Forums

Garry Kasparov Masterclass Review

Sort:
Theimmortalpatzer01

Hello, I finished Garry Kasparov's Masterclass course today and I wanted to share what I thought of the course since I had a difficult time trying to figure out if the course was for me before I purchased it. 

First of all, I consider myself an advanced player as I hold ratings over 2000 on all time formats on a different site. My chesscom account is new and I expect it to be near that range here as well in the very near future. 

The course is just over 7 hours long and my opinion is that the course has about 4.5 or useful material for beginners and perhaps intermediate players. The 4.5 hours mostly cover tactical patterns, end game technique and some opening theory generalizations. The rest of the course, about another three hours, is just him holding a simul (plays three people at once) and some pep talks towards the end which I didn't find very useful. The course could easily be reduced in half if Kasparov cut down on the trivial chatter. Lastly, there is also a workbook which you can download and practice some of the lessons. 

Perhaps, a new OTB tournament player might find the chapters at the end more useful than I did. I've played in plenty official OTB events and I'm well passed the point of needing pep talks. Unfortunately, I think that Kasparov put little effort into this course as he could recite any of the things he discussed from memory and I didn't see any big revelations. This is surprising to me as his books are the complete opposite and of very high quality. I think that the course doesn't have depth in any of the topics covered which means that anyone above beginner level will see very little they didn't already know. There are some real nuggets here and there but I think an advanced player, for example, will find 80%+ of the course redundant. 

You would think that a $90 course from the world champ himself would be packed with many lessons on actual game play but I think Kasparov uses too much of his time chattering about - hence why I think he was unprepared for this course. One last minor complaint is that English being a second language for him makes his speech pattern slightly annoying to me. 

In conclusion, the course covers different aspects of the game but with no real depth in any of the topics. The real credit should go to Masterclass for the aesthetically pleasing presentation. After completing the course, I would say this course is geared towards 1) beginners as they have the most to gain from this course and b) fans who idolize Kasparov and simply want to feel like they are receiving lessons from the champ himself. Even then, I find the $90 price tag for the course steep as you could get a general improvement chess book with exponentially more depth for a lot less money. Unless someone is determined to get this course I would say wait until it goes on sale if they ever discount it. Otherwise, the course is a hard skip for me if I had to do it again. I hope this honest review helps anyone contemplating if the course is for them. There is always the possibility that someone else will disagree with my conclusion and that's fine. Good luck to everyone with your chess!

Please share our thoughts about the course or personal experience if you also went through the course. Cheers and good luck with your chess! 

LetTheMovesMoveYou

"The 4.5 hours mostly cover tactical patterns, end game technique and some opening theory generalizations."

 

Did the tactical patterns have games noted where they came from? It's one thing I hate about these "tutorial" resources. You get tactics, but you have no context where the tactics come from. If you go play a game, how will you encounter these tactics? Personally, I don't remember this stuff without being able to connect them to a game or opening line if it is an earlier move. 

 

With them being tactical patterns, this suggests to me that there ought to be more of game references so you can recall them in context. When I study games, I put them through an engine. When I see the same mistake come up over and over again, I make a mental note of it and attach it to usually an opening and then games where it comes up a lot. 

 

The next time I play that position, I recall the game and not the pattern. The pattern follows after. Take the King's Gambit Accepted, Muzio Gambit. For a while I was reluctant to give up the pawn on f4 after taking the knight. So, I would play Bh6 to protect it. Now I know more by instinct to play Qf6 instead and let white take the pawn. A similar thing happens in the Scandinavian. You don't try to protect the d5 pawn. 

 

But these things weren't memorized by position. They have a sequence to them. This is what I find missing from master's lessons. They just grab positions out of the air without recognition that lower level players don't have the experience or database of games to recall those positions. 

Theimmortalpatzer01
LetTheMovesMoveYou wrote:

"The 4.5 hours mostly cover tactical patterns, end game technique and some opening theory generalizations."

 

Did the tactical patterns have games noted where they came from? It's one thing I hate about these "tutorial" resources. You get tactics, but you have no context where the tactics come from. If you go play a game, how will you encounter these tactics? Personally, I don't remember this stuff without being able to connect them to a game or opening line if it is an earlier move. 

 

With them being tactical patterns, this suggests to me that there ought to be more of game references so you can recall them in context. When I study games, I put them through an engine. When I see the same mistake come up over and over again, I make a mental note of it and attach it to usually an opening and then games where it comes up a lot. 

 

The next time I play that position, I recall the game and not the pattern. The pattern follows after. Take the King's Gambit Accepted, Muzio Gambit. For a while I was reluctant to give up the pawn on f4 after taking the knight. So, I would play Bh6 to protect it. Now I know more by instinct to play Qf6 instead and let white take the pawn. A similar thing happens in the Scandinavian. You don't try to protect the d5 pawn. 

 

But these things weren't memorized by position. They have a sequence to them. This is what I find missing from master's lessons. They just grab positions out of the air without recognition that lower level players don't have the experience or database of games to recall those positions. 

That's a good question. The only game that he reviews in detail is a game against Anand in the "Case Study: Opening" section towards the end of the course. For the most part, Garry recites basic tactical positions (some positions are more advanced than others) out of memory and from I recall sometimes he would verbally reference a game but not always. All the positions are presented the exact way you see them in the commercials with no text whatsoever to note which games are being referenced so if you want to find the real life games you might need to do a little digging online. The games are presented primarily as puzzles where he gives you a moment to solve it so even if he references the original game we only have the critical position in the videos. Overall, I think his teaching style is similar to what you would expect in most puzzle and end game books.  

VMSguy

Thank you for doing this, it was beneficial for me to decide whether to buy this or not.