Games or Books?

tipish
we have seen people advising us to go through GM games others of course tell us to read books. So the question is, is it good enough to go through books by going through just the games. on chessgames there are ppl who kibitzed the games of every book. just google games of [book title] .. it will come up the games nicely. I understand your gonna miss the annotation of the book author but on the other hand its faster you can get to more books and its not as boring as a book. thoughts???
kindaspongey

Depends on the book (and the person doing the learning)?

kindaspongey

"... [annotated games are] infinitely more useful than bare game scores. However, annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010)

bong711

s Studying annotated brilliant games of GM games is fun. Join the fun!

tipish

kindaspongey wrote:

"... [annotated games are] infinitely more useful than bare game scores. However, annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010)

I don't think ppl read books to get some question answered. they read it to become a better player. so your saying it depends. ok. now lets assume I'm talking about one of that good books you keep on posting on the threads...but still I outlined some benefits with going straight to the games. so is it good enough?

bong711

Studying the annotated brilliant games of Morphy, Tal, Kasparov, etc not only makes you a better player... creative too. The beauty of chess is in creativity... not just winning.

tipish

bong711 wrote:

Studying the annotated brilliant games of Morphy, Tal, Kasparov, etc not only makes you a better player... creative too. The beauty of chess is in creativity... not just winning.

true. but it doesn't answer the question. Studying annotated GM games... my question was thru reading books or going straight to the games of the book? your adding annotated????

bong711

Yes. Annotated. I'll be direct. Choose annotated games over instructive chess books. Sorry... chess books authors.

kindaspongey
"... is it good enough to go through books by going through just the games. on chessgames ..." - tipish (~7 hours ago)
kindaspongey wrote (~7 hours ago):

Depends on the book (and the person doing the learning)?

"... now lets assume I'm talking about one of that good books you keep on posting on the threads..." - tipish (~7 hours ago)

"... 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

"... The books that are most highly thought of are not necessarily the most useful. Go with those that you find to be readable. ..." - GM Nigel Davies (2010)

kindaspongey
tipish wrote: 
kindaspongey wrote:

"... [annotated games are] infinitely more useful than bare game scores. However, annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010)

I don't think ppl read books to get some question answered. they read it to become a better player. ...

I think Soltis had it in mind that, as part of the process of becoming a better player, one should ask oneself questions about what was going on in the game.

tipish

bong711 wrote:

Yes. Annotated. I'll be direct. Choose annotated games over instructive chess books. Sorry... chess books authors.

would you recommend a place where I can find those annotated games?

tipish
let me get more specific. there are ppl here who swear in the book of Kmoch Pawn power in chess.. but you know its a hard read. so can I get around by going straight to the games? There is like 80 games in the book. would going thru the games without reading the book give me near the same advantage as becoming a better player??? or even an easier book like the art of attack.. do I need to read the book at all to find the best way to attack or going thru the 80 something games that the book talks about would give you the whole idea on the best way to attack????

 

kindaspongey

Pawn Power is a respected book, but not approved by everyone.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708110136/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review249.pdf

Art of Attack is also respected.

http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/assorted-recent-books

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708234424/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/aac.pdf

There are alternatives for Attack and Pawn study. Whether it is just the games or the books or alternative books, the amount of learning will depend on the learner.