Pros and Cons of reading chess books

my attitude and humility all depend on your perspective. you can only draw so much from text

@Godspawn: Don't worry about it; Humility is a lesson best learned through experience.

I Have collected a large quanity of chess books over the years, at first as a beginner, it helped alot, to beat equal rated players that did not read any books. But as the competition got higher, then the books I needed to help me see deeper into the depth of the games got harder to follow, because of all the alternative possible moves one can make and I always seem to lose my place. But now with the help of the computer, you can play the book moves out on the computer screen and back up, go forward and never lose your position.  Thats modern technology working with the age old book! 

   But I feel if you improve greatly, and never read a book your stronger opponents will soon see your pattern of play which will become obviously repetitive, and you will be an easy target!

@ghost

i see what ya mean. ive been using the same opening, and so far it works, but eventually people will figure it out

Oh and do not concern yourself about what others say about your attitude, its just your cool personality showing through, nothing will irritate your opponents more! lolo

5 rated games is not really a good representation of anything. You should play at a couple of tournaments before you can actually assess your playing level. As a matter of fact, USCF considers all ratings provisional until you have played 25 rated games.

I wouldn't read if you don't enjoy it.  You have plenty of time to study chess.  When you reach a dead-end in improving your chess, then consider it.  I will add that studying books will give you new ideas and increase areas for you to be creative and not make you robotic.  BTW Capablanca specifically mentions that he studied a book on rook endings.

 no need to get cocky mr.1800 player, LOL

I'm recommend playing a lot of tournament games against stronger opposition and going over them afterwards with a strong player to critique your thought processes and the moves themselves. If you're getting first place, it means you're playing against opposition that is too weak for you. Go ot chesscafe.com and look for Dan Heisman's articles, read a couple, see what you think about reading stuff to learn.

As opposed to yours, which is as large, solid, and hard to get over as Mt. Everest.

^so much bitterness

^agreed

^ I just like to use the little up arrow. ^^^^

Sure, you have most likely already faced many of the tactical situations in the chess books. However there are traps and quick checkmates which you may not know because you haven't opened a chess book. If you don't study openings then you give your book reading opponent an advantage right at the start. He will know what to do with a position while you will spend time from your clock figuring it out. If you don't study endgames then you may draw a game that you should have won or lose a game that you should have drawn. There is plenty of room in the middle game to be creative. Even in the middle game studying pawn structure and other strategic ideas will help your game. There is always room to improve on tactics as well. Those are the reasons I study chess books.

 Why on earth would you play for a Legal's mate?

Talk about hope chess

I went into stalker mode and looked up your record.  Assuming you are who I think you are... of those 5 games, you won 1, drew 2, and lost 2.  So don't go thinking that nobody has anything to teach you :) 

If your opponents thought you needed to study openings, that probably means you made a mistake in the opening.  Now, if your competition is rated low enough, they might not be able to take advantage if you don't play the best move.  But as you play better players, they will punish you for it.  Maybe not every game; lots of times you can wing the opening and be fine... but why lose even one game that way?

And, nothing says you HAVE to listen to the book.  If you have another move that you think is better, play it, and let your opponent prove it wrong. 

This actually sums it up very nicely to be honest.

is there anyway you can delete others comments? >__> cough haywood cough