I, too, am curious about the (lack of value) in reading My System. Is the main issue that the contents are convoluted and difficult to digest? I personally find such books aluring, but would like to know about the inaccuracies within Nimzowitsch's text! Looking for a book to read after Pachman's three volumes in chess strategy.
There is such a huge amount of chess literature to choose from that it's hard to justify reading less than the best. Even the admirers of "My System" readily admit some of its material is outdated or plain wrong.
Nonetheless I'd still say "My System" has its place for players who want to have a go at it. For one thing, Nimzovich is a hoot to read. He has such a great cranky voice that the pages go by quickly and memorably. For another thing, it provides historical perspective on the advance of chess. Nimzo's good stuff is old hat now, but once upon a time it was new, or at least hadn't been yet articulated.
I read it in high school when I didn't know about rooks on 7th or blockades and I was entranced. Recently I was working some positional puzzles and I got to a position for which I immediately knew the answer, though I didn't know why. Then I remembered ... it was right out of "My System."
Far better players than I -- Tal and Larsen for two -- have sung "My System's" praises. Don't read it for final answers. Read it for the pleasure of encountering a great chess mind and a sharp writer at work. Listen to Nimzovich and argue back at him if necessary. I don't think he would have wanted it any other way.
Here's John Watson on "My System":
In conclusion, for those who haven’t read them, I recommend My System and the associated works in this book app as strongly as I do any other chess book. We no longer consider many classics to be essential to a chess education, not since the Internet; but if there’s an exception, Nimzowitch’s work is it.
Dolphin27 wrote:
"... I suppose 'trainers' like Nigel Short and Grivas dislike My System for the same reason I like it, it makes their services unnecessary. ..."
My System is not exactly a secret, so, if people are using Short and Grivas as trainers, it must be because My System is NOT seen as making "their services unnecessary."
Dolphin27 wrote:
"... My System was also top of John Watson's list when asked about his favorite chess books. ..."
As documented in #111 in this thread, even IM John Watson noted, "Not everything in it has stood the test of time".
Dolphin27 wrote:
"... forum troll Pfren who spends his days smoking cigarettes and calling users 'patzers' on chess.com. ..."
I'm not exactly a fan of IM pfren myself, but, in this case, it seems to me that he is indicating something of value. At least to me, the truth appears to be that one can learn worthwhile stuff from My System, but one doesn't have to.
"... 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)
I've come up with a New Year's Resolution. I'm gonna read My System and Chess Praxis.
And here's GM Seirawan on My System:
This then, is the strength of My System. It is a book that provokes you to think differently about chess. It challenges you to consider a different approach and urges you to prove or refute Nimzovich's ideas. It is also a book that you can read and reread, each time coming away with different lessons and insights, leading to a deeper understanding of the game.
I don't think My System is for everyone. God knows how many classics in all fields I've heard shouted to the skies which however left me cold or confused.
Looking through the book this morning I'm still impressed. I suspect the problems some titled players have with the book is that they can see the exceptions and fuzziness to Nimzovich's claims. However, class players are only beginning to peer into the deep mysteries of chess and can do worse than to take Nimzovich on and think for themselves.
My System is a useful book, but it needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. I personally find it too dogmatic. For example, snatching a pawn in the opening and/or bringing the Queen out early for him are sins, but so many times they are perfectly playable if you can calculate concretely... ...
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?
Outragious!
You expect me to listen to Nigel "the womanizer" Short?
Why should I listen to anything this man has to say?
This man is deluded I am glad Garry Kasparov crushed him!
His name is Short and so to was the Match!
Than you have the nerve to call me a Grand Patzer after telling people to not read "My System"?
Absurd!
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 $$ thirty years ago. It's the first Russian edition (1930) printed in 10,000 copies, and authored by Maizelis. A rare copy, that is, which becomes more precious due to erratic page binding.
But leaving archival purposes aside, it's not hard to find something more useful to read...
There are other classics, e.g. Pachman's "Complete Chess Strategy" which are still a terrific read.
Pfren said don't read "My System"! You will not learn anything! Everything is wrong!
Mr. Pfren has only read it and bought 3 different copies of it including a priceless one!
What a Hypocrite!
Hey, don't be talking bad about Nigel!
Several Senior Trainers, e.g. Grivas, are way more dismissive than I am of the book. I am no Senior Trainer yet, so I guess it comes with time...
Nigel Short says My System is rubbish. Sometimes boldly, some other times "subtly":
My System is not exactly fun, is it?
(a recent tweet of his).
For the record, Short is also a very fine trainer, I guess a wee bit better than mr. Reynolds... Pentala Harikrishna is his most reknown pupil.
On the other hand I’ve never liked Nimzovitsch's My System that much, finding it to be a tough read and rather convoluted in its thinking.
(GM and Chess Author Nigel Davies)
GM Spraggett claims in his blog that Davies is rather too keen on Nimzo, and the book is way too convoluted.
And so it goes...
Now- may I ask you who are you to put others in shame, mr. Grandpatzer?
Outragious!
You expect me to listen to Nigel "the womanizer" Short?
Why should I listen to anything this man has to say?
This man is deluded I am glad Garry Kasparov crushed him!
His name is Short and so to was the Match!
Than you have the nerve to call me a Grand Patzer after telling people to not read "My System"?
Absurd!
I have three copies of "My System" in my library. One of them is priceless, I bought it in a Rusian old bookstore for quite some $$ 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.
Pfren said don't read "My System"! You will not learn anything! Everything is wrong!
Mr. Pfren has only read it and bought 3 different copies of it including a priceless one!
What a Hypocrite!
Some thirty something years ago? Since he has the book and read it, probably a good idea to listen to him?
Nigel Short is a more trustworthy authority than Reynolds. Some books don't stand the test of time...
@X_Player_J_X I too think it's terrible how Pfren calls you things like Grandpatzer.You're not a patzer, you're a creative thinker who is obviously very enthusiastic about chess and I believe you'll be a master someday. ...
I've come up with a New Year's Resolution. I'm gonna read My System and Chess Praxis.
Nigel Short is a more trustworthy authority than Reynolds. Some books don't stand the test of time...
It has nothing to do with trustworthy!
The book "My System" was written by Aron Nimzowitsch.
Aron Nimzowitsch is a chess legend.
The Father of Hyper-Modern Chess!
The book expresses his thoughts and ideas of chess.
Thoughts and ideas which were never heard of before during "His time".
Not everything stands up to the test of time because some new ideas improve on the old ones.
However, He was the original!
You are learning from Aron Nimzowitsch.
You are learning from what he believed was the right way of playing!
Finding out what is right or wrong is part of the learning experince.
Even if everything Aron Nimzowitsch said is wrong.
You should still read this book!!
WHY?
Because it is like a small glimpse into the mind of one of the most famous chess players in history.
Where esle can you gain insight on what Aron Nimzowitsch was thinking?
It is his own words!
I would of loved reading books by Harry Nelson Pillsbury.
A US Chess champion!
Harry Nelson Pillsbury had a even score against Lasker!
They believed he was going to be the next World Champion.
I believe he would of been the next World Champion.
He had an illness which called him to die at such a young age!
What do you guys and gals think of Harry Nelson Pillsbury ideas in chess?
Do you think they are wrong?
Oh forgive me that is right Harry Nelson Pillsbury never wrote a book!
He died before he could ever express his thoughts or ideas on chess.
The stuff we know of Harry Nelson Pillsbury comes from others!
The saddest thing in chess is not ideas which end up turning bad by new modern chess theory!
The saddest thing in chess is ideas which have been lost to time!
They were never shared!
They were never expressed!
It happens in chess.
It is very sad.
This is one example of a chess player who has been lost by time.
Hundreds of thousands of chess players end up like this.
Many of them have wonderful stories.
Stories which were never told!
It is a privilege to have insight from the mind of Aron Nimzowitsch.
A privilege which we do not have from the mind of Harry Nelson Pillsbury.
What about Jackson Whipps Showalter?
5 - time US Chess Champion!
Known as "The Kentucky Lion" due to his birth place and hair style.
A line is named after him in the Queens Gambit Accepted.
[ 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 [[3. Nc3 ]
Here is a game he won against Lasker!
[Jackson Whipps Showalter (?) vs. Emanuel Lasker (?)
Lasker - Showalter | Logansport, IN USA | Round 2 |
16 Dec 1892 | ECO: C66 | 1-0
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O d6 5. d4 Bd7 6. Nc3 Be7
7. Bxc6 Bxc6 8. Qe2 exd4 9. Nxd4 Bd7 10. b3 O-O 11. Bb2 Re8
12. Rad1 Bf8 13. Qd3 Kh8 14. f4 c6 15. Nf3 Bg4 16. Rd2 Qc7
17. h3 Bxf3 18. Qxf3 Rad8 19. g4 Kg8 20. g5 Nd7 21. Ne2 d5
22. e5 Qa5 23. Bc3 Bb4 24. Bxb4 Qxb4 25. c3 Qb6+ 26. Kh2 Nc5
27. Ng3 Rd7 28. Nh5 Ne4 29. Rg2 Kh8 30. Nf6 gxf6 31. gxf6 Rdd8
32. Rg7 ]
"The Kentucky Lion" attacking!
[ Jackson Whipps Showalter (?) vs. Harry Nelson Pillsbury (?)
Pillsbury - Showalter US Championship | Brooklyn, New York USA |
Round 8 | 6 Mar 1897 | ECO: C67 | 1-0
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. O-O Nxe4 5. d4 Nd6 6. Ba4 exd4
7. c3 dxc3 8. Nxc3 Be7 9. Nd5 O-O 10. Re1 Bf6 11. Bf4 Ne8
12. Rxe8 Qxe8 13. Nxc7 Qe4 14. Bd6 Rb8 15. Bc2 Qg4
16. Bxf8 Kxf8 17. Qd6+ Be7 18. Re1 g6 19. Qd2 Qh5 20. Nd5 Bd8
21. Qc3 f6 22. Nxf6 Ba5 23. Nxd7+ ]
That game was played in the US Championship in 1897.
Black is playing the Berlin Defense.
A Modern line in 1897!
The Kentucky Lion avoided the dreaded Berlin Wall Endgame!
The line he played is called the l'Herment Variation.
Jackson Whipps Showalter wrote no books!
People would love to read books by some of these chess players and don't even have the chance to because they didn't write any.
The few books we do have to read people are advicing not to read?
It is outrageous and there is no way they are ever going to convince me what they are saying is right!
It is a crying shame!
Some thirty something years ago? Since [pfren] has the book and read it, probably a good idea to listen to him?
However, other players, some even more highly rated and prestigious than pfren, say otherwise.
As Patrick Swayze said in Roadhouse, "Opinions vary."
Indeed. My System is one of the most comprehensive, definitive books on Abstract thinking by one of the.greatest Chess thinkers. One of my ex-gf loved reading it because of the way he wrote, not because she could understand any of it's concepts. Heh. Anyways, while I still use many of it's axioms, principles...I too agree, although a great read, it's not one of my favorites. I'll only recommend it to players who have read other books and are already proficient technical players themselves. Simply as a change up, a break from the norm you might say. To be inspired by this work, to become creative thinkers themselves instead of being stuck in rut in an imaginative sense.
For me, I don't like the negativism which sort of permeates throughout. Like how Petrosian at his best plays. Not to lose. Prophylaxis & overprotection speaks to this way of playing. It's only my opinion. I like dynamism. Giving life to a position, not taking it away.
Just me, I guess.
I take ylb's point that a long off-topic thread on My System in something called "LOL at the sicilian" may not be ideal.
I salute his dedication in cutting and pasting all those comments from there to here.
So in ylb's spirit I'll add a new thought on My System here.
Nimzovich wrote in a somewhat archaic formal style, but also in an old-school style of saying what he's going to say, saying it and hitting his points hard, then illustrating with examples.
It's an organized style which lends itself to browsing for main points, then drilling down when one's interest is piqued. Most class players could gain substantial benefit for a small time investment just by browsing the first paragraphs of each chapter and each subheading.
Plus his writing is delicious! Compare the first sentence of Chapter 6 with the first sentence of Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice":
"It is a well known phenomenon that the same amateur who can conduct the middlegame quite creditably, is usually completely helpless in the endgame."
"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."
In this forums I read a message of a master recomending reading pachman books on strategy (3 volume). The top player of my club also recomend reading the pachman book on strategy (1 volume in spanish).
In this tread a master speaks good of "My system"
You can read "My system" and improve or if this book is boring for you, you can read others good books on strategy for example Pachman books or more modern works: "Chess Strategy for Club Players" or "How To Reassess your chess".
My first read of "My System" was back in 1976, when I was 17 y.o. and a Candidate Master (never got the title of National Master). I found this being an interesting read, although it was apparent to me that many things were written as a mere provocation. By that time, I also read Reti's "Modern Ideas In Chess" and a Petrosian games collection. Surely enough I have learned more from both of them than Nimzo- actually I don't believe he really wrote the book as a didactic text.
My Russian copy of "My System" is priceless because it is a collectors item. Apparently this is too hard for x_patzer to understand... ...
I think any chess book studied is likely better than a library not. I find study is mostly about ideas anyway. Sure, an idea might be antiquated but if it was never in the head before, so what?. Playing old but now surprising ideas are just as good as novelties.
If a student cannot tell whether a book is better or worse than some other book does it really matter which one they pick?