Generally the most important Game to study is your own!
that being said, annotated games from some lucid, thoughtful chess writer like Heisman is another very instructive idea.
more generally, I rarely go over many people games, unless they are looking for advice or post intersting analysis. that usually involves playing through them and looking for an improvement of their game..
"joke trainers"
thats a bit harsh jengaias. but :respect. I'm nowhere as near as high rated as you. I've gotten a lot of instructive thoughts for silman and heisman. but I've gone through some older stuff as well.
Logical chess was Great and I got/am getting a lot out of it. Reinsfeld's "complete chessplayer" is a gem of a book and practically worth learning descriptive just because of all the great chess he teaches.
... and what of some of the new chess writers that really pride themselves on being difficult and rigorous? dvorestsky for example? to sink your teeth into some really challenging stuff is, no doubt, really good for your chess
but just because an author doesn't make it very deep doesn't make him just a joke. anyways if I would name names on the three deepest books ever to hit the chess scene... it would definitely be
The Art of the Attack by Vukovic
Pawn power by Kmoch
My system by Nimzowitch
These are the great past thinkers that have really made their mark onto chess. but accessable? no. these are all books that you will wrestle with. and that approach doesn't appeal to me.
so.... you didn't like "reasses your chess" (neither did I btw)
and you feel that silman and heisman aren't strong enough to explain chess- but are only trying to cash in on their meagre talents...
hmmm...
at any rate, like I said :respect. but I don't think I can agree that a person's rating is in the end All important. Give me an IM that can really explain how to approch a important but untactical middlegame position and that is far,far better than a long WC explanation that I struggle with.
instead, for a patzer like me. key is whether the author can explain something succinctly and further whether their book speaks to me. if this doesn't happen the books stays on the shelf. I have a limited appetite for (studying) chess books and a bigger chess library than I should.
I should also point out that I am an Online warrior with limited time, average potential and No OTB play (not to mention aspirations).
------
"pachman, Kotov and Keres" is a pretty small library. if those are the kinds of books that speak to you. you should expand you horizons. there are many, many similar deep books from the thinkers of chess.
its funny, given that recommendation; I would have almost bet that you were a diehard advocate of "My System" by Nimzowitch. he's a great chess player and it was a heck of book that has been shaping chess for over 100 years.
ok, thanks for the indepth recommendation.
I appreciate it.
"Jeremy Silman's How to Reassess Your Chess is an example of a good book which explains many important ideas in clear terms." - GM John Nunn (2006)
... Wait , Nunn's book has been published from the same publishing company?Nah , it was a coincidence. ...
Specific details?
"Silman has been the most prolific author of quality chess books in this country. His output ranges from technical theoretical works to books for the beginner and average player. His ‘Reassess Your Chess’ ... and ‘The Amateur’s Mind’ are already classics of instruction, ..." - IM John Watson (2001)
... Wait , Nunn's book has been published from the same publishing company?Nah , it was a coincidence. ...
Reassess your chess is distributed in Europe by NewInChess.The same company is distributing at least 4 of Nunn's books , one of them is Nunn's Chess Course.
Can we infer from this that you have absolutely nothing to justify your earlier ("published from the same publishing company") comment?
... Surprisingly , Silman's site recommends Batsford books and guess who works for Batsford.I will give you a hint , starts from N ends to unn. ...
If one avoids an explicit statement that GM John Nunn "works" for Batsford, does it provide deniability if it becomes apparent that the idea has as much substance as the published-from-the-same-company comment?
But seriously , you need me to tell you what "games" all these play so that they make you buy?If I gave you no clues you would believe everyone is honest and noone is "paid" for fake reviews?
If there is any verifiable source for the idea that GM John Nunn plays games by writing fake reviews, I am afraid you will have to identify it for me. Otherwise, I would be inclined to reflect on the switch from "published" to "distributed" as an indication of what to expect.
My English are not very good you know.You guys forget that we are forced to discuss in a language we hardly know.It was a language mistake.
If I made a language mistake like that, I would want to promptly notify people that the earlier statement was not to be trusted, rather than wait for somebody to prod me about it.
But I wonder , how stupid are you?
These guys have the same distributor ,they are practically employees of the same company ,
Did this sort of thinking cause you to conclude that GM John Nunn "works" for Batsford? Perhaps another language mistake announcement is coming?
would they ever dare to say anything bad for each other's books?
What's your common sense tells you , if you have any?
I don't need common sense to see quite negative comments by GM John Nunn on a Batsford book on the Latvian Gambit and you writing about someone who works for Batsford and "starts from N ends to unn".
Or you just realised that all this time they have foolled you with the fake reviews and you find it hard to believe you were so naive?
Can we infer that you know of absolutely no published comment connecting GM John Nunn and fake reviews? By the way, the GM John Nunn comment was not a review avoiding saying anything bad about Silman's book. Indeed, it wasn't a review at all. It was an aside in his own book.
http://publishingperspectives.com/2015/09/chess-the-worlds-most-published-sport/#.VsEkrbSLTMo
Something that most don't realise is that chess publishing industry is one of the biggest publishing industries.The above article clearly says that no other sport or game has so many books as chess.
Isn't there something of a difference between
"one of the biggest sport or game publishing industries"
and what you actually wrote?
"one of the biggest publishing industries" - jengaias
I read somewhere but can't find it, that the sales estimated that are over 800 million dollars every year.
In the meantime we have the word of the one who wrote "published", "works for Batsford", and "one of the biggest publishing industries".
Distributors and publishers would do anything to get these money on their hand.Anyone doubts that?You think they would leave everything in chance?
It does not appear that GM John Nunn was stopped from writing the negative commentary on the Batsford Latvian Gambit book.
When you see someone in tv explaining how good a product is , do you have any doubt that he has been paid?Why chess should be different?Because all grandmasters are higher humans and they are good and honest people that would never post a fake review for money or because it suits them or because they have been ordered by their "boss".Anyone really believes that?
GM John Nunn is not "someone in tv". He is someone who writes books as an authority on chess. He would have something to lose if he became known as one who put "fake" stuff in them.
Ylblai2
In almost all your posts you recommend a book.
It would be more apt to refer to me SUGGESTING a book that might have content related to the interest of this or that person making a post.
In every post asking about openings you recommend a book of some totally unknown guy called Taburo or something like that.
... (who that guy Taburo is?Enlighten us) ...
Just earlier today, I responded to a Sicilian concern by referring to a book by GM John Emms, not Tamburro. From time to time, I have responded to concerns about the best of various sorts of openings by quoting from the magazine, Chess. At the USCF site, there is a listing for Pete Tamburro maintaining a rating over 2000 for close to two decades.
"Chess Life and Chess Life for Kids columnist Pete Tamburro hosted the popular Openings for Amateurs lecture series on chess.fm and the Internet Chess Club. In addition to coaching college basketball and championship high-school chess and cross-country teams, Pete has been voted Chess Journalist of the Year (2006) and named New Jersey’s Outstanding Teacher of History (1990). His chess books include writing Learn Chess from the Greats and editing the Kasparov Foundation’s Teaching Chess Step by Step series."
... How long you are in the site?
I arrived here around the summer of 2015.
How many games you have played?
In the last 12 months, I have played about 13 games. They were also around the summer of 2015.
I found not even one.
Would you want us to take this as an indication of the quality of your searching?
Why be in a chess site and not playing chess?
There are those who enjoy trying to help others.
It makes you wonder , doesn't it?
Your role in the site is rather suspicious.Why don't you show us how much you understand chess with all these wonderful books you have read?
On the other hand, people might wonder how much time is going to go by before you comment on what quotes you have to justify this notion about reading "all these wonderful books". By the way, my USCF rating is about 1500.
Anyway , people can judge for themselves.I am trying to help chessplayers avoid people like you that try to promote the useless.My recommendations are classic authors that also were great players.Who better to teach you chess?Someone that himself was a top grandmaster or someone that has never been even a good International Master?
"A lower-rated player who writes well and can explain ideas clearly may be more helpful than a top GM who lacks any talent for writing. ... many fine books are written by players who are not grandmasters." - GM John Nunn (2006)
You recommendations are books of doubtful value written by nobodies , most of them ...
Again, my predominant activity has been SUGGESTING, and my suggestions have included authors such as IM Jeremy Silman, GM John Emms, and so on. Do you evaluate your own ability to write usefully as greater than theirs?
Are these the books your boss tries to sell?
I do not have a boss, trying to sell books.
Now, how much time is going to go by during the wait for a report on the availability of specific verifiable evidence in connection with
the "works for Batsford" idea;
the idea that GM John Nunn plays games by writing fake reviews;
the "one of the biggest publishing industries" idea; and
the reading "all these wonderful books" idea?
I've always found ylblai2' quotations and shared information on chess books valuable and to the point.
People are welcome to think that chess book reviews are not to be trusted if they wish, but personal attacks against ylblai2 are completely unjustified.
Why be in a chess site and not playing chess? It makes you wonder, doesn't it?
I have played ylblai2 OTB. He's credible and quite knowledgeable.
This site claims more than 13 million members.* Fewer than 2 million play Daily Chess. Fewer than 2 million play blitz. It's a pretty fair guess that a lot of members are here only for the forums.
*The number of members may be inflated by those who have had multiple accounts.
Show us some of your games to see how much you understand chess with all these wonderful books you read.
This "all these wonderful books" notion is not mine. I see no reason for me to be obliged to try to demonstrate a claim by someone else. It seems to me that the first step is for the claim to be demonstrated (with a quote) to be something other than an invention. Perhaps the wait will be similar to the wait related to the "working for Batsford" idea and the "one of the biggest publishing industries" idea.
How much time do you spend studying others chess games? Do you print out their games and study? What is your method? Interested in hearing the various methods that are here.
Thank you,
Joseph
My apologies if this should have gone to a different forum