Weapons of chess actually looks quite good and a way more fun that studying Capablancas chess fundamentals.
Weapon of Chess is light and easy to digest. It can improve a beginner's game. But just because your brain can't comprehend that Capablanca book, does not mean other will experience the same.
There are good beginners endgame book. One of them is Winning Chess Endgame by Seirawan. Pandolfini's Endgame Course is another one. Silman's book is also a good one. These books are easy read and is beneficial and not sub optimal. Again look at your tactical rating it is only 1600 despite the fact that you tried solving more than 1200 problems here. Many masters advocated endgame for beginners and a scrub like you is telling it is sub optimal?
the same regurgitated Silman flunkie routine so beloved by my friend Spongeybob, save if for those that believe in it.
Look at yourself at the mirror. You have more than 1200 tactical try here, but your rating at tactics is only 1600. And as i told many masters advocated endgame study for a beginner. And a scrub like you is telling not to study them?
Weapons of chess actually looks quite good and a way more fun that studying Capablancas chess fundamentals.
Weapon of Chess is light and easy to digest. It can improve a beginner's game. But just because your brain can't comprehend that Capablanca book, does not mean other will experience the same.
Right and its just what the grinder really needs? and here you are pontificating about how to help an 1100 rated player by studying technical endgame’s. Hilarious. thanks for the laughs.
There are good beginners endgame book. One of them is Winning Chess Endgame by Seirawan. Pandolfini's Endgame Course is another one. Silman's book is also a good one. These books are easy read and is beneficial and not sub optimal. Again look at your tactical rating it is only 1600 despite the fact that you tried solving more than 1200 problems here. Many masters advocated endgame for beginners and a scrub like you is telling it is sub optimal?
the same regurgitated Silman flunkie routine so beloved by my friend Spongeybob, save if for those that believe in it.
Look at yourself at the mirror. You have more than 1200 tactical try here, but your rating at tactics is only 1600. And as i told many masters advocated endgame study for a beginner. And a scrub like you is telling not to study them?
you are rated a mere 1783 and I am rated 1850, how are we to explain the disparity? and I hardly ever play chess. I cannot remember the last time I practised tactics here, maybe 2016? Shall I show you my lichess account where I have a tactical rating of 2101? where I actually practice tactics? What will you do then you pompous winbag, here you go suck it up.
https://lichess.org/@/mirsultankhan
If I study the endgame I wonder if I could retard myself back to the 1700's like the chess skank jambyvedar.
There are good beginners endgame book. One of them is Winning Chess Endgame by Seirawan. Pandolfini's Endgame Course is another one. Silman's book is also a good one. These books are easy read and is beneficial and not sub optimal. Again look at your tactical rating it is only 1600 despite the fact that you tried solving more than 1200 problems here. Many masters advocated endgame for beginners and a scrub like you is telling it is sub optimal?
the same regurgitated Silman flunkie routine so beloved by my friend Spongeybob, save if for those that believe in it.
Look at yourself at the mirror. You have more than 1200 tactical try here, but your rating at tactics is only 1600. And as i told many masters advocated endgame study for a beginner. And a scrub like you is telling not to study them?
you are rated a mere 1783 and I am rated 1850, how are we to explain the disparity? and I hardly ever play chess. I cannot remember the last time I practised tactics here, maybe 2016? Shall I show you my lichess account where I have a tactical rating of 2101? where I actually practice tactics? What will you do then you pompous winbag, here you go suck it up.
https://lichess.org/@/mirsultankhan
That 1783 is daily game and i only have 8 daily games here. You have a total of 86 daily games. You have tactics of 2101 and yet your daily rating here is only 1800 range. Your rapid is only 1500 range and your blitz is only 1300 range at lichess. Your tactics rating does not reflect your game. Your highest blitz rating here is at 1400 while mine is 1900(and i have a poor internet connection)That just shows you solving many puzzles does not reflect that much in your game. Now don't point out my rapid here as all the game here at rapid is from my nephew.
And as i told many masters advocated endgame study for beginners and here a scrub like you telling beginners not to study endgames? Technical endgames will help a beginner as it can help calculation and visualization. Endgames also appear at beginner's game. Many basic endgames won't also take that long to study. Are you suggesting to study tactics 4 hours a day? Don't be stupid.
Actually I do not play chess that much. I have no games here and my last games against humans in live chess was in 2015-16. I just solve tactics.
Actually I don't care about your rating or anyone else for that matter but I do care about your logic or lack of as the case may be. Anyway can you recommend any endgame books for me to get back down to 1780, maybe Skankablancas best endgames? cheers your fan Robbie.
I just demonstrated to you a king and pawn endgame that required No visualization and No calculation. All it required was a knowledge of the opposition. What are you talking about? Are you in your senses? Mork calling Orson, come in Orson, nanoo nanoo.
See post #116 for someone bringing up book-age. Do you think people turn to the Zurich or System books for help to find tactical problems? Maybe they go to them for games with instructive comments. ...
Its your logic, not mine. ...
Post #116 was not written by me.
... Its your logic, not mine. Tell us would you also dismiss classic chess books because they were written in a different epoch? ...
Do you think people turn to the Zurich or System books for help to find tactical problems? Maybe they go to them for games with instructive comments.
... Its your logic, not mine. Tell us would you also dismiss classic chess books because they were written in a different epoch? ...
Do you think people turn to the Zurich or System books for help to find tactical problems? Maybe they go to them for games with instructive comments.
You attempted to dismiss De La Maza because his book was published in 2002, carrying your logic forward we should then dismiss older publications on the same basis. When called out for it you were of course confronted with the illogical nature of such a scurrilous attempt. Its not my problem dude.
I just demonstrated to you a king and pawn endgame that required No visualization and No calculation. All it required was a knowledge of the opposition. What are you talking about? Are you in your senses? Mork calling Orson, come in Orson, nanoo nanoo.
That is not the only position in king and pawn endgames. Look at the links that I provided. There are many king and pawn endgame positions before you arrive at that basic king and lone pawn against a lone king that you have shown.
Sure its all good, was just trollin yah! You know how it is.
... Tell us would you also dismiss classic chess books because they were written in a different epoch? ...
Do you think people turn to the Zurich or System books for help to find tactical problems? Maybe they go to them for games with instructive comments.
You attempted to dismiss De La Maza because his book was published in 2002, ...
No, I raused the question of going to a 2002 book for help finding tactical problems.
... If you think learning king and pawn is going to help him then fine, personally I think he would be much better off learning how to avoid dropping pieces, how to develop harmoniously, the importance of the centre etc etc ...
Is there something to rule out doing some endgame stuff along with the other things?
you Silman flunkies can advocate anything you like.
... If I was going to advocate any type of endgame for an 1100 rated player it would be major piece mates Q+K v K , R+K v K etc and minor piece mates B+N mate, B+B mate as at least these teach piece co ordination.
Do you think that that is very different from what is in the beginner and 1000-1199 sections of the Silman endgame book?
Actually Silman's Complete Endgame Course is beginner friendly as he explained well the concepts in his book. It is not surprising that it has many positive reviews as it is really well written for various level.
I know a a master who teaches chess at scholastic level. This is his method. Study endgames and tactics. He has many students that are doing well. Many masters advice that a beginner should study endgames.
... the idea that studying Silmans endgame book will help the Op from dropping pieces, developing harmoniously is by any standards rather far fetched and i have really no idea why you and these other people are advocating it. ...
Can you quote a specific example of that idea being advocated?
... If I was going to advocate any type of endgame for an 1100 rated player it would be major piece mates Q+K v K , R+K v K etc and minor piece mates B+N mate, B+B mate as at least these teach piece co ordination.
Do you think that that is very different from what is in the beginner and 1000-1199 sections of the Silman endgame book?
Dunno cannot remember the last time i looked at the insufferable tome, my friend game it to me and i gave it back to him.
There are good beginners endgame book. One of them is Winning Chess Endgame by Seirawan. Pandolfini's Endgame Course is another one. Silman's book is also a good one. These books are easy read and is beneficial and not sub optimal. Again look at your tactical rating it is only 1600 despite the fact that you tried solving more than 1200 problems here. Many masters advocated endgame for beginners and a scrub like you is telling it is sub optimal?
the same regurgitated Silman flunkie routine so beloved by my friend Spongeybob, save if for those that believe in it.