improving my chess. I had no idea what he was talking about on 113 of the 114 pages.
But I loooved it; lost in the arcane language (which no-one else I knew ever talked) and feeling somehow part of this weird, magical world.
I love chess books...that is why I find new and weird ideas in chess, even if you can refute them! lol if you can, the more power to you!
Part of the love for me of new chess books is seeing two people argue over an idea...I had a book, the Bird's Opening by Tim Taylor, who said that the following opening was trash for White:
f4 d5 e3 Nf6 b3 (straight into the q-side fianchetto) d4! and Black has immediately equalized. He based this upon the game Nimzovitch-Steiner which continued Bd3 dxe dxe e5! and Black now had the initiative. Nimzovitch was trying to play into the ultra famous game Lasker-Bauer, where Lasker initiated a double Bishop sac. However, this opening order for White was "refuted".
Later, I bought a Bird's Opening book by Soltis, who (honestly) is a much better teacher than Taylor. Taylor's ideas, well, they seem to be pitched at a higher level of understanding...Soltis' text really taught me the "meaning" of playing the Bird - I definetely recommend it. He gives a reasonable alternative after f4 d5 e3 Nf6 b3 d4: Bc4!? dxe Bb2 exd Nbxd and White is down one pawn with an initiative. I looked into this idea, and it looks fun! Imagine pulling off moves like Qe2 or Qf3, 0-0-0 and g4! and going straight for Black's throat.
If you aren't a GM, some of those ideas that are refuted are very hairy to handle for the other player. Here is another idea in the Bird that Taylor says is busted...
f4 e5 fxe d6 exd Bxd Nf3 g5 d4 g4 Ng5?! after f5, the knight is trapped, and h6 kills the knight. But imagine the attack that White can pull off with this attack...I can't remember the line move for move, but Soltis shows the line's potential for initiative in his book. I normally played Larsen's g3 and Nh4 after g5-g4 in the Bird, but this Ng5 is definetely worth exploring, even if it is "refuted" - you would have to memorize the refutation as the Black player, and what if White found an interesting alternate move order that pulled you out of book? lol
So I use the books to find new ideas to play with mine, and to gain understanding from various minds. I had a friend who told me it was dangerous to study too many openings, but I love it, so who cares? lol
Something cool about that Smiley-face opening...there was a russian GM who played 1.h4 and played in this manner...h4-g3-Nh3-d4 (assaulting the pawn that was assuredly on e5 by now) and after resolving the issue of exd or e4, Nf4 and the knight had a good place, as no pawns could attack him now. This may not be "accurate", but it is a cool unorthodox opening system that I have gained some thought from, and may try one day.
Well, I often try to cure the shopping itch with yet another chessbook. The most depraved form of shopping itch is probably books on chess openings. Agreed, my fine collection of books on the Latvian Gambit has surely earned me 5-600 points but most of my chess Opening Books will stay in mint condition for a very long time.
Another pet waste of time of mine is to trying to decide what openings to play. Somewhere deep in my soul I know and realize that the choice of Opening does not matter much for us who play some chess to give the Ol' Brain some work-out but I have not realized how small the difference is between openings.
So, here is a sketchy fun time experiement:
The value of first Opening Moves according to my silicon friend from Germany
1. e4 = (+0.18)
1. d4 = (+0.09)
1. c4 = (-0.20)
1. a4 =/+ (-0.31)
1. Na3 =/+ (-0.34)
..... just a few quick evaluations according to Fritz v10. The unit is "pawn units". So after playing 1. e4 white is roughly 1/5th of a pawn ahead and the difference between the opening moves 1.e4 and 1. Na3 is roughly half-a-pawn!
This is of course an important difference at Master level but not much to brag about at wood pusher level. A wood pusher tend to drop a piece or two which of course will have a greater inluence on the outcome of the game than half-a-pawn in the opening.
Conclusions:
I recently had to face the following Opening:
It is easy to expect a five move win after such an opening but Mr Fritz is telling me that the difference is less than two pawns. Amazing!