Books vs On-line learning

Sort:
Darc-Thidious
I’m 46 years old, but have only been playing chess for a little over a year. I primarily play on Chess.com in games that allows 24 hours per move. In that category, I hover in the 1100 ranking arena.

I have gone through many of the Chess.com learning resources, and I think they are great! That said, with all the resources on Chess.com, is it still valuable to read chess books?

kindaspongey

"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever

SoupTime4
MUWC wrote:
I’m 46 years old, but have only been playing chess for a little over a year. I primarily play on Chess.com in games that allows 24 hours per move. In that category, I hover in the 1100 ranking arena.

I have gone through many of the Chess.com learning resources, and I think they are great! That said, with all the resources on Chess.com, is it still valuable to read chess books?

Depends ultimately on what your chess goals are. 

If you're here just to have some fun, play some games, do some casual studying?  Then the online lessons here, or anywhere are fine.  This is considered passive learning.  Learning in 2D, watching videos, using e-books. 

Now, if youre serious about improving for OTB tournament play?  Then you would need to study in 3D.  Use a real board, and pieces.  Simulate OTB tournament conditions as much as possible.  This would be active studying.  Studying in 3D.  Here videos, e-books, and online tools are fine, as long as you are using a real board, and pieces, pen and paper, writing down your thoughts, ideas, plans, etc. 

kindaspongey
SoupTime4 wrote:

... Here videos, e-books, and online tools are fine, as long as you are using a real board, and pieces, pen and paper, writing down your thoughts, ideas, plans, etc. 

"Set up a real board and pieces. Get pen and paper. Write down your ideas, thoughts, impressions, plans, etc. ..." - IMBacon (April 25, 2019)

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/how-do-i-analysis-a-game

RussBell

Good Chess Books for Beginners and Beyond...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/good-chess-books-for-beginners-and-beyond

corum

People talk about getting a physical board. I don't think you need to worry about that unless you intend playing for a club or playing in tournaments. If you are just playing on chess.com just stick with the computer boards. 

I learned loads with books when I was younger. But then, there was not much else in the 70s. These days there are some fantastic digital resources on chess.com and even on youtube. Whether you will find books useful might well depend on your personality and the way you like to learn. 

antisunechess

I think it depends on the amount of time you have to offer. If you can spend 1 hour on a learning session, I think that online is better. For more time, real boards are better. But there are other variables. For example, I suggest studying openings online, since it has helped me better to learn opening moves that way.  But the most important thing is to find the style f learning that suits you best. If you like fast learning, have a low attention span, or just like learnng in video form, go online. If you don't like that, go with books and boards. You should try both and see what's best for you

Ramiro000

It really depends on what works for you. For me, I tried Chess.com lessons and I found them to be great, but online learning didn't work 100% for me, so I bought a book (Tarrasch's "The Game of Chess", if you're curious), and started going through it with a board. Then, it finally clicked for me. Again, I think it really depends on what works for you. One thing that is true, though, is that while Chess.com lessons are great, you simply cannot beat centuries of knowledge that are on books, so if you are hyper serious, books might be your only option, nonetheless.