trying to 'figure out' chess for yourself is going to be a lot slower and harder than reading books.
You have to find the right kind of books though, I personally think collections of annotated games are the best kind.
Can you figure chess out or must you read boring books?
Sort:
kelsierSC wrote:
trying to 'figure out' chess for yourself is going to be a lot slower and harder than reading books.
You have to find the right kind of books though, I personally think collections of annotated games are the best kind.
but there are different kind of collections, for example maybe i just looked at the wrong example of the books maroczy on Morphy for example is not so easy to read. while IM Brian Smith seems to be easier to read and more educative.
That being said the second annotated an easier game and the first i maybe was just bad example or i wasnt concentrating, but in general i believe even in annotated games there you have just as much luck to find good annotations.
TetsuoShima wrote:
kelsierSC wrote:
trying to 'figure out' chess for yourself is going to be a lot slower and harder than reading books.
You have to find the right kind of books though, I personally think collections of annotated games are the best kind.
but there are different kind of collections, for example maybe i just looked at the wrong example of the books maroczy on Morphy for example is not so easy to read. while IM Brian Smith seems to be easier to read and more educative.
That being said the second annotated an easier game and the first i maybe was just bad example or i wasnt concentrating, but in general i believe even in annotated games there you have just as much luck to find good annotations.
I don't really know what you are saying.
There are of course good and bad anthologies, however with some research it isn't hard to find the good ones.
Just read what DanHeisman recommends and you won't go far wrong
Jul 29, 2013
0
#25
If books bore you, then you are playing the wrong game. Take up tic-tac-toe. Nothing can be better than playing thru a piece of history to better educate yourself!
To crack open a book and go thru the game Rotlewi - Rubinstein, 1907 (Rubinstein's Immortal Game) and say that it's boring is like an orchestra musician saying that Beethoven's 9th Symphany is boring.
I own over 300 books, and as long as John Nunn's name isn't on it, it's not boring. John Nunn's books are un-readable.
Jul 29, 2013
0
#26
Books are tiring.I prefer videos.The only book I have right now is an endgame book which I use as reference.
never knew there were chess books o.O but imo best way to get high rating is experience
I have plenty of books that I have either bought, aquired or won at chess tournaments. I keep saying to myself that one day I will read them but never got around to doing so. To be perfectly honest I think you can become a better player without reading chess books...if I read chess books for a long period I might go mad and start dreaming about chess positions.
thrillerfan, can you recommend some decent books?
[COMMENT DELETED]
Well someone wrote the books right?
Jul 29, 2013
0
#32
pdve wrote:
thrillerfan, can you recommend some decent books?
Depends on your rating. Opening books are specific to each player, but I don't recommend studying openings until you are at least 1800 Over the Board. Ratings I give below are based on Over the Board, not internet blitz:
Under 1400 -
1. Winning Chess Tactics and Winning Chess Strategies, both by Yasser Seiriwan
2. Silman's Complete Endgame Course by Jeremy Silman
3. A game collection book of a player from before 1950, mainly going thru the games themselves, not all the annotations except maybe the really short ones.
1400 to 2000 -
1) If you can get your hands on a copy, "The Inner Game of Chess" by Andrew Soltis.
2) "Bishop v Knight: The Verdict" by Steve Mayer (chesscafe.com has it).
3)The 9 book Yusupov Series (see http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/docs/14/artur_yusupovs_awardwinning_training_course/) where you read the Orange First (1500 level), then the Blue (1800 level), and last the Green (2100 level).
4) A player from the 50s or 60s (Botvinnik, Tal, Petrosian, Spassky, etc)
Over 2000 -
1) Chess Lessons by Popov
2) Advanced Chess Tactics by Psakhis
3) The Grandmaster Battle Manual by Kotronias (spelling?)
4) The Grandmaster Preparation series by Aagaard
5) Game collections of players Karpov onward, and if you want to look back at the players in the past in more depth, the My Great Predecessors series by Kasparov (5 books). Of course, I'm sure the 4 on Modern Chess and what will eventually be 3 on his own games wouldn't hurt either.
Jul 29, 2013
0
#33
Actually Chess fosters reading. Along the way you would figure it out that you just have to read books to improve. Just by reading the columns on chess.com alone you gain a lot of information that improves your game. The trick is finding what book that is easy to read. Dan Heisman's usually are.
Jul 29, 2013
0
#34
MojoJedi wrote:
What do you think?
I think that you are poisoning the well.
Jul 29, 2013
0
#35
ThrillerFan wrote:
If books bore you, then you are playing the wrong game. Take up tic-tac-toe. Nothing can be better than playing thru a piece of history to better educate yourself!
To crack open a book and go thru the game Rotlewi - Rubinstein, 1907 (Rubinstein's Immortal Game) and say that it's boring is like an orchestra musician saying that Beethoven's 9th Symphany is boring.
I own over 300 books, and as long as John Nunn's name isn't on it, it's not boring. John Nunn's books are un-readable.
I think that I have six with Nunn's name on the cover, and I don't find them boring. I will say, however, that none of Nunn's books are aimed at the beginner.
Jul 29, 2013
0
#36
Ziryab wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
If books bore you, then you are playing the wrong game. Take up tic-tac-toe. Nothing can be better than playing thru a piece of history to better educate yourself!
To crack open a book and go thru the game Rotlewi - Rubinstein, 1907 (Rubinstein's Immortal Game) and say that it's boring is like an orchestra musician saying that Beethoven's 9th Symphany is boring.
I own over 300 books, and as long as John Nunn's name isn't on it, it's not boring. John Nunn's books are un-readable.
I think that I have six with Nunn's name on the cover, and I don't find them boring. I will say, however, that none of Nunn's books are aimed at the beginner.
Well, I'm not a beginner (Rated 2120 OTB) and when I was about 1950, I tried to read "Secrets of Rook Endings" and the book was literally unreadable. It can maybe be used as a reference book for when you just got done with a game that was KRP vs KR to see whether you should have won or not, but otherwise, I can not go cover to cover with that book, unlike most other books. Some opening books cover to cover is not necessary, but middlegame books I do read c to c.
I feel that in this day and age books shouldn't be the go to form of chess learning.
Fully interactive online (a more advanced course of study than the old chessmaster training) is what everyone should be working on putting out there. A chess board with voice over explaining why the move you made was right or wrong.
Technology should always be incorporated into learning and used to advance how people learn a topic. Chess has been pretty slow to do this. Everyone writes a book or makes a video instead.
You have to read books to improve your game when you get to a certain level, but reading chess books are not boring
Jul 29, 2013
0
#39
ThrillerFan wrote:
If books bore you, then you are playing the wrong game. Take up tic-tac-toe. Nothing can be better than playing thru a piece of history to better educate yourself!
To crack open a book and go thru the game Rotlewi - Rubinstein, 1907 (Rubinstein's Immortal Game) and say that it's boring is like an orchestra musician saying that Beethoven's 9th Symphany is boring.
I own over 300 books, and as long as John Nunn's name isn't on it, it's not boring. John Nunn's books are un-readable.
I'm a musician and though I LOVE Beethoven, the 9th is by far not his best piece. Too much "I try to hear what I composed"; And like Topalov (vs Kasparov in this FANTASTIC game) when he took the first sacrificed rook: He knew better but it was just too tempting. Go for the string quartets.
AND go for (chess)books, if you like books. Go for anything that works for you... Nowadays it is ok to get the knowledge from where it is easiest for you to learn. Why read books if you have Videos to learn from?
I always found it very educating AND entertaining, when I could discuss a game that I played, ok ok i am just a recreational player, but I like it anyway, AND i believe I would get better, if, that is, IF i did it more often... But please don't compare the immortal "immortal" with Beethovens 9th... ;)
It takes a genius to figure out chess without "stupid books". I would not know how to play Lucena and Philidor position without reading. Figuring out chess by one's own intelligence is like reinventing the wheel.
But the OP is a chess genius, as his rating demonstrates.