Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 30 Apr '07 06:02
    As a poor player, would the more experienced players on the forum recommend that I play through the games of the chess greats? Does this actually help the learning curve any more than getting hammered by half way decent players on this site? If you do recommend this, which players games would you suggest as being the most instructive for us strugglers? Sorry to keep asking for advice. Your help and patience appreciated as always.
  2. Standard member Yuga
    Renaissance
    30 Apr '07 08:25
    Originally posted by Millwall Bill
    As a poor player, would the more experienced players on the forum recommend that I play through the games of the chess greats? Does this actually help the learning curve any more than getting hammered by half way decent players on this site? If you do recommend this, which players games would you suggest as being the most instructive for us strugglers? Sorry to keep asking for advice. Your help and patience appreciated as always.
    Generally it would be more beneficial to study the games of earlier masters if one is a weaker player. The ideas behind the moves become more complicated as one progresses to study the games of stronger masters; I don't think that I can much understand the games of Fischer onward without extensive analysis. Many games at the lower level is decided by tactics. So I would recommend the games of Paul Morphy.

    Paul Morphy
    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=16002

    I should note that most improvement comes with experience; by knowing how to develop pieces while limiting the scope of a few of the opponent's pieces, one can do pretty well. I think much opening study is pretty irrelevent - aim to control the center of the board. And books aren't necessary for improvement.

    Of course there is much more to chess than that... have fun.
  3. 30 Apr '07 10:10
    Originally posted by Yuga
    Generally it would be more beneficial to study the games of earlier masters if one is a weaker player. The ideas behind the moves become more complicated as one progresses to study the games of stronger masters; I don't think that I can much understand the games of Fischer onward without extensive analysis. Many games at the lower level is decided by tactics. ...[text shortened]... necessary for improvement.

    Of course there is much more to chess than that... have fun.
    I agree with Yuga that you should study the games of the earlier masters before moving on to the more complicated games of the present day masters. Morphy is great for learning how to attack. I would also recommend Capablanca for his strategy and endgame technique. Alekhine's games are very enjoyable, but can be complicated and overly tactical.

    Of more modern players, Fischer, Karpov, and Kasparov are the obvious ones to study. I think I learnt more by playing through the games of Bobby Fischer than anyone else. His book 'My 60 Memorable Games' is a classic.
  4. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    30 Apr '07 15:30
    If you can get your hands on a copy of "Tal - Botvinnik 1960", Mikael Tal's account of his World Championship match with Botvinnik, it's good for any level of player. One of the nice things is that he explains what he's trying to achieve rather than just give reams of variations (does anyone ever really go through them?). He was a journalist as well as being one of the all time chess greats, so his books are more readable than most.