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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member max92
    let's play CHESS
    14 Aug '08 12:07 / 1 edit
    As a beginner what book helped you improve the most and help to understand certain aspects of chess most effectively,which one do you remember the most in your learning years.
  2. 14 Aug '08 12:10
    You don't say.
  3. Standard member max92
    let's play CHESS
    14 Aug '08 12:12 / 1 edit
  4. 14 Aug '08 13:28
    That would correspond to the present for me. I've gotten a lot out of "The Complete Chess Player" by Reinfeld.
  5. 14 Aug '08 13:30
    Originally posted by max92
    As a beginner what book helped you improve the most and help to understand certain aspects of chess most effectively,which one do you remember the most in your learning years.
    The art of the checkmate by Renaud and Kahn (need to know descriptive notation).
    Logical chess: move by move by Chernev.
  6. Standard member Wulebgr
    Angler
    14 Aug '08 13:51
    The first book I read led to the most dramatic improvement: Chernev, 1000 Best Short Games of Chess taught me to coordinate pieces in attack
  7. 14 Aug '08 15:38
    Originally posted by max92
    As a beginner what book helped you improve the most and help to understand certain aspects of chess most effectively,which one do you remember the most in your learning years.
    I got most out of Chessmaster tutorials. Actually I owe most of my enthusiasm for this game to that program, and Josh Waitzkin for making chess very interesting.
  8. 14 Aug '08 20:18 / 1 edit
    The only chess book that I consider to be a "must read" is Logical Chess: Move by Move by Irving Chernev. It will teach you how to "think chess."

    Before tackling the Chernev book, I would recommend immersing yourself in the basics by reading one of the following books:

    Chess for Dummies by NM James Eade
    The Complete Idiot's Guide to Chess by GM Patrick Wolff
    Play Winning Chess by GM Yasser Seirawan & IM Jeremy Silman
    Guide to Good Chess by IM Cecil Purdy
    Chess the Easy Way by GM Reuben Fine (available only in desciptive notation, unfortunately)
    The Game of Chess by Siegbert Tarrasch
  9. Standard member Noel Stumpit
    Throwing bricks ...
    14 Aug '08 20:35
    One of the earliest chess books I read was "Chess for Amateurs" by Fred Reinfeld, published in about 1940. It was unusual in that it took games - I've no idea if they were constructed or genuine - from novices at the beginning of the book through to club players towards the end and every two or three moves would ask the reader for comments on the general strategy or to give analysis of a particular line, usually two or three moves deep. The model answers were at the back. There was a companion Volume Chess Mastery by Question and Answer where a dozen or so master games were treated in the same way. I have not seen this "interactive" format repeated in any modern books more to the pity because I suspect that many readers just skim through the books they buy without really involving themselves too much in what they read.
  10. 14 Aug '08 22:01 / 8 edits
    one of the books that really made a deep impression and more important engendered a tactical awareness was the now famous Micheal de la Maza, rapid chess improvement. i did some of the tactical exercises and tried to follow a plan but being a father and a husband i had so many other commitments. however I now try to think more positionally and have embraced I.M. Alexander Bangievs square strategy theory, it is essentially a system for appraisal of any given position, where questions are asked and the results used to formulate important strategic aspirations and ascertain goals , it too has a question and answer session style approach where the student is trained to adopt the correct 'thought process'. this is somewhat different in that its aims are to get the student to be self reliant, making thoughtful moves without the need of memorizing a plethora of theoretical lines, extensive calculation or ironically the need for books! there are also some opening books that i would recommend, greenpawn eat your heart out!

    the worst opening book i ever purchased was everyman chess, the petroff defence, written by a raetsky and m chetverik, appalling list of theoretical lines, cover to cover, might as well be a knitting pattern, the best was Neil Macdonalds, the Bb5 Sicilian revealed, awesome book covering the main ideas, strategies, whats new, tricks and traps, heroes and villains and excellent annotated games. wish you well - robbie.
  11. 15 Aug '08 02:01 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by max92
    As a beginner what book helped you improve the most and help to understand certain aspects of chess most effectively,which one do you remember the most in your learning years.
    I think gaychessplayer's list is a good one. I'm a novice, and not long ago I read Wolff's "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Chess." I thought it was a great beginner's first book. (I read the 2nd edition, but there's a 3rd edition now.)

    Then I read Purdy's "Guide to Good Chess." It's out of print, and I've recently seen some high prices asked for the latest edition (12th ed). But if you hunt a little, you might find a reasonable deal. Also, the 11th edition seems to be a lot cheaper. (Both the 11th and 12th editions are in algebraic notation.)

    I think Purdy's book is a good complement to Wolff's book. Wolff's book has better discussions of some subjects like tactics, but Purdy's book has better discussions of general principles. Purdy's discussion of general opening principles was so clear and easy to understand that it was like a light bulb being switched on over my head.

    Purdy's book is on the thin side (only about 140 pages), but he packs in quite a lot of advice. I liked it a lot.

    Edit - On second thought, you HAVE to get Purdy's book - He was an Australian!
  12. 15 Aug '08 14:45
    Play Winning Chess by Seirawan and Silman is probably the single book that has had the most impact on my game so far. I am just finishing it now and will be starting on The Amateur's Mind by Silman next, hoping to get a bit more understanding of positional ideas and long term planning rather than just moving things around hoping my opponent blunders so I can snap up a piece.
  13. Standard member Talisman
    Time traveller.
    16 Aug '08 14:39
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    one of the books that really made a deep impression and more important engendered a tactical awareness was the now famous Micheal de la Maza, rapid chess improvement. i did some of the tactical exercises and tried to follow a plan but being a father and a husband i had so many other commitments. however I now try to think more positionally and have ...[text shortened]... , tricks and traps, heroes and villains and excellent annotated games. wish you well - robbie.
    If you're reading books that tell you there's no need for extensive calculation, you're being seriously mislead!
    The truth of any given position is in the variations. No amount of thoughtful moves will ever change that.
  14. 16 Aug '08 14:42
    Originally posted by Talisman
    If you're reading books that tell you there's no need for extensive calculation, you're being seriously mislead!
    The truth of any given position is in the variations. No amount of thoughtful moves will ever change that.
    This is what I don't understand about Silman's approach.
    He says that in any given position you should first look for imbalances.
    What good is this in OTB when you waste time because the first thing you should be looking for are tactics for both sides via check/captures/threats?
  15. Standard member Talisman
    Time traveller.
    16 Aug '08 15:17
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    This is what I don't understand about Silman's approach.
    He says that in any given position you should first look for imbalances.
    What good is this in OTB when you waste time because the first thing you should be looking for are tactics for both sides via check/captures/threats?
    I couldn't agree more. I've tried the Silman approach myself and found his system of imbalances completely impractical for normal play.
    i think there is a lot to be said for positional evaluation, after all it's always good to know where your strenghs and weaknesses in any given position are. However all the positional features of a position are completely irrelevant if you can't spot a 2 move tactic.
    The board has to be combed for tactical variations before starting to think about any positional ideas.
    This is where i think the Silman books are very misleading. The stuff he talks about as being of paramount importance is really just the icing on the cake. Master chess may well be about shades of position but for the rest of us... the 2 movers and cheapos will forever be King