Best GM annotator(s)

There are several names that keep coming up when I read about which GMs are excellent annotators.

One is Keres, another is Bronstein. Yet another is Bent Larsen.

Of more modern GMs, John Nunn seems to be very highly rated.

Anyone have any opinions on which GMs are the best annotators? Maybe you could also mention which set of games, tournament etc. they annotated which gave you this view.

Besides those you mentioned I like Alekhine. Can't think of any others right now.

I like a lot of Nimzowitsch's annotations - from what I've stumbled upon on chessgames.com. Here's just a random example.

John Nunn is quite clear in his annotations... Kasparov lays it on a bit too heavy I think.

Yeah, Silman is great. The top GM's are better than silman of course but their explanations aren't as clear and usually just say whether a move was good or bad and gives a few lines of analysis. Silman tells you what they know and think is obvious, but what they won't say. Ever look through an older book written by an old master, euwe or reti for example? Ever notice that their explanations seem "rougher" than the ones from today like Nunn and Silman?

But Silman is not a GM. I would say John Nunn (understanding chess move by move)  + Fred Reinfeld (Best games of Tarrasch)

For depth of analysis John Nunn is very good. Jon Speelman is also good as is Jan Timman - again detailed analysis.

For slightly less depth and more 'words' - Tal was quite good, Silman (IM I know) and Raymond Keene. I admit tal and Keene can do the depth aswell.

Well it's useful for us patzers to know who are good GMs to read who can explain their ideas and goals clearly, so we can understand them, and preferably in words, rather than in reams of variations.

Different annotators are aimed at different strengths of players. Kasparov is an excellent writer but many of his notes are over my head. I happen to like Keres and Botvinnik's writings as I find them understandable and informative. But there are plenty of top class writers out there such as Euwe, Nunn, Timman,Soltis and the list goes on.

Raymond Keene

Kasparov, Tal, Alekhine, Karpov, are good GM annotators. Waitzkin and Silman are also good, but they are IMs, not GMs.

Kasparov, Tal, Alekhine, Karpov, are good GM annotators. Waitzkin and Silman are also good, but they are IMs, not GMs.

For the beginner - Chernev...

Thanks guys, some useful tips here!

Why you don't like Ray?

Keene wrote two or three good books and then mass published the rest--with lots of errors. Very few people consider him among the best annotators.

Here is my list ( I have included IM's as well)

Timman, Huebner,Kasparov, Dvoreetsky  and Nunn are known very detailed notes sometimes hard for non masters to read through.

Euwe, Silman, Watson, and Solits are excellent and more readable for most of us.

Ray Keene is a total arse, really.

GM Vinay Bhat always does an excellent job.  I highly recommend his column here.

He speaks very well of you...

I've been studying Alekhine's Best Games, and he annotates it himself, and leaves very little out. He is rigorous with variations if he needs to be, but doesn't over-variate (like Stohl).  I feel I really learn chess when  I read that book. A lot of modern books (Stohl, Kasparov, Shirov, Gelfand) are too sophisticated for me: they go on long variations, and I lose the thread of the game pretty quickly.  I can often do the same thing as they by going through a master game on Fritz. What I need at my level is more Reinfeld, Chernev,Silman, Horowitz-type books, even if they oversimplify sometimes. But Alekhine is a good balance for now.