Capablanca on Gutenberg

Capablanca's "Chess Fundamentals" has been made available for download on Project Gutenberg. It's free, of course, as everything on Gutenberg. Its URL is http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/33870 .

Of course, something like that is always nice to have and browse through, but what I'd like to know is, what is the forum's opinion on this book? Still good? Outdated? Outdated but still good anyway?

In any case, greenpawn34 should be interested Reveal Hidden Content

Hi SB.

The knowledge cannot be outdated. It's the same game he is talking about.
But I reckon there are better books covering the same subject.
Capa's is OK but not the best.

I'm not a Capa hater, I'm just fed up seeing the same old examples of his being
used to get across a point. Writers are lazy so they copy from each other.

That is why I used Swiss Toni - kingphish ( 🙂 )
Old idea new setting and it is played by one of us simple woodpushers.

Go to search forums - type in Capablanca. 3,870 hits.
Swiss Toni gets one (now two when the web crawlers pick up this thread.)

Writers are lazy so they copy from each other.
So it appears do posters. 😉

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
Capablanca's "Chess Fundamentals" has been made available for download on Project Gutenberg. It's free, of course, as everything on Gutenberg. Its URL is http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/33870 .

Of course, something like that is always nice to have and browse through, but what I'd like to know is, what is the forum's opinion on this book? Still good? ...[text shortened]... Toni - kingphish reminded me very much of a game Capablanca shows in chapter 4.

Richard

Swiss Toni is underated.

that being said, I think Capa should have 500,000 more hits on rhp.I would venture to guess probably 50% of the population here have never even looked at a Capa game.

thx for sharing the link.

I looked at the pawn endings last night. Instructive to try them on a real board. I believe I can learn a lot from this book, so it can't be bad. Maybe the good players and addicted chess book readers don't like it, but they already know too much. They probably look at details: writing/annotation style, choice of examples etc. I just like the info that is in there.

The descriptive notation is a bit confusing sometimes, but only because of comparison with algebraic notation. If you (want to) understand a bit of chess, you should be able to understand this notation as well.

There is an algebraic version out there but by all accounts they did a 'Fischer'
on it and and editied the prose and notes. Quite a few of Capa's example games
have been left out to be replaced with modern up to date theory wise examples.

So we have this book written in the 1920's with games by Tal, Bronstein, Karpov,
Kasparov, Anand and worst of all...Deep Blue...a bloody computer.
This is ridiculous. What a complete waste of time and effort and a lost oportunity
to bring this book to the modern market.

(typical money making trick this, adding in the names of modern great players
and a computer to cast the net as wide as possible. )

The Original
Reading/studying it will not do any harm at all. You will pick up things.
It's horses for courses. All chess books are like that.
It will click with some and not with others.

Trying to recall my first brush with the book I remember loads of
interesting moves that offered no explanation at all.
Of course this was Capa wanting the student to work out things for themselves.

Infact he says after leaving you at an interesting position something like;
'you should be able to work out this for yourself.'

Excellent. Except what looked like a natural spot for Capa to stop and let the
reader work out other continuations was way beyond the grasp of the average player.
At that stage I was not good enough to work things out and ended up getting
into an even more complicated mess.
Imagine Da Vinci stopping halway through painting the Mona Lisa and allowing
a cartoonist to finish it off, then you will get the idea.

Armed with only handful of tactical tricks I'm trying to win a technically won
position with Knight forks and skewers.

In reflection maybe I should have kept at it. 🙂

Hi tvochess

If you think you can learn a lot from the book then go for for it.
Like all books it does need a determined effort from the reader so why
not make this the one you can say you have done cover to cover.
It will make you into a better player.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Infact he says after leaving you at an interesting position something like;
'you should be able to work out this for himself.'

Adding on to my previous post. (this bit should been blogged)

Erwin Weinzinger should read the Capa book.
Capa's, sadly very small, section on opening traps mentions this position.


And White can now play 1.Bxf7+ Kxf7 2.Ne5+ and Nxg4.

In Erwin Weinzinger - TPOL THP Ch 2012 Whie missed this shot though he did go on to win.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
If you think you can learn a lot from the book then go for for it.
Like all books it does need a determined effort from the reader so why
not make this the one you can say you have done cover to cover.
It will make you into a better player.

I'm not to sure it is a ref book.
It's a learning from book, a work book.
Most likely the reason why I gave up on it.
I was going though my looking for a quick fix phase.
(if you are not gifted there is not one.)

If you get stuck, post. One of us will surely be able to guide the rest of us.
It might read a bit like the blind leading the blind but maybe it might tempt
one of the good players (after he has had a good laugh) into posting.

Study it. Soon no doubt you will the one answering the questions.

Edit:
All you will really learn from the blog is to see situations that under 1800
players blunder in and the occasional nice wrap up. (often missed.)

Originally posted by tvochess
Well, I hope it has a certain 'completeness' that I miss from fora, blogs et cetera. However, going cover to cover trying to understand all examples seems like an impossible task for a human. I look at it more as a reference book on which to fall back for specific topics.

I thumbed through my copy last night.

Capa clearly states he takes it for granted that the student has already reached
a certain level and though he mat not fully understand every move he can derive
benefit form any discussion with regard to them.

So like ALL learners I thought I was much better than what I was so that
is why it most likely made little impact on me.

There is also the wonderful note in the Winter game after Winter has just played 10.Nd5


"White should have considered that a player of my experience and strength
could never allow such a move if it were any good."

A brilliant note that one.

I give the game up to the part where Capa shows you what is wrong with 10.Nd5.

W.Winter - Capablanca Hastings 1919

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Adding on to my previous post. (this bit should been blogged)

Erwin Weinzinger should read the Capa book.
Capa's, sadly very small, section on opening traps mentions this position.

[fen]rn1qkb1r/ppp1pppp/5n2/8/2B3b1/2N2N2/PPPP1PPP/R1BQK2R w KQkq - 0 6[/fen]
And White can now play 1.Bxf7+ Kxf7 2.Ne5+ and Nxg4.

In Erwin Weinzinger - TPOL THP Ch ...[text shortened]... Qe2 Kh7 22. g3 Qa5 23. c4 Qc5 24. cxd5 cxd5 25. Qe7 Qxe7 26. Rxe7 Rd8 27. Bf4 d4 28. Be5[/pgn]

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I thumbed through my copy last night.

Capa clearly states he takes it for granted that the student has already reached
a certain level and though he mat not fully understand every move he can derive
benefit form any discussion with regard to them.

So like ALL learners I thought I was much better than what I was so that
is why it most likely made ...[text shortened]...

Now you know the plan. Enter the position into your favourite box,
take Black and win it.

Originally posted by ketchuplover
In both positions I think 6.Ne5 is not too bad. Right? tia