You should use whatever method of study appeals to you. Keeping your interest focused is more important than following someone else's concept of the best study method.
If Bertok vs Fischer 1962 appeals to you, then you should check out Fischer vs Spassky, 1972 match game 6.
Do what you enjoy. I like books based on themes. For example, I have a Simon William's move by move book. Each chapter contains roughly 6 annotated games grouped into chapters to exemplify different themes such as exploiting a development advantage, play with purpose, unnecessary pawn moves, and Super h-pawn power of course (Simon loves Harry). I also have Logical Chess by Irving. For that, I tend to play through games based on opening. I'm thinking of trying the French Defense (need to work on my openings a bit more) so I've been playing though the French games, enjoying the game and seeing what happens. Just some ideas for you.
I always get such great thoughts and advice from people on this forum - and not only that, great suggestions of material too. Thank you very much MarkGrubb and blueemu.
I have Fischer-Spassky game 6 in my Mammoth Book of the World's Greatest Chess Games, and I am putting that on my board more or less as I type this!
And Simon Williams, I think he is (GingerGM online?) I will certainly take a look at that book - I like move by move type analysis, from solving problems I can see tactics, but I like explanations from opening to middle game (I can understand 1.e4 claims centre, opens lines for bishop, and 78. Nf6+ forks rook and king...it is the little bit in the middle, between moves 1 and 78 that need my attention...anything that can show me how to get to a point of forking a rook and king on move 78 is very much appreciated!)
Yes the Ginger GM. The book I have is called How to Win at Chess Quickly. Cheesy title but it is because the games are all less than 25 moves and are all examples of where a player has lost due to mistakes in the opening or early middle game. 50 games in total. Mostly from the last 50 years. The chapters are all based on typical mistakes. The annotations are more or less move by move. As you might expect, Simon is a witty and pacey writer. I found my copy in a 2nd hand bookshop for £2.50. I reckon it is a collector's edition as Chess is mispelt on the spine. Only one S would you believe it.
The Black Queen can capture the Bishop by 2...Qxg5.
Hi MuteMeIFknDareYou, are you able to download Analze This or DroidFish for your phone or Tablet?
If you look at positions like this, those apps will give you options and then you can use that to think out the best response.
Lots of people on these forums can help you (I am a very basic player) but they can give you advice to explore good first moves (called openings) and themes.
In the example that you give, Nf3 would be a better move than f4, because is develops the Knight with a threat - you are doing what you want to do anyway, while at the same time forcing a move by your opponent...but of course playing the bishop to g5 was an error.
I wish you the best of luck, I have found some amazing advice on this forum.
The Black Queen can capture the Bishop by 2...Qxg5.
Hi MuteMeIFknDareYou, are you able to download Analze This or DroidFish for your phone or Tablet?
If you look at positions like this, those apps will give you options and then you can use that to think out the best response.
Lots of people on these forums can help you (I am a very basic player) but they can give you advice to explore good first moves (called openings) and themes.
In the example that you give, Nf3 would be a better move than f4, because is develops the Knight with a threat - you are doing what you want to do anyway, while at the same time forcing a move by your opponent...but of course playing the bishop to g5 was an error.
I wish you the best of luck, I have found some amazing advice on this forum.
hahaha
Your levity makes me happy.
As I say, I have had some great advice in this forum, and I am very happy to pass on my limited knowledge, and also point people in the direction of the great advice I have received*, if you're not in the spirit of learning things and offering advice, that is OK, I wish you all the best. From my perspective, look at the people above like MarkGrubb and blueemu - they took time out of their day to offer help and guidance to someone who likes playing a game they play - me I went out and spent (and will spend) hours on the advice they gave, I am am sure a good few other who read this forum will do the same. What have you done today?
*I do feel like making a table of links, I have asked some questions and got such great replies...some really great practical advice and things to work on.
I was recently grateful for a piece of advice I received on this forum with regard to going through one annotated GM game every day - it is something that I will try to do.
There are a couple of games in the books I have that are specifically in the openings I want to use initially, but whose ideas are perhaps a bit beyond me (Bertok - Fischer 1962, Bobby Fischer My 60 Memorable Games; Tartakover - Domenech, The most instructive games of chess ever played, Chernev)
I do look at other games, but I do find myself putting these two games up on the board a lot - is this a good or a bad thing? The annotation in both books is good (in my limited opinion!), and I do walk myself through it at different variations suggested, but is having a couple of model games like this a bad thing? Should I just move on and cover as many games as possible, rather than dwelling on a few that take my fancy?