My System

... On my 6th reading of My System lol and understand maybe 20% more than I did on my first reading.  But I'm trying ;-D

As far I can understeand he siad nowdays there are better books for learning chess which is different from "don't read "My System"! You will not learn anything! Everything is wrong!"  isn't ?

He didn't questioned the value of the book on his hystorical perspective, he really didn't spoke about it... 

that said I do appreciate your point of view I think that My system has is value not only as a piece of chess hystory but for some of his contents, not all the contents just some of that. 

I do believe is a fine book for starting to learn chess from zero. I'd like to remind that the book start explaining how the pieces moves...

Another thing that I liked and I still like today too it's the logical approach he use to define  a strategy. I agree the book may have not been written with didactic pourposes, it may be a systematic collection of logic thoughts ordered from the begin to the end of the middle game (possibly without leaving any hole). 

last the book was written around 90 years ago (should be 1925 right?) after the computer era there's nothing bad or shameful to call outdated some of his ideas.

Besides the obvious, all of his ideas are outdated. You are better off buying a more modern book on tactics and srategy.

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.

Different strokes for different folks. I often wonder if pfren is aware that much of what he writes are just his opinions and other people have different ones -- especially when it comes to learning materials.

When you say that some old book is still actual, you should always demonstrate the facts of its influence on the contemporary chess views. In almost every interview, the Grandmasters are asked to tell whom do they consider as their creative predecessors. Petrosian and Larsen always acknowledge Nimzowitsch in this case. Critics also noted Nimzowitsch's influence in their playing.

--Mikhail Tal
http://www.chess.com/blog/Spektrowski/mikhail-tal-foreword-to-aron-nimzowitschs-quotmy-systemquot-1972

[Bent Larsen] described himself as self-made, with only Aron Nimzovich's My System a major style influence.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2010/sep/17/leonard-barden-chess

GM Jacob Aagaard lists "My System" as the 9th best chess book of the 20th century. Reti's "Modern Ideas in Chess" was seriously considered but didn't make the cut. Petrosian's best games was not even mentioned.

http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/blog/2855

I also wonder what pfren thinks "My System" is, if not a didactic text.

My System is NOT for beginners, and may even be too advanced for intermediate players.

There's a newer, more modern version of My System by John Watson. I think it has chess strategy in it's title.

Ah yes, Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy.

Someone does a YouTube series of My System part by part it's not bad. I think Silmans books cover everything that Nimzovich taught and then some though...

Yeah I agree, check out Reassess your Chess and the Silman endgame course

I've never read My System. But I know most of the aphoristic bits of advice:

put a rook behind a passed pawn

the threat is stronger than the execution

passed pawns have a lust to expand

a thrust in the wings must be countered with a thrust in the center

There, now you don't have to waste any more time with it.