Starting Out v. Move by Move

Generally speaking, which of these is best to read first and why?

More specifically, I want to learn the Slav and am considering the following. Of course maybe there are better options of which I am not aware.

The Slav: Move by Move by Cyrus Lakdawala (Aug 16 2011) Paperback

By Glenn Flear Starting Out: Slav & Semi-Slav (Starting Out - Everyman Chess) (1st First Edition) [Paperback] Paperback – July 17, 2005

EDIT:

Another option:

[ Play the Slav ] By Vigus, James ( Author ) [ 2008 ) [ Paperback ]Jul 1, 2008

by James Vigus

There is no general rule. I really like Flear's books. I have an earlier Slav book by him that is still useful.

James Vigus' book is excellent and is highly recommended.

You would like Sadler's book on the Slav.

OK, it sounds like I should read the Vigus book first. Thanks all.

One general tip when buying chess books:

DO NOT BUY LAKDAWALA!

Here are some of the comments in Larsen: Move by Move:

"Losing by force. Uncontrolled freedom is just another kind of slavery, where we are mastered by our erratic whims and impulses. Sometimes the most natural move on earth can be a major blunder. The inherent righteousness of a cuse doesn't ensure a happy outcome. Sometimes even a sound-looking move can be upended by a geometric anomaly, as in this case."

"Sociopaths expend huge energy in masking their true natures from society, yet try as they may, their actions eventually do unmask them. Black's queen begins to laugh, but, up on seeing her sister enter the room, elicits a startled yelp which quickly turns to a feigned cough."

"Black's king, digesting his preposterous indignity, takes on the expression of a perplexed resignation of the family dog, who is forced by the six-year-old to wear her clothes. This is the position Larsen was after: Black loses a tempo"

Although these annotations may, at first, seem quite fine and even funny or interesting, these occur several times a page and the repetitiveness of it makes the book unreadable.

Many of these annotations can be said much more simply. For instance, in the last one, I would just say:

This is the position Larsen was after: Black loses a tempo.

There are many other good authors on the same players and the same openings. Lakdawala is not one of them.

Lakdawa can be a good poet thought.

ROFL. Maybe Lakawakachewbacha he just wanted to write an extraneous 200 pages. That guy is off the list. I don't have time for that drivel.

I find Reuben Fine to be a good writer...

I'll add Sadler to the list. Good suggestions. Will start with Vigus most likely...and, of course, Robert's Slav blogs (instilled with sardonic and impetuous temerity).

If you want to learn the Slav, Avrukh's book is the way to go, and even though I am not familiar with the others you mentioned, I think you should look into the Avrukh material before this stuff.

That is assuming you want to play the Classical Slav and not any Meran stuff

Lol. First of all, while I hate Lakdawala's "prose", the introductions to his books are insanely good and I buy purely for those and the games he presents(which are ocassionally hard to find). That said, I, unlike some of the idiots on this website understand that his commentary is actually anti-commentary. Seriously, if you're buying a book for analysis you're wasting your time and money. Words won't help you understand chess, and I couldn't get to 2100+ without understanding that words clog your head. What words do is inspire us and excite us, but in chess, one cannot express what Botvinnik called "the essence of the position" in words, that's why textual game analysis is, in general, stupid.

@dpnorman: Isn't the Avrukh book reallly advanced? I want something (to start) that explains the reasonings behind the moves...assuming I know nothing. I don't know if I want to play the Classical Slav or Meran. Perhaps I'll experiment with both.

@IAmAquariius: I don't fully understand everything you wrote. Why should you buy a chess book?

Because you want to understand how the author sees the game. Don't see chess books like math textbooks in high school. They are not telling you the truth, they are postulating their ideas about the world, here being chess. It's about inspiration and transfer of ideas. I think Lakdawala's problem with his anti-analysis is its empty. It robs of us seeing what HE THINKS because he doesn't want to tell us. He's making analogies and metaphors that don't make sense. That said, I understand where he's coming from. He also wants it to be fun to read the games and spur your the reader's imagination.

@IAmAquarius

I've only read a couple chess books, my first being last year. I have a dim understanding of what you a saying...Do others agree or disagree? I'll probably understand better after several more years of study...

In my opinion, and especially given that you have a Diamond Membership on chess.com, I would only buy an opening book if I know I am really seriously interested in playing an opening- because there's always plenty of good material to find on the internet, much of it free, and much of it on chess.com! Firstly, if you have any interest at all in playing the Meran setups, I recommend Sam Shankland's chess.com videos on the Semi-Slav, which should give you an idea of the kinds of positions which result. Also, look in databases to see the theory, and look at GM games. The chess.com game explorer is far from perfect, but it has a good feature in that you can go to a position and click "see all games from current position" and then arrange the games in order of "highest rated (black)" to see how the highest rated players with black (maybe people like Alexey Dreev, Avrukh, Anand) handled the positions. I would do all this and more before deciding to dive in headfirst.

@dpnorman

Thanks. Good point, and I am going (at a slow pace) through the chess.com study plan. Not at Slav yet, but I could skip ahead. I'm at least compiling a list of books for future reference. There is a lot of free info out there too of course...videos etc.

I use Opening Explorer extensively...it is helpful for familiarizing yourself with common moves and patterns. Of course, it doesn't explain the reasons for the moves. Sometimes those reasons are not clear to me and sometimes they are.

Anyway, I want to learn a little bit about all or most openings, and practice them as well....I imagine that will help me in the long-run.

I like and enjoy LAKDAWALA's books.  And one of the reasons i enjoy them is for exactly the reason Robert0905 gave for not enjoying them.  LAKDAWALA's books are like having the author there with you, and you are both enjoying the book, and he throws in one of those off beat remarks.  

I understand its persoanal preference, but for me, his books are good, and entertaining.

Maybe I'll read one in my copious free time. Interesting writing, that's for sure. Creative.

I just looked at Lakdawala's Slav Move by Move book (free Kindle sample). Seemed totally normal. I like the Q&A format.

I only have 12 of Lakdawala's books and have read 3, his London, the Nimxo-Larsen and his b6. Haven't had time to look through all of the others but I plan to one day. The positive response to his books is of the 3 I have read I included them in my openings and he is very consistantly correct with his evaluations, maybe not always but he is better than some of the other texts I have.

Avrukh's Slav book has some significant errors and omissions. This is especially important because Avrukh strives to create a complete repertoire. His book on the Slav isn't nearly as good as some of his others.

On top of that, Avrukh's audience is +1800 strength and correspondence players. It certainly isn't meant as a first book on the opening.

Despite all these flaws, Avrukh has written a book that any future Slav author will have to reference. It's one of the most important books on the opening.