Nwap111 wrote:
Learning how to read pawn structure will do more for you.
"... [Silman] would go on to write a series of excellent books on chess strategy. …" - GM Joel Benjamin (2018), writing about a 1979 encounter with Silman
Jeremy Silman's books
Sort:
Jul 15, 2019
0
#43
I'm going through the winning chess series by Seirawan and Silman. Finished "play winning chess" and am into "winning chess tactics". Think these books are very good.
Jul 16, 2019
0
#44
kindaspongey wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
kindaspongey wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
His endgame book is a decent beginning for the casual player who is too lazy for serious study!
...
... My use of the word "lazy" was perhaps lazy shorthand for "people with limited ambitions looking for shortcuts to endgame skill." ...
Is there any reason for people to do more than what is necessary for their ambitions in a hobby?
Let's see. One of my "hobbies" is fishing. The main point is to waste time, as much as possible.
Then, another hobby is shooting. The more I do, the more satisfying the hobby. However, I did buy a few items to add efficiency to the process of cleaning brass.
As for chess. If your reason for playing is to reach a certain rating level, but you have no hope of becoming a top GM, I'd say you suffer from some unfortunate maladies. I play because I enjoy the game, and I enjoy the process of learning. Yes, improvement matters, too. But that's not the main reason I play.
Jul 16, 2019
0
#45
Ziryab wrote:
kindaspongey wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
His endgame book is a decent beginning for the casual player who is too lazy for serious study!
A person has absolutely no obligation to do any particular amount of chess study, and no obligation to seek to be considered "serious" by you. Under such circumstances, does it say anything about anyone other than you if you start making judgments about who is "lazy"?
Good point. However, it should be noted that Silman explicitly pitches his books towards readers looking for minimal work with maximum benefit (a prof I worked for in grad school often referred to certain students as minimaxers--that's a better term than lazy).
My use of the word "lazy" was perhaps lazy shorthand for "people with limited ambitions looking for shortcuts to endgame skill." I read 2/3 of Silman's Complete Endgame Course in an evening and have dipped into it several times since. He succeeded in convincing me to spend far less time teaching the bishop and knight checkmate to young students. I also find some of his vocabulary useful and employ it in my teaching.
However, I have spend vastly more time working through parts of Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, and feel that I have barely scratched the surface of what that book offers. I also find that Averbakh's Endgames: Essential Knowledge is better organized and more useful to those with limited time who want to get to the heart of what they need for practical endgame play.
There's no question that Silman's books--all of them (except maybe Complete Book of Chess Strategy)--are useful to the average player. They have helped my play, and they have influenced my teaching. Complete Book of Chess Strategy has some good content, but it always takes me three times as long as it seems that it should to look up something that I know it contains.
I think that Silman's work deserves much more critical assessment that it has received. I'm offering some directions for that criticism.
Care to explain why it isn't "good" to make a chess book that gives tons of benefits with little work?
Jul 16, 2019
0
#46
What I don't like about Silman's Endgame Course:
It's not enough to just tell people the concepts of the endgame. In order to keep them in the mind, one must practice those endgames over and over. Because of that, I feel that one must also have access to problems in any chess book that teaches something.
After about a month I forgot everything I learned from Silman's Endgame Course. I guess it goes without saying though, no matter what you are doing, if you don't use it, you lose it. I will have to blame it on my not playing enough, rather than the book. However, at the same time, I feel some problems should be added to all books like this.
Jul 16, 2019
0
#47
Daybreak57 wrote:
What I don't like about Silman's Endgame Course:
It's not enough to just tell people the concepts of the endgame. In order to keep them in the mind, one must practice those endgames over and over. Because of that, I feel that one must also have access to problems in any chess book that teaches something.
After about a month I forgot everything I learned from Silman's Endgame Course. I guess it goes without saying though, no matter what you are doing, if you don't use it, you lose it. I will have to blame it on my not playing enough, rather than the book. However, at the same time, I feel some problems should be added to all books like this.
Perhaps Silman should create a separate puzzle book for his books!
Jul 16, 2019
0
#48
Daybreak57 wrote:
Care to explain why it isn't "good" to make a chess book that gives tons of benefits with little work?
When the work is light, the benefits are illusory.
I have his 4th edition and the endgame manual as well as Pogo's tactics book. If I were to actually study all 3 cover to cover I'm sure could get to 2200+ ELO. Currently 1550-1600+ But I don't have any motivation to get better. I wish I did, but I don't. I'm almost 45 and past my prime and to get good (over 2200+ elo)you have to memorize a lot of masters games, opening theory and middle/endgame strategy.
Jul 16, 2019
0
#50
arttrysted wrote:
to get good (over 2200+ elo)you have to memorize a lot of masters games, opening theory and middle/endgame strategy.
You don't have to do most of that, at least, certainly not the first two. Chess is much more a game of skill than knowledge.
Playing a tape while you sleeps works. Ghost.
Daybreak57 wrote:
What I don't like about Silman's Endgame Course: ... I feel that one must also have access to problems in any chess book that teaches something. ...
The book does have problems. Does one of the advocates of Averbakh want to tell us about problems in Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge?
Jul 16, 2019
0
#53
I have three of his books; they're ok. I prefer books by GM Yasser Seirawan; I own 5 books written by him. What I like about Seirawan's books is that they are very easy to read - even fun! He has a certain self-deprecating style that makes it easier for the reader to relate to him. His YouTube videos are also educational and enjoyable. I think because they are easier to read, I have learned more from them.
NM ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
… When the work is light, the benefits are illusory.
It's like those people who played a tape at night so they could learn while they slept. Somehow or other they're trying to get it for free...
Is "work" either "light" or not-"light", or is it a matter of degree? What makes either of you think that you know the point at which "benefits" become "illusory"? For every reader of the book? GM John Nunn did not seem to think the "benefits" of the book are "illusory".
"... Some recent books that I enjoyed and can recommend include: … Silman's Complete Endgame Course …" - GM John Nunn (2010)
CM JamesColeman wrote:
arttrysted wrote:
to get good (over 2200+ elo)you have to memorize a lot of masters games, opening theory and middle/endgame strategy.
You don't have to do most of that, at least, certainly not the first two. Chess is much more a game of skill than knowledge.
"... On the one hand, your play needs to be purposeful much of the time; the ability to navigate through many different types of positions needs to be yours; your ability to calculate variations and find candidate moves needs to be present in at least an embryonic stage. On the other hand, it will be heart-warming and perhaps inspiring to realize that you do not need to give up blunders or misconceptions or a poor memory or sloppy calculating habits; that you do not need to know all the latest opening variations, or even know what they are called. You do not have to memorize hundreds of endgame positions or instantly recognize the proper procedure in a variety of pawn structures.
[To play at a master level consistently] is not an easy task, to be sure ..., but it is a possible one. ..." - NM Peter Kurzdorfer (2015)
http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2015/11/16/book-notice-kurzdorfers-reaching-the-top.html
http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Reaching-the-Top-77p3905.htm
Did I read that right? A NM is saying it is ok to have sloppy calculation "habits."
As with many things, I imagine that it is a matter of degree. I would guess that he was thinking of habits that would be thought of as sloppy by an IM.
I do not think so, Spongy. It seems he is saying just to get to NM level. Read the quote you furnished again.
I don't think that he wrote anything indicating something specific to compare to. It seems obvious to me that he did not mean to refer to being as sloppy as a beginner. As with much casual communication, the writer was (I think) relying somewhat on the perception of the reader to understand. My guess is that he was taking it as understood that some degree of improvement would be required, and trying to indicate that one could get to master while still having a long way to go with regard to eliminating sloppiness from one's calculation habits. Ever see Yermolinsky's book? He found it appropriate to discuss blundering.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233827/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/road.txt
... I also find that Averbakh's Endgames: Essential Knowledge is better organized and more useful to those with limited time who want to get to the heart of what they need for practical endgame play. ...
"... I believe that Jeremy Silman's Silman’s Complete Endgame Course ... deserved strong consideration for the 2007 ECF Book of the Year award; see the two books above. ... It has already caught on with the average player in a big way, confirming Silman's status as the king of instructional writers. He writes in a clear and casual style, and time and again has shown the ability to reach those who feel intimidated by the lofty approach that a grandmaster will often take. ... Silman ... defines what he thinks is necessary to know at specific rating levels. For example, the beginner or unrated player needs to know ... Silman's idea is to wait until you climb in strength before you worry about more advanced material. Then, as a Class 'E' player (that's 1000-1199), one must learn ... Silman's book emphasizes to the student that the important thing is to master the strictly limited material at hand, rather than get confused by endings that won't help your results at that level. Perhaps even more importantly, Silman is able to use his teaching experience and talk to his readers in a way that they can handle, in a friendly manner and without condescension. ..." - IM John Watson (2007)
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/theres-an-end-to-it-all