Originally posted by chesskid001idiotsevant of chess
Similar thing in my chess club. This is pretty amazing. There's this one guy rated about 800. He consistently gets into situations in the openings where he has a far superior position to 1400's, 1600's, and the occasional 1800. But his middle and endgame are so bad that it keeps him an 800. When I tell him this, he shrugs it off and continues to talk to some 1700 of some obscure variation of the french defense.
They say that -
those who can, do; and
those that can't, teach.
You don't have to be an expert in your field to teach. After all were we taught Physics at school by Stephen Hawkins, Maths by Einstein, Economics by Keynes, English by Shakespere, etc.
No, we were all taught by mere mortals and some of us went on to greater heights than their teacher. I would not want to be taught Physics by Hawkins - he would lose me totally in the first 5 minutes but an expert teacher using the multitude of resources available to him and having a fraction of the knowledge of Hawkins could teach me that knowledge because he is good at teaching.
Why should chess be any different? Frequently in books written by the likes of Korchnoi I reach the end of his line to find the statement "white stands better". He expects me to know how to turn this into a win but I can't because although I know why white stands better I don't know how to make it work for me. A 1600 writing this book would be unlikely to make such a statement without telling me how to translate my advantage into victory.
It is not who wrote the book that matters but the quality of that writing. If the book works for you, buy it!
Originally posted by GrandmousterYes and it was meant for players below his rating.
Was'nt there a book about Rapid Chess Improvement, written by a chess expert?
La Maza was only a mere 2000 player, and his book is still in print.
Seems to me the idea is mightier then the name, or rating.
We are talking about a 1800+ reading a book written by a 1600 player about.
Originally posted by Dragon FireAbsolutely Brillant!!
They say that -
those who can, do; and
those that can't, teach.
You don't have to be an expert in your field to teach. After all were we taught Physics at school by Stephen Hawkins, Maths by Einstein, Economics by Keynes, English by Shakespere, etc.
No, we were all taught by mere mortals and some of us went on to greater heights than their teac ...[text shortened]... the book that matters but the quality of that writing. If the book works for you, buy it!
That's why you have Gm Roman teaching Gm Kasp. sometimes although Kasp is far better then Roman at chess.
"If the book works for you, buy it!" The problem is you have to buy it first to see if it works for you. With a limited income, I was considering whether to buy Nunn's latest book, narrating his own games or a collection of Colle games, collected by a 1600 player with (I presume) games around that level. From a selfish point of view, I'm asking myself, which would do my game the most good. Maybe I should shovel out the cash for both, then report back to rhp forum, which has done me the most good. Might be an interesting experiment.
Originally posted by ShinidokiThe 1700 player could help that 1300 player tremendously.
Your thinkng is flawed.
Allow me to demonstrate.
you have $10 and you MUST SPEND IT ON CHESS....
(also assume you are a 1300 player)
a number of options present themselves. all of them costing $10
1) a Hour lesson with Kasparov (2800 player)
2) 1 single 2 two hour lesson with an IM (2400)
3) 2 lessons (each 2hrs long) with a Master
4 ...[text shortened]... spend most of that hour teaching you simple tactics (which the 1700 player could of done).......
Originally posted by buddy2Is it possible to borrow chess books from the library? Or maybe a chess club?
"If the book works for you, buy it!" The problem is you have to buy it first to see if it works for you. With a limited income, I was considering whether to buy Nunn's latest book, narrating his own games or a collection of Colle games, collected by a 1600 player with (I presume) games around that level. From a selfish point of view, I'm asking myself, whi ...[text shortened]... ort back to rhp forum, which has done me the most good. Might be an interesting experiment.
Our public libraries have at least 100 chess books and Canada isn't as big in chess as Usa is.
Forget my library. I think they stopped buying chess books after the Fischer-Spassky Match. Nope. If it's an up to date chess book, the library isn't the place to go. When I die, I'm thinking of leaving my collection to the library to help some other poor soul. Canada has more? That figures. We're more interested in spending a quarter trillion in Iraq, when the U.S. states are nearly bankrupt. But it's a good idea to give a quick review of the books i get. There's too many chess books out there that are just plain garbage. Too many opening books with obscure variations. I guess they're the best-sellers. I recall as a young lad memorizing opening lines from an old MCO, lines that nobody every played against me. Better to study endings, tactics, strategy. At present I'm going through Chess Tactics for the Tournament Player by Lev Albert, Sam Palatnk. As good as it is I can still see flaws in the presentation. Hundreds of examples are given of various motifs: clearing a square, X-ray, the in-between move, etc. But these examples are not pulled together properly. I think more should have been done explaining why the geometry of certain positions lends itself to tactics. From that standpoint, i believe The Art of Attack in Chess by Vladimir Vukovic is excellent. It doesn't have as many examples, but the explanations are more thorough.
