books

The following is taken from Bangiev's site:

Das "etwas andere" Schachwerk!
Ein begeisterter Schachfreund schrieb mir folgenden Brief

Hallo Herr Bangiev,

nach dem Durcharbeiten von Aaron Nimzowitsch's "Mein System" bin ich auf der Suche nach weiteren Werken, die die Logik des Schachspiels beschreiben und nicht so sind, wie die typischen Wälzer, wo es auf tausende von auswendig zu lernenden Zügen draufkommt. So bin ich nun auf Ihre Werke gestoßen. Ich bin vom ersten Augenblick fasziniert und möchte unbedingt alle Bücher und CDs durcharbeiten. Mir ist bewusst, dass dies einige Jahre dauern wird, ich bin mir aber sicher, dass genau das der richtige Weg ist. Eine Frage stellt sich allerdings für mich: in welcher Reihenfolge sollte man die Bücher und die CDs durcharbeiten? Welches Buch und welche CD bauen aufeinander auf? Das wird auf Ihrer Website leider nicht so ganz ersichtlich... Vor einigen Jahren habe ich aufgrund von zu wenig Zeit aufgehört aktiv bei Turnieren mitzuspielen. Nun habe ich wieder viel Zeit und möchte langfristig planen mein Schachspiel zu verbessern. Meine letzte DWZ war ca. 1850. Könnten Sie mir also bitte einen Tipp geben, in welcher Reihenfolge man Ihre Werke durcharbeiten soll? Vielen Dank für Ihre Antwort und noch mal danke für das "etwas andere" Schachwerk! 🙂

20.03.2008 Ein begeisterter Leser aus NRW

PS: Schreiben Sie bitte weitere Bücher/CDs mit Aufgaben und Antworten/Lösungen, womit man die Fortschritte des Lernens der Denkmethode nach Ihrer Felderstrategie überprüfen könnte. Das hilft uns, den Schachlehrlingen, das Verständnis für Ihre Methode zu überprüfen. Schon mal: Ein ganz großes: Danke schön dafür!



Antwort

Lieber Schachfreund, danke für Ihre Nachfrage!

Es empfiehlt sich die folgende Reihenfolge bei der Bearbeitung der Felderstrategie.

1) Buch „Felderstrategie: Denkmethode“

2) CD „Felderstrategie 3: Mittelspiel“

3) Buch „Felderstrategie: Taktik“

4) CD „Felderstrategie 1: Taktik“

5) Buch „Felderstrategie für Morra-Gambit“

6) CD „Felderstrategie 2: Eröffnung“

Erklärung:1)Das Hauptwerk der Felderstrategie ist das Buch „Felderstrategie: Denkmethode“. Das Buch stellt die trockene Theorie der Felderstrategie und Beispiele heraus. 2)Die CD „Felderstrategie 3: Mittelspiel“ bietet nach dem Motto „Felderstrategie ist nicht zum Anschauen, man muss Aufgaben lösen“ den Theoriestoff und eine Menge von Schachstellungen (Aufgaben) zum Lösen an. 3)Das Buch „Felderstrategie: Taktik“ ist der Schachtaktik gewidmet. Es stellt die Theorie der Taktik und Beispiele heraus. 4)Das weitere Werk zur Taktik ist die CD „Felderstrategie 1: Taktik“. Hier findet man ausreichend die praktischen Handhabungen in taktischen Stellungen. 5)Das Buch „Felderstrategie für Morra-Gambit“ stellt ein Beispiel für Eröffnungsbehandlung nach Prinzipien der Felderstrategie dar. 6)Die CD „Felderstrategie 2: Eröffnung“ bietet zahlreiche Beispiele aus dem Eröffnungswissen an. Die Eröffnung ist die Phase der strategischen, langfristigen Entscheidungen. Man sollte für das Eröffnungsstudium theoretisch und praktisch gut vorbereitet sein.

All diese Werke werden mit der Terminologie der Felderstrategie und B-Methode behandelt.

Viele Grüße,

Alexander Bangiev


http://bangiev.de/methode/fragen-und-antworten/das-etwas-andere-schachwerk-3/

Originally posted by ivanhoe
The fact that Bangiev chose this game as an example to show the effectiveness of his method in the tactical field ( ... he presents this game on his CD "Strategy Squares I, Tactics" as the first example) has been the subject of many discussions. It is not such a good example to show what the Bangiev method is all about. Bangiev has stated this himself, if my ...[text shortened]... ...

So please, don't dismiss the Squares Strategy because of this rather unlucky example.

I haven't dismissed it yet - I just haven't embraced it yet. Except for Mr. Bangiev, I'm still not aware of a single person who claims to truly understand the B-method.

Waiting for Godot regards,
Mad Rook 🙂

Originally posted by Mad Rook
I haven't dismissed it yet - I just haven't embraced it yet. Except for Mr. Bangiev, I'm still not aware of a single person who claims to truly understand the B-method.

Waiting for Godot regards,
Mad Rook 🙂

I understand.

What is most important in playing and studying chess is the fun you get out of it ... and there are many ways you can do that. There are an awful lot of good books out there that you can study. Some of them are mentioned in this thread.

ok the experiment continues, lets apply the Bangiev method to the position mentioned above after 18.Bd6!! Qxa1+ 19.Ke2 Qb2!, we once again try to involve those pieces which are protecting the dark squares, to challenge, distract, remove if possible those pieces which are defending, the Bc5, Qb2, Ng8, pawn on g7,

20. Rc1!, a move designed to distract the queen, if 20... Qxc1 21. Nxg7+ Kd8 22. Bc7# (20 ...Bxd6 21. Nxd6+ Kd8 22. Nxf7+ Ke8 23. Nd6+ Kd8 24. Qf8# ), (20...Nc6 21. Bxc5 Kd8 22. Nd6+- 18 Nh6 23. Nxf7+),

once again all of the pieces that were defending the dark squares have been either distracted, exchanged or involved in play, in order to weaken the strategically important dark squares, is it not so?but friends, i see that you remain unconvinced, therefore due to your enthusiasm or mine, i dunno which, i will try to post another position which illustrates the effectiveness of this method, a middle game example this time, it should be interesting if nothing else! regards Robert.

Originally posted by Mad Rook
I don't expect to make a habit of agreeing with Robbie, but I guess this is one time that I have to come to his defense. I think in a later post of Robbie's, he did finally state that the B-strategy does include the more traditional tactics (and I assume by extension, also traditional calculations of variations).

Of course, I still have no idea how the B ...[text shortened]... uestion with the response, "Time, as well as later volumes in the series, will tell."

Hahaha! That sounds like Steve. I can hear him saying it.

I'm gonna have to tell him about this thread Saturday; I think he'll be tickled. 😀

look at the solution, after 18.Bd6!! Qxa1+ 19.Ke2 Qb2!, etc etc. why did nobody pick up on this except wormwood, he too couldn't understand Kasparovs remarks, if only he, (kasparov) had studied under Alexander Bangiev, he would have then realised that 20.Rc1 is the move. 😀

I am looking, robbie. Rc1 looks pretty and I haven't found a refutation, but I just found this thread. I need to look some more.

I'm afraid I might be too set in my ways to start thinking differently about chess now, though. 🙂

And if Steve says the Bangiev method is hard, I'm inclined to believe him.

Originally posted by Ignatious Max
I am looking, robbie. Rc1 looks pretty and I haven't found a refutation, but I just found this thread. I need to look some more.

I'm afraid I might be too set in my ways to start thinking differently about chess now, though. 🙂

And if Steve says the Bangiev method is hard, I'm inclined to believe him.

is Steve mad rook ?, if he is, then of all the people who have examined the little snippets of Bangiev he is probably the most broad minded. we had some excellent discussions originally where he almost was going to burn his huge pile of books on tactics but at the last moment succumbed to his fear and renegaded😛 its not that the principles are excessively hard, or that the knowledge is even new, it just takes adjustment in thinking, practise and time. anyhow if the thread brings you happiness then it is enough for me - regards Robert.😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
is Steve mad rook ?, if he is, then of all the people who have examined the little snippets of Bangiev he is probably the most broad minded. we had some excellent discussions originally where he almost was going to burn his huge pile of books on tactics but at the last moment succumbed to his fear and renegaded😛 its not that the principles are exc ...[text shortened]... nd time. anyhow if the thread brings you happiness then it is enough for me - regards Robert.😀

No, Steve is Steve Lopez. I live down the road from Steve and have known him for years. We used to work together, and still meet several times a month to play miniature wargames. Strangely enough, we never play chess!

I wouldn't want to play Black in this position! But I am still looking at it.

hi, please forgive my ignorance, i am just a chess noob and have no idea who Steve Lopez was, really, i just googled it and started to read an incredibly interesting article on chessbase, 'the future of internet chess', something about SUV drivers and their refusal to wield the road and admit their mistakes, will get back to you once i have absorbed it - kind regards Robert.😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[fen]rnb1k1nr/p2p1ppp/3B4/1pbN1N1P/4P1P1/3P1Q2/PqP1K3/2R5 b kq[/fen]

ok the experiment continues, lets apply the Bangiev method to the position mentioned above after 18.Bd6!! Qxa1+ 19.Ke2 Qb2!, we once again try to involve those pieces which are protecting the dark squares, to challenge, distract, remove if possible those pieces which are defendi ...[text shortened]... hod, a middle game example this time, it should be interesting if nothing else! regards Robert.

What about 20...g6?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
is Steve mad rook ?, if he is, then of all the people who have examined the little snippets of Bangiev he is probably the most broad minded. we had some excellent discussions originally where he almost was going to burn his huge pile of books on tactics but at the last moment succumbed to his fear and renegaded😛 its not that the principles are exc ...[text shortened]... nd time. anyhow if the thread brings you happiness then it is enough for me - regards Robert.😀

Hi Robbie. No, I'm not Steve Lopez. However, I decline to comment on whether I'm Alex Bangiev. 😛 It WOULD be cool if Steve could make a post or two while he's reading this thread. (Hint, hint, Steve.)

Robbie, you can easily find the Lopez reviews on the Bangiev CDs if you go to Chessbase and just do a Chessbase search on Bangiev.

Originally posted by tomtom232
What about 20...g6?

yes this is incredibly interesting, according to the Bangiev method it should be good for black but i myself have failed to find a solution and there is no point trying to utilize a chess engine, greedy materialistic things that they are! incomprehensible conglomeration of accursed ones and zeros, bah and humbug to the wretched things.

Originally posted by Mad Rook
Hi Robbie. No, I'm not Steve Lopez. However, I decline to comment on whether I'm Alex Bangiev. 😛 It WOULD be cool if Steve could make a post or two while he's reading this thread. (Hint, hint, Steve.)

Robbie, you can easily find the Lopez reviews on the Bangiev CDs if you go to Chessbase and just do a Chessbase search on Bangiev.

lol, do you also decline that you were almost on the verge of burning all of your tactical books on a huge funeral pyre of conventional wisdom and sacrificing them to the Bangiev method.😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes this is incredibly interesting, according to the Bangiev method it should be good for black but i myself have failed to find a solution and there is no point trying to utilize a chess engine, greedy materialistic things that they are! incomprehensible conglomeration of accursed ones and zeros, bah and humbug to the wretched things.

This method thingy looks interesting.