Didn't you ask this the other day (minus the Pandolfini book reference)? :)
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/going-back-to-tactics-square-one-but
Tactics with a little strategy
Sort:
Oops. My mind must be going... :)
Stwils
You don't need strategy till about 1900 USCF. (I'm 1800 atm and I can assure you that I have never studied a chess book period, gaining ability from chess.emrald and chesstempo) Tactics are the way to go.
Basic components of strategy like development, king safety, piece activity, and types of pawns eg backward, doubled, isolated, etc. are useful to learn before 1900 USCF.
So basically try to keep your pawns healthy, try to keep your pieces active (don't ignore your undeveloped or poorly placed pieces -- work to get them into the game) and don't unnecessarily weaken your king's position by moving pawns.
orangehonda wrote:
Basic components of strategy like development, king safety, piece activity, and types of pawns eg backward, doubled, isolated, etc. are useful to learn before 1900 USCF.
So basically try to keep your pawns healthy, try to keep your pieces active (don't ignore your undeveloped or poorly placed pieces -- work to get them into the game) and don't unnecessarily weaken your king's position by moving pawns.
But that's like common knowledge, no?
I'm concentrating on tactics via tactics trainer, chess tempo, and chess mentor and puzzle books. But I feel I need some strategy guidance to be well balanced. Would studying Weapons of Chess (Pandolfini) be a good idea? What would you suggest? Stwils (rating around 1353)