First off let's deal with Eric Schiller...the biggest potboiler since
Reinfeld...I mean I have quite a few of his books...and his analysis
and attitude always leaves me very unimpressed.
I recommend to all to steer clear of his opening books.
Strictly for openings I recommend getting MCO or the ECO set (if you
can afford that one!) and then go to Chess Digest and find a specialty
book on the openings you like...but not one by Schiller.
The other way is to buy game collections and study the openings of
GM's that way...by going through the whole game. Well and of course
Informants...which are the best!
Dave
In the for what it is worth category, I must agree on Schiller. The
books I have of his ( yes, I bought a couple at the same time but I
am not a repeat offender 🙂 ) are very appealing on the face but tend
to fall down on analysis of what they do cover, do not cover a lot of
the variations you will meet and are not well-structured to be usable or
useful as either a learning tool or as reference material. Surface level
information only. Waste not your time, waste not your money.
-ww-
With pleasure, Dave. Actually, we agree on most things; I just don't
voice my opinion on many subjects. Schiller is just one that raises my
annoyance level. I wish there were stronger term than "hack" I could
use in a "family" environment.
To be useful to the community rather than just express disgust, note
that Dave's overall advice is the best.
For those looking for a particular opening, if you want to learn to play
the Reti, Angus Dunnington's book published by Cadogan is pretty
good. For those who want the English, Tony Kosten's book from
Gambit is similarly good.
Both have holes but do not claim to be an end-all authoritative
sources and part of the fun is finding out how to plug those holes your
opponent finds anyway.
Since I seem to be in a prolific mode, a brief word on holes in chess
theory and maintaining a repetoire. ALL opening books have holes in
them. Period. Both theory and popularity of openings as well as the
fact that over 100,000 ratable OTB IM and above games are played
yearly make it difficult at best to have a source that is up to date.
Ask your local GM where he spends most of his study time and the
answer most likely is keeping up with theory in his/her pet openings.
This does not mean that most players should try to keep up that well.
For most players it just does not matter as the differences at the GM
level tend to be subtle and positional in nature; for most chess
players, tactics wins the day again and again.
More than I wanted to say so I'll end with the obvious advice: work
your basics first (development, open lines, piece placement, etc.),
know the concepts/ideas behind the openings you want to play much
more than worry about every variation, and, if you want books, well,
stay away from the .... hacks.
-ww-
best posts I have seen in the theory forum. It was too insightful and
too true!
I implore to all of my pupils that the best thing that you can study is
really complete games...cause like you said either tactics or endgame
finesse wins in the end...the days of Bobby being more booked up on
anyone are gone...now everyone gets their latest results right off the
net and can find any new TN's in any opening.
WW I will wait for our game in the tourney...if I get knocked out or if
you do before we have a chance to play than we can set one up
after...you and Mcdonan are running up the list pretty quick...if you
catch me then great...but who in the hell can catch Gil??
Dave
Thanks Dave. I look forward to the opportunity of playing you, so it's
a deal. I've been mostly just trying to be patient and earn a spot near
the top. Don't recall if you have played mcD but he is solid and tough.
And I don't know what happened to Gil, he just turned on the
afterburners a few weeks ago - think he's been sandbagging a bit?
Anyway, off to get a bite and watch a lecture by Bill Paschall on the
Scandanavian. Catch up with you in a few.
-ww-
And my beginner's two cents.
I was looking for books on openings that were readable for me. (MCO
and the like just don't fit the bill for me yet).
Schiller's books looked good on the surface, and who knows, maybe
good enough for me.
But I noticed the intro's to two different opening books he coauthored
looked very similar; both openings led to dynamic play, opportunities
for sound strategic play or sharp tactics, blah blah blah, or some such
pablum. The two intros were so similar I started comparing them side
by side.
Comparing them side by side, they were MORE than just similar; they
were IDENTICAL, except for the global replacement of one opening's
name for the other.
At that point, I figured if the author's were too lazy to write unique
intro's, I couldn't be so certain how meticulous they were on their
analysis and explanation.
So I passed....
Exactly!! Tony Kosten is a good writer..Raymond Keene is decent...if
you want a real good opening book check out Chess Openings by
Mike Basman...I mean I can go on and on about good authors...but
Schiller is just out to make money...not to expand known theories.
I met him in NY...I was getting Simarin's autograph...and he was
standing right there and asked me if I wanted him to sign my board
as well...I said no.
Not a good look on his face...hehehe
Dave
Hi Dave et al! I don't have the feeling that Schiller wants to go in-
depth. To me it seems -and I'm only very intermediate- that the only
thing he aims at, is to get you started with a sort of mini-max
programme. Just to launch you a bit. Of course, the titles 'A Complete
Defense against...' are preposterous, just like these books
titled 'Winning with...'. But he helped me. With Black vs 1.d4 I feel
pretty well at home in the Tarrasch. It lands me in familiar patterns.
It's the students responsibility to study this (and later other) opening
(s) thoroughly, as far as possible, of course. I haven't the chess
knowledge like yours to judge him in such earnest. However,
his 'defence' against 1.e4, the Caro-Kann doesn't appeal to me. I'd
rather play the Alekhine, the Scandinavian or the Accelerated Dragon.
With White I NEVER open with 1.e4, although it's in most beginner's
textbooks to start with learning open games, but I don't feel then like
a fish in water. I love closed games. I also occasiaonally play, with
White, the Trompowsky, just to limit my opponents' book-knowledge.
Oh well, this is just a patzer's opinion. Don't nail me down on it. By the
way, Dave, are you as harsh on Jeremy silman as on Schiller. Jan
Jermey Silman is an excellent writer...he really looks into how to teach
a person...same as Bruce Pandolfini does. My feelings on Schiller are
obviously not just my own...seems a few people on here share the
same deal I have with him. All of his books aren't bad...and yes there
are some decent things in them...but for the price it is better to go
with someone else than him...although I really like his
book "Unorthodox Chess Openings"...but only for bathroom reading
material..hehehe.
I have always recommended Seirawan's series for beginners and after
that My System by Nimzo and The Game of Chess by Tarrasch. Along
with a copy of MCO.
Dave
Who knows that Bobby was right "1.e4...Best by Test!"
- Joined
- 08 Jul 02
- Moves
- 155511
Dave, or anyone,
I read Fred Reinfeld a long time ago, and I'm revisiting two of his
books now. They are old school with old standard notation. But they
seem quite informative and helpful because they concentrate on how
to THINK about playing chess, instead of just the moves themselves.
I'm reading "How to Be A Winner At Chess" and "The Complete Chess
Player". Are they worth my time, or am I just not with it? ...I am
getting ancient you know. Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Coyote