Hey there. As someone who was in a very similar situation and has the same books as you, here are my thoughts. Yes, simple chess should be one's first positional book and I recommend finishing it before starting anything else. My system is a really controversial book because while it paved the way for a lot of positional concepts like prophylaxis, the way that he writes is just really.. Annoying to understand? Half the people love the book and half the people hate it. I'm on the hate side, I'd consider myself to have a good vocabulary and in the foreword, the introduction says that the translation was preserved perfectly from german-english and he calls nimzowitschs language charming and idiosyncratic (means cutely weird, I had to look that word up too lmao) but in reality it's just hard to understand, not because of the chess concepts but just because of his language and understanding the book is annoying. So I recommend reading a few pages of the first 3 chapters and seeing if you can understand it. His book my praxis which is my system but in the form of games is more understandable but still not my cup of tea. If you don't like it I strongly recommend 'how to reassess your chess by Jeremy silman' very easy to understand and a great next book after simple chess. Silman recommends to read amateurs mind first but it's up to you on which youd rather start with. You can find both for free as PDF on google with a little bit of searching. Hope this helps.
I really want amateur’s mind, if I can ever get my hands on it I will. Thanks for the tips, I tried how to reassess your chess but the third edition is way better than the fourth, but either way I struggled to understand it (a while ago, before simple chess) and got bored quickly.
Thanks for the tips so far everybody! Keep ‘em coming!
I tried reading Reassess Your Chess but I just find that Silman goes on too many tangents, and is the type of person who would provaricate around the proverbial bush to state that the instrument that one uses to create an aperture in the terrain is called a shovel, instead of just calling a spade a spade. Like seriously, reading his books makes me think he'd rather write novels than chess books.
Reassess your chess did nothing for me
Silman Endgame manual helped.
He's the Jordan Peterson of chess: he talks a lot, says very little, and goes off topic as if he's trying to answer but the original question
My advice is to read it and expect to not understand it, and then read it again with better understanding.
I'd like to add that it's not essential reading because his principles are repeated everywhere. From what GMs say I get the idea that they picked up Nimzowitsch from other reading. Back when I read it there wasn't that many alternatives.
Abtectous wrote: #10, have you actually studied Reasses your chess? Almost everything he says is of key importance. You may not be able to see it if you don’t already have some basic or tactical understanding but he does not rant in his book.
I have, and its not a case of not understanding the material. It's a case of Silman takes too long to get to the point with his explanations because of the tangents he goes on instead sticking to the point, which is the cardinal sin when explaining something.
Abtectous wrote: #10, have you actually studied Reasses your chess? Almost everything he says is of key importance. You may not be able to see it if you don’t already have some basic or tactical understanding but he does not rant in his book.
I have, and its not a case of not understanding the material. It's a case of Silman takes too long to get to the point with his explanations because of the tangents he goes on instead sticking to the point, which is the cardinal sin when explaining something.
I think everyone is different and some folk enjoy Silman's style and some don't. But personally I love it because i've read so many dry and boring chess books over the years that I love the humourous anecdotes he adds in. Yes they are unnecessary, but it breaks up the monotony which many chess books have. A bit like a teacher at school who would crack a joke every now and then vs the stern faced dictator type.
Hey everybody!
I’ve had a pdf of My System (by Aaron Nimzowitsch) saved for a while, but I’m wondering that, with a little stall of my improvement and simple chess being a good tool but also repetitive and not giving me a spark, if it’s time to break into My System.
I’m just really worried that I’m not at a level yet where it’ll help me. So I have a few questions.
Thanks to any responders! And I’d like it if answers come from people who’ve read My System and know what it presents.