Just started reading How to Reassess your Chess

ugghh, don't buy any beginner level books. There all so basic you can learn it by playing games or by watching youtube videos, even by reading advanced books. Any how, you can find most of them as pdf's too and online, the ideas can also be found in free apps. 

Spend your money on quality books; don't buy some beginner book or some book on the entire sicilian system or a bunch of one/two move mates. HTRYC is a fine book, albeit some don't like his style, it's a good primer and workbook.

How to Reasess Your Chess is a bit advanced for you if you're still blundering often...just saying. 

I don't have time to read chess books.

I'm too busy reading biographies

You dont need to be 1800+ to handle that book. A friend of me jumped from 1500 to 1900 when he worked himself through that book (the third edition) in maybe a year. I am 1437, and about tactics. Sometimes I see them, sometimes not.

jengaias says:
"The truth is that there is no "difficult" book for the determined chess student"

When the author teaches through an example, but the example stops short so you don't understand the evaluation, then by definition it's more difficult... because you have to work more to understand it.

If the entire book is like that then it's not as effective as book which doesn't do this.

It's true though that very difficult games can be used to teach things to any level of player... but the difficulty level for the student is variable depending on what you're teaching and the level of the student.

I think it's important to realize that most people are NOT naturally gifted enough to read a book like Reassess and just by dint of hard work, be able to absorb it.

Maybe jengaiais and his friends are, but for sure, most folks are not.  For a gifted person who might improve to 1800-2000+ (IM Silman DEFINITELY fits into this category) before even studying seriously, going straight to the tough stuff will work great. For the mortals like myself, who plateaud early at 1150, forget about it.

As for the friend above who jumped from 1500 to 1900 in a year, it's far, far, far, more likely that he would have made such a ratings jump by studying and playing almost anything at a similar extent during that time. Attributing that ratings increase mainly to Silman is almost certainly incorrect.

A 400 point rating jump in a year is so big that you pretty much only see it in players in the early, non-plateau portion of their ratings improvement curve (like kids or adults just starting out in chess.) You NEVER see 400 points in a year from players who have truly hit their initial plateau or ratings slowdown after starting to take the game seriously. 

Uhh, no. That's no true at all. 

There is absolutely a real bell-shaped talent curve in chess, as there is in most any activity in life. 

Some folks like me plateau quick at 1150, even with serious study, and it's hard going of years of work to gain points after that. 

Other folks like Silman, started out at 1900+ at the very start of their serious study and play, and were never rated as low as I was, ever. 

When you keep talking about those 'serious trainers', especially the Russian ones, they are almost always blessed with receiving some of the most talented and gifted players in their area, most of whom likely are at or above Silman's level of talent. So of course they can digest 2000+ level books right off the bat. 

And these same Russian trainers are NOT capable of turning everyone into masters, or even A-class players. Just look at all the trainers out there who do coach class-level players, and how few of them still are masters or stronger.

Studying is important, but as many have pointed out before, only if you are studying things appropriate to your level of ability. The OP, who is rated 1000, will gain plenty of rating points from doing an EASY tactic books (like "Tactics Time", which is appropriate for players with ELO 1000-1300 on chess.com - I've done it and know it), and he will gain almost zero points AND probably quit chess if you force him to hammer his way through Silman's dense Reassess, where he will literally not even be able to correctly guess a single of Silman's ideas or lines correctly, even partially, as he'll be so stymied by the basic calculation and tactics he's lacking. 

Don't use precepts developed by Russian trainers who had students at a talent level of 2000+, to apply to the OP who is clearly not like that. 

You've also completely neglected the enjoyment factor of chess study in your analysis. Like it or not, a club player's odds of continuining to study and improve in chess is CRITICALLY dependent on such an activity being enjoyable to some degree, even if only a minority of the time. Punishing the OP by making him bash his head repeatedly on Reassess is probably the fastest way you can get him to quit chess altogether. Whereas if you nurture him with easier, appropriate books like Tactics time, the Logical chess, then upwards from there, it's VERY likely he'll be ready to appreciate Reassess in full not too long from now, and be a much stronger player to boot.

After reviewing some of your games, i think you would be bterr of with the following:

1. Opening Principles:

Control the center

Develop minor pieces toward the center

Castle

Connect your rooks

2. Tactics...tactics...tactics...

While the book is very good, i think at this mon=ment it is to advanced for you.  Also, the point of the book is not to prevent you from blundering.

While you are correct that anyone can read them, not everyone will be able to comprehend them.  Anyone can read a book on how to do brain surgery, but that doesnt mean you can perform brain surgery.

Yup. 

I'd still stand by my earlier advice for possibly the best (and FREE!) resources the OP can get for improving both:

- Youtube Akobian videos (addresses those lacking opening/middlegame nontactical basics that OP is missing on nearly every move). There are NO books that do this on such a basic level - even the excellent beginner book Logical chess, which does show this to some degree, doesn't do this sort of basic move illustration as well as just following Akobian and his games. 

- Chesstempo for tactics galore.  

Both free, and I can't even come up with better resources even if I had to pay money (aside from an excellent coach) that will give the OP better progress at this stage of a 1000 rating.

I have read the book, and as an 1300 OTB player, I can say it was way over my head. But if you want to learn about strategic play which the book is about, I think Silman's book Amateurs Mind is a better choice. Which also I have read and think I have learnt at least something from it.

Im not a big fan of videos (just me), but the ones i have watched and thought they were very good are:

Melikset Khachiyan - Makes things sound so simple.

Dereque Kelly - Explains openings so well its rediculous.

Tatev Abrahamyan - Explains things wery well.

And a cut above the rest! Daniel King.

I agree Amateur's Mind is better, but it's still Silman analyzing, which means it's still really complicated and often opaque to C-D class players like me.  Even his analysis of the weakest players is way too complicated.

For example, what the OP needs is really, really simple advice that's solid.

Like "you just moved your N three times in a row in the opening. Don't do that."

Or, "You failed to castle early, and then proceeded to liquidate the center pawns which left your king wide open to attack in an open position."

Or even a slightly deeper by still easily comprehended positional idea - "Your N was strongly placed on the enemy 5th rank - it was the strongest piece on the board! Yet you traded it willingly and with no threats for his unmoved Bishop. While Bishops can be better than Ns, you can't trade an awesome aggressive N for a B that's hemmed in and hasn't even moved!"

These are such basic concepts that no complex understanding is required, and no tactical explanations are needed. They are instantly, immediately comprehensible, and have immediate positive impact on play. 

Silmna's Amateur's mind has none of this. Even in the simplest player analysis, he goes into fairly complex sequences. While they're correct analyses, they're sufficiently complex that it offers little value to a 1100-1300 level player which wouldn't even be able to come up with the correct sequence even if they could play it out on a physical board as assistance.

Gotta do basics first.

learning how not to blunder is in large part a function of learning how to put your pieces on intelligent squares. i'd start with Stean's Simple Chess and then advance to something like How to Reassess Your Chess. in the meantime,simultaneously, work your way through as many tactical manuals as you can.

I think even Silman says something like "when I told people to play over 10,000 games they thought I was joking, so I made this as a sort of fast food method of learning"

Something like that anyway.

Didn't you tell us that, while lacking an understanding of the value of endgames, you went very fast to around 1500 FIDE (in a matter of months) by studying mainly openings?

Well, thanks again, good people for all the good advises.  I will do more training on tactics, and also try to improve my focusing / concentration at the positions.  I think I lack focusing, I need to play more day (3 days) games then blitz, which has few time to think. Thanks again. I am reading all the comments, and learning with you.  I already put Silman's book aside, I will keep it for another time (or another life, since I am already 57 years old, lol).  

I totally disagree that the Lucena position is a good exercise to teach beginners how the rook works. While it's not a particularly complicated concept, for a beginner, it's unnecessarily abstruse and not relevant to their actual play, as they will NEVER encounter a Lucena or lucenalike position for a long, long time if they're a true <1200 player with 'normal' talent.   

I recall learning it in the first chapter of the old version of Reassess your chess where Silman pretty much SHOUTS that "THIS is the MOST important position in all of chess!" He then does a spectacularly bad job of explaining it - I was confused even after looking at it for nearly 2 weeks, after which I realized I could youtube it and find quite a few crystal clear explanations of it online. 

And even after I learned it - how much did that add to my understanding of rook play at my <1100 level? ZERO! Literally, utterly zero. 

In contrast, doing a bunch of rook based tactics (easy ones) involving rooks on the 7th and back rank mates - immediate impact on my play at that level.

Even now as a 1550-1600 blitz player, the Lucena is of minimal importance to my games. The concept of getting rooks behind passed pawns is an important one, but you don't need the Lucena position to clearly illustrate that. 

In studying master games though, where blunders are much fewer and games are often balanced all the way to the endgame, I see that the Lucena-type finishes are much more frequently encountered. Too bad I'm nowhere near that level of play. 

"... What a chess master does not need to know.

(1) All the basic endgames. ..." - NM Peter Kurzdorfer (2015)

@ jengaias, no I understood you perfectly well.

The Lucena position has no value mentioning to the OP, the player of 1000 rating. 

Yet this is verbatim from your post:

"But it is necessary because it is the first position to teach them how the rook works. ..."