Is it ok to read 10 chess books at a time???
Sort:
marqumax
Jun 10, 2021
0
#1
Hello everyone! l've ways loved to work through chess books. I fully read like 8, but I have 25 in total and most of these books I read above 50%, but I often read different books depending on the day, which results in a very slow process of finishing them. I personally like doing that, but do you think it's a good approach or is it slowing down my progress?
I think you should read first one book and when you’re finishing the next
marqumax wrote:
Hello everyone! l've ways loved to work through chess books. I fully read like 8, but I have 25 in total and most of these books I read above 50%, but I often read different books depending on the day, which results in a very slow process of finishing them. I personally like doing that, but do you think it's a good approach or is it slowing down my progress?
oh like when your bored with one book change to another? I don't see anything wrong with that unless it's getting hard for you to stuff all those details
No.
Jun 11, 2021
0
#7
Chess books are not stories. They are manuals for study or reference. 25 books is an excellent library. Use them as such, dig and delve, when and where required. Gaining skills and strategic logic from multiple books at a time is not a bad thing.
Jun 11, 2021
0
#8
A Chess book is written differently by every author, would it really be needy to read 10 at a time?
Yes if you flip every 4th one upside down. +100 points if you get that reference
Jun 20, 2021
0
#10
marqumax wrote:
Hello everyone! l've ways loved to work through chess books. I fully read like 8, but I have 25 in total and most of these books I read above 50%, but I often read different books depending on the day, which results in a very slow process of finishing them. I personally like doing that, but do you think it's a good approach or is it slowing down my progress?
I only read the parts of the books I need. For example if my colle system book tells me a funny line that I don’t play, I don’t study it. (Unless it’s the zukertort colle because I really suck at hanging pawns positions and need to study that)
Chess has so many specific aspects to study. That being said, most books are dedicated to either one or just a few of those aspects, whether it be specific opening lines and variations, middlegame positional play, certain endgame positions that are known to be a win or a draw, etc, and if you're trying to learn all of that at once.. You might absorb it all via osmosis but most likely, you won't learn much. It's good to study a variety of topics on the subject of chess but it's much easier to wade through that variety of subjects by focusing on just one or two specific ideas at a time and then stepping back and seeing how that fits into the game as a whole than it is to try and digest an all-encompassing course at once. One example of the top of my head is Eric Schiller. Some of his books scratch the surface of many, many ideas in chess. The problem is that they don't dive deep into any of those ideas to really show the reader how to apply the principles being highlighted. It's very vague and that's a huge reason his books aren't recommended as much as better chess authors.