Spectator94 wrote (~33 hours ago):
My System is definitely worth reading.
My System
Sort:
IM pfren wrote (about 32 hours ago):
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
Freddie-Freeloader wrote (~32 hours ago):
pfren wrote:
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
What do you recommend?
Fixing_A_Hole wrote (~32 hours ago):
pfren wrote:
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
About time someone says it. Although a historically important text, I think there are many other better chess books for learning positional nuances and pawn structure planning/ideas than My System.
"... I found [Nimzowitsch's] own books very difficult to read or understand. ... [Nimzowitsch: A Reappraisal by Raymond Keene] explain's Nimzowitsch's thinking and influence on the modern game in a far more lucid and accessible way. ... 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)
IM pfren wrote (about 30 hours ago):
Freddie-Freeloader wrote:
pfren wrote:
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
What do you recommend?
Reti's "Masters of the Chessboard" is an ideal start to serious study.
Masters of the Chessboard by Richard Reti
http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2012/4/1/book-notice-richard-retis-masters-of-the-chessboard.html
yeres30 wrote (~28 hours ago):
pfren wrote:
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
These are the contents of My System.
[PART 1 - THE ELEMENTS PAGE
CHAPTER 1. ON THE CENTER AND DEVELOPMENT 1
CHAPTER 2. ON OPEN FILES 13
CHAPTER 3. THE SEVENTH AND EIGHTH RANKS 23
CHAPTER 4. THE PASSED PAWN 31
CHAPTER 5. ON EXCHANGING 53
CHAPTER 6. ELEMENTS OF ENDGAME STRATEGY 57
CHAPTER 7. THE PIN 69
CHAPTER 8. DISCOVERED CHECK 81
CHAPTER 9. THE PAWN CHAIN 87
PART 2 - POSITIONAL PLAY
CHAPTER 10. POSITIONAL PLAY AND THE CENTER 103
CHAPTER 11. THE DOUBLED PAWN AND RESTRAINT 121
CHAPTER 12. THE ISOLATED d-PAWN AND ITS DESCENDANTS 137
CHAPTER 13. THE TWO BISHOPS 147
CHAPTER 14. OVERPROTECTION 153
CHAPTER 15. MANEUVERING AGAINST WEAKNESSES 159]
When you say "others are plain wrong" - can you name just one of "Others"? Just one would be enough.
X_PLAYER_J_X wrote (~26 hours ago):
pfren wrote:
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
HAHAHAHHAAHHAHHAAHA
Post #95 [in the LOL at the Sicilian thread] You say Mr. Reynolds is selling something.
Well it is far better to be a sales man than a shoveler.
You are trying to shovel nonsense down peoples throat.
Advicing people to not read a Fine Classical piece of chess literature.
Shame on you!
GMKimJong-Un wrote (~25 hours ago):
X_PLAYER_J_X hat geschrieben:
Advicing people to not read a Fine Classical piece of chess literature.
Shame on you!
I have my copy of My System right besides my toilet - just in case.
KevinLudwig wrote (~21 hours ago):
I found "my system" to be borderline unreadable. but do be sure to read Watson's "modern chess strategy" after, it's a real gem.
"... Not everything in [My System] has stood the test of time, but even that is a reason to read this masterpiece. ..." - IM John Watson (2013)
http://www.theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/john-watson-book-review-108-of-eplus-books-part-2-nimzowitsch-classics
IM pfren wrote (~20 hours ago):
X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:
You are trying to shovel nonsense down peoples throat.
Advicing people to not read a Fine Classical piece of chess literature.
Shame on you!
Several Senior Trainers, e.g. Grivas, are way more dismissive than I am of the book. I am no Senior Trainer yet, so I guess it comes with time...
Nigel Short says My System is rubbish. Sometimes boldly, some other times "subtly":
My System is not exactly fun, is it?
(a recent tweet of his).
For the record, Short is also a very fine trainer, I guess a wee bit better than mr. Reynolds... Pentala Harikrishna is his most reknown pupil.
On the other hand I’ve never liked Nimzovitsch's My System that much, finding it to be a tough read and rather convoluted in its thinking.
(GM and Chess Author Nigel Davies)
GM Spraggett claims in his blog that Davies is rather too keen on Nimzo, and the book is way too convoluted.
And so it goes...
Now- may I ask you who are you to put others in shame, mr. Grandpatzer?
Ziggy_Zugzwang wrote (~19 hours ago):
pfren wrote:
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
If you have some time Pfren, I would be interested in which parts you think are wrong. I suppose Nimzo's idea that you should only attack the base of the pawn chain.(eg c5 in the French as opposed to f6) might be on the list.
Many years ago I worked through My System. I found it required a disciplined approach and was hard work. I have heard that the English translation doesn't do the original justice.
I suppose many teaching books have flaws because they deal with general ideas when IMHO excellent chess requires exceptional thinking. When I first studied "Logical Chess" by Chernev I greatly improved, but for years wouldn't move my pawns forward from the castled postion to "kick" a piece since I had learnt from Chernev this invited piece sacrifices - the antidote to this was of course analysing the position. I don't know about anyone else but my major chess weakness is laziness in analysing. I want to play the game armed with a lot of patterns, strategies and rules etc and often fail to analyse the position properly.
JM3000 wrote (~19 hours ago):
Watson's book "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy" discussed various topics of "My System".
IM pfren wrote (~19 hours ago):
I have three copies of "My System" in my library. One of them is priceless, I bought it in a Rusian old bookstore for quite some $$ thirty years ago. It's the first Russian edition (1930) printed in 10,000 copies, and authored by Maizelis. A rare copy, that is, which becomes more precious due to erratic page binding.
But leaving archival purposes aside, it's not hard to find something more useful to read...
There are other classics, e.g. Pachman's "Complete Chess Strategy" which are still a terrific read.
Dolphin27 wrote (~10 hours ago):
NIgel "the womanizer" Short not liking a book is quite an accolade. The guy's a complete goof. I suppose "trainers" like Nigel Short and Grivas dislike My System for the same reason I like it, it makes their services unnecessary.
GM Alexander Grischuk, who is the best French Advance player in the world with the White pieces, said that Nimzowitsch influenced him the most of any player and that he had intensely studied his books. Results speak for themselves. My System was also top of John Watson's list when asked about his favorite chess books.
So let's see, whose opinion carries more weight, GM Grischuk who is frequently in the top ten players in the world for any given month, or forum troll Pfren who spends his days smoking cigarettes and calling users "patzers" on chess.com. Pfren, by smoking cigarettes you've illustrated to us that you make horrendous decisions, and your decisions about chess books are continuing in this trend.
IM pfren wrote (~9 hours ago):
Have you applied for tobacco police? I guess you would make a bright career.
Wannabe trainer Short (never was a good player as well, the most he could achieve was playing a WC final) had the aforementioned 2700+ GM as a pupil, and Grivas, many- last one being the former World Junior Champion Alexander Ipatov. I guess both are not good enough for talents like you...
Or- may I ask what YOU are smoking?
cats-not-knights wrote (~8 hours ago):
pfren wrote:
My System is interesting, provocative and outdated. Some of the things in it are classical wisdom, while some others are plain wrong.
I'd rather advice you reading something else instead, especially if you take everything at face value.
first real book of chess I've read, so if you're starting from zero I think it's a relly good book. But chess has evolved and I agree that before reading it you may want to tore some pages expecially the overprotection part.
[Aron Nimzowitsch (?) vs. Systemsson (?)
Composition | Copenhagen | 1927 | ECO: C00 | 1-0
AN INGENIOUS EXAMPLE OF MY SYSTEM by Aaron Nimzowitsch - Anderssen started the sacrificial style, Morphy and Gruenfeld the pure attacking style, Steinitz the positional style, Tarrasch the scientific style, Lasker the style of styles, Capablanca the mechanical style, Alekhine a style as brilliant as sunlight. But it is a generally known fact that originality and modernism were introduced by me as my own personal inventions and enthusiastically imitated (without being fully understood) by the whole world of chess. For the ridiculously small sum of ten marks, the reader can confirm all this in my monumental work, My System, published by B. Kagan. Before my time, chess was so naive and undistinguished! One or two brutal opening moves, each one involving a vulgar, obvious threat, a common, banal sacrifice, a painfully elementary, bestially raw checkmate - such, more or less, was the course of chess games before my heyday set in. Then I appeared on the scene and the chess world paid heed. The hegemony of matter was shattered at a stroke and the era of the spiritual began. Under my creative guidance, the chessmen, hitherto nothing but highwaymen, pirates and butcher boys, became sensitive artists and subtle instruments of immeasurable profundity. But why waste words! - accompany me, dear reader to the dizzy heights of the following game.
My very oldest and latest thought in this opening. To the chess addict nurtured on spineless convention, this move comes like a slap in the face - but calm down, dear reader; after all, you cannot be expected to understand such moves. (Forgive me - it is not your fault, until now no one has opened your eyes and ears.) Wait just a little while, and there will pass before you a miracle of overprotection of more than earthly beauty. (I assume that I rightly surmise that you are quite familiar with my great theory of overprotection.)
Black of course has no suspicion of What is coming and continues serenely in classical style.
A move of elemental delicacy. (We detest, as a matter of principle, such words as "power" and "strength"; in the first place, such banal expressions make us uncomfortable; and, in the second place, we like even less the brutalizing tendency which such words imply.) Wherein lies the beauty of 3.e5? Why is this move so strong? The answer is as simple as it is astonishing. The move is strong because it is weak! Weak, that is, only in the traditional sense! In reality, that is to say, it is not the move but the Pawn on e5 that is weak - a tremendous difference! In former times, it is true, it was customary to reject any move which created a weakness. Today, thanks to me, this view is obsolete. For, look, my dear reader, the fact that the Pawn on e5 is weak obliges White to protect the Pawn more and more until at last the state of overprotection arises as it were of itself. But, as we have seen (cf. My System), overprotection is practically equivalent to victory. Hence it follows automatically that the "weak" move, 3.e5, is a certain road to triumph. The rest is more or less a matter of technique.
All according to a famous precedent.
Here it is quite clear that it is more profitable for White first to provoke c5 and then play d4, rather than the other way round, which is the customary course. For, if White first plays d4, there follows c5 and White's d-pawn is under attack. But my clever transposition of moves changes the situation completely. For now Black's c-pawn is suddenly attacked by White's d-pawn!
What else can Black do?
All very clever, original and decisive! Of course the ordinary run of people who envy my every spark of genius but cannot follow my line of reasoning for even three paces, outdo themselves in sneering at me with the poison-dripping epithet, "bizarre." The text move creates confusion in the whole Black army and prepares for the annihilating invasion by the Queen 18 moves later.
Naturally not 5...Nc6 6 Bb5! etc. Why should Black play the French Defence only to allow the Ruy Lopez Bishop move after all?!
An avaricious dullard would never hit on this deeply conceived Pawn sacrifice.
After 6...gxh6, White has an even more comfortable game.
The reason for this becomes clear after next move.
Black threatens to begin a successful siege of the weakling at e5 with Bg7. But White forestalls this.
To every fair-minded observer, this move must come as a revelation! All the previous manoeuvres now become clear! White has completed his development brilliantly and proceeds to overprotect e5. Against this, Black is helpless.
Note the splendid cooperation of White's forces: while the e-pawn and the King Bishop completely blockade Black's position, the development of the overprotective forces takes place behind the broad backs of these sturdy blockaders.
As a rule this is a routine move. But here it is strikingly original and as such occupies a place in the treasury of my intellectual property.
Old stuff!
A deep trap, as will soon become apparent!
How Black must have rejoiced when he anticipated his formidable opponent in the occupation of the long diagonal. But...
...how bitterly disappointed he must have been to realize that 11.b3 had only been a trap and Bb2 had not been intended at all. The position of Black's Bishop at g7 is now quite pointless. 11...Be7 would have been relatively better.
Black no longer has any good moves!
Again, an extraordinarily deep move. White sees through Black's plans, and in addition he prepares a particularly powerful continuation of his strategy of overprotection.
Just what White was waiting for.
This was the point of his previous move! Black is now forced to exchange off the attacking Bishop at d3. But, with that, even White's King Knight enters the fray with fearful effect at d3, while the square f3 becomes available to the Queen Knight. Surely a grandiose piece of strategy. The fact is that I'm a marvellous player, even if the whole chess world bursts with envy.
Naturally not 16 cxd3? which would have been quite inconsistent. The Pawn on c2 is unimportant, and Black only wastes precious time by capturing it.
White continues his overprotection without much ado.
This counterattack has no punch. Black would naturally like to get a passed Pawn plus a Rook on the seventh, but it is too late for that.
Now the menaced Rook must scurry back, for capture on a2 would be much too dangerous.
At last, Black gets the right idea: overprotecting his Pawn at e6. But it is already too late.
Introduced into tournament play by myself. See note to White's 14th move. The King overprotects e6.
Completing the overprotection of e5 and thus deciding the fate of the game. Black has no defence. Note the aesthetic effect created by White's position.
Now Black threatens to complete the overprotection of e6 by playing Ng7. But White has prepared a brilliant combination.
Much stronger than the obvious Bg5+ etc.
Now one clearly realizes the masterly understanding of position which went into White's eighth move (Qh2!).
Had Black continued overprotecting by 23...Ng7 there would have followed 24.Bg5+ f6 25.Bxf6+ Kf7 26.Ng5 mate. Black's basic error was that he started overprotecting much too late.
One of my best games! I am proud of it if only because Herr Systemsson is one of the strongest Scandinavian players. The game made an overwhelming impression on the players and spectators as well as on my opponent. The game has become famous in Denmark as "the immortal overprotection game."]
Did Nimzo ever authored a book under that title? I strongly doubt it...
My System, sorry.