what tactic book help u get over that hump

I remember Kasparov saying the importance of studying many master games. Actually it's not only kasparov that says this. Majority of masters advices novice to study a lot of masters games.

I think there is no harm if a below 1800 study strategies. Of course the novice needs to improve his/her tactics. But there is no harm studying strategies. Studying strategy will help a novice get good positions. Of course it can be ruined by a blunder(this is where studying tactics  comes in, to help you getting better at winning good positions). Studying strategy will give novice a clue what to do if he can't find tactics. Chess can become boring too for novice if they can't see a tactic, and are clueless on what to do.

If a novice gets a good position, he can still lose by blunder against a fellow novice. But if we will go for percentage/stats, I will guess that most novice that gets good position probably will win 65% of their games against a fellow novice opponents.

Novice loses games because of poor tactics. But you can also see that they have poor piece placement.

I know a kid who always has  an even score with his fellow novice opponents. Then  one day I showed him a book that teaches basic chess piece placement/guides like castling, endgames,rooks are good at open files, trade when ahead etc. After reading some of this concepts this kid beat most of the time his fellow novice opponents.

I can no longer recall the  exact quote of kasparov. But it's related with studying  a lot of master games.

It really depends on the students/amateurs . There are are amateurs who enjoy/get pleasure studying chess a lot. There are amateurs who don't enjoy it. If a player only seeks entertainment then he can just simply play without studying that much. If a player wants to get better but don't enjoy chess training, he should get another hobby/field(kasparov has a quote about this too, I just have forgotten where I saw it).

International Master Silman was quoted saying he quited chess because he can't take the rigorous process to be a GM.

Silman is a great writer. He is one of my favourite authors.

Jeremy Silman has helped me a lot. His articles are excellent. I won't say anything to you.

Wernher-von-Braun wrote:

If he's helped you so much, why are you still rated only 1432. The fact is, you're not capable of thinking or learning.

He has helped me breaking 1500. I timed out recently in 3-4 games and went down to 1432.

!!!!

i dont see anything wrong with going over 1 or 2 annotated master games. but remember that would take about 30 mins per master game. i feel that everyone below 1800 would be better off spending that hour on tactical training. it really depends on how much time you have to devote to your study on a daily basis. i feel i would be much stronger if i can just play safe on every move and thats worth reading 200 straegy books. it took me to get away from chess for a small time to realize every thing NM Dan Heisman told me was true. simple things like playing good old fashion slow games where i learn to play safe on EVERY move. see a good move , put it in my pocket and look for better move. make sure im using all my pieces. he said he went through 2000 master games in his first 3 years and didnt read an endgame book til he ws rated 2100 USCF. he learn a lot just by going over master games

SmyslovFan: Well said. I'm impressed by the Yusupov books but consider them uneven and overrated as a great chess course.

hey guys , i just recieved a tactic book in mail called Chess School vol.2. rated for 1600 -2200 player. problem is that it's mostly mates. do you'll think its better to solve mate tactics or material tactics.

It depends on your skill level. Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess was almost all mating patterns. 

I teach tactics thematically beginning with forks and pins. 

As long as you memorise the patterns and play regularly with the intent of setting them up, your play will improve.

thanks, lol, i now have now have fred reinfeid 1001 brillant combos, sergey ivashchenko chess school vol. 2, 303 tricky chess tactics (i really like it because it has pins, forks, ect. then random puzzles at the end), the complete chess workout, combination challenge, ray cheng pratical chess exercises, lev alburt chess training pocket book, and i'm going through My best games by Alexander Alekhine

..do you'll think its better to solve mate tactics or material tactics.

I would recommend both. Plus there is the wonderful world of positional tactics

IMO much of chess study is like long-distance track training. It doesn't matter so much whether you run over hills or flats, whether it's warm or cold, but that you are out there running.

i checked the answers and for each section there are 200 tactics and 70 are 4 move mate combos, other 130 are 95% material with a few mates in there. i wont lie, ive been through about 7 master game books and read Amateurs Mind by Silman and i still dont understand all that grand strategy i see in the games. But all Masters are tactical monsters so their games has to be won by strategy. i dont hate strategy, i just think tactics are easier to master and give u more bang for the buck. no to mention u dont need a coach to learn them

13 months later, I still say that being weak tactically is the case for lower rated players. But also, having a consistent thought process is more important than studying tactics. I stop playing for 8 months and I'm back to improving.