Chess improvement and study go hand in hand although formal study isn't essential - it just speeds it up. Books are just one method of study and books don't work for everyone. The wrong book or a poor method of studying a book won't benefit the player much either. I believe the right book at the right time will make a noticeable difference so long as the player is happy to work at it.
Some players do climb high without too much study but maybe their brains are trained in other ways such as maths, architecture, engineering, music or anyone of several activities that use modes of thinking that relate in some way to chess. And these players are likely to be more adept at learning from play.
My brothers an architect and only ever plays one or two games of chess a year against me. I see him work out stuff at the board that took me while to learn. Now I can beat him comfortably thanks to what I've learned from books, study and other players.
Originally posted by MahoutI still think that polish sasauges are the steroids of chess. 😉 😀
Chess improvement and study go hand in hand and books are just one method of study. Books don't work for everyone and the wrong books and or a poor method of studying the books won't benefit the player much.
Some people can climb high without too much formal study but maybe their brains are trained in other ways such as maths, architecture, engineering, ...[text shortened]... t him comfortably thanks to what I've learned from books, from study and from other players.
Originally posted by davidgraysonReading books means you don't have to reinvent the wheel.
How many players can really say that studying chess books brought
them from, say, class c to master. It seems to me, that most players
will get close to their maximum ability by merely playing. Books may
increase ratings by perhaps a hundred points or so, but not much more. It seems we all have an innate chess ability which cannot be increased much ...[text shortened]... much out of chess books.
I hope I'm wrong, and would like to hear some real success stories.
You learn which opening moves work and which don't quicker.
You learn tactical and strategic ploys to draw lost endings or win drawn games.
You pick up on and learn opening traps that may be difficult if not impossible to see otherwise.
You stop asking questions like "Can I win with K & N vs K" because you know you can't.
The list goes on and on. Once you have learnt the basics studying books on your weakest aspects will ultimately add 100s if not 1000s of points to your rating.
... but if you don't have the latent ability in the 1st place no amount of studying will achieve anything.
Originally posted by davidgraysonI think the reason reading books don't add 100s of points to players is that tactics and hours of intense tactics training everyday for years(just like wormwood has said) is totally underestimated. people here discuss about which variation of the najdorf they should prefer, but after one of their pieces is captured, they forget to take back and castle! it's unbelievable.
How many players can really say that studying chess books brought
them from, say, class c to master. It seems to me, that most players
will get close to their maximum ability by merely playing. Books may
increase ratings by perhaps a hundred points or so, but not much more. It seems we all have an innate chess ability which cannot be increased much ...[text shortened]... much out of chess books.
I hope I'm wrong, and would like to hear some real success stories.
I'm playing occasionally for about 2 years (but I've been systematically studying for 6 months I guess) and I never had a "strategically lost" or "strategically won" position after the middlegame. in all the games I have played so far, it was the tactics which decided the game. as you go higher in the ratings, the opposition begins to make moves that "works tactically", and the game begins to make more sense. then I guess I'll begin to read deeper books about strategical/positional play.
if you want to be a better player, you just have to stare at a position, lock your mind and concentrate for 30 minutes, "get your hands into blood" (an expression from wormwood again) and think, think, and keep on thinking while just sitting there, doing nothing else. then go to the next position.
one should know no book will study itsself for you. you have to study the book.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 07
- Moves
- 27653
Originally posted by diskamylAnother reason why this happens (it takes time for study to affect your play) is that whatever you are studying often takes a while to show up on the chess board in critical positions. For example, I taught myself K+P endings out of Basic Chess Endings when I was a teenager. Its served me well over the years ad I think I play these above average, but even when you are playing serious tournament chess how many of these do you really get? Same thing if you are studying tactics - learning smothered mate is cool, but how often do you need to know? It does happen, and I've won games with it, but only a few. It takes time for learning all the specifics to add up, even if you remember them all.
I think the reason reading books don't add 100s of points to players is that tactics and hours of intense tactics training everyday for years(just like wormwood has said) is totally underestimated...n
If you are trying to improve tactical alertness (rather than learn specific tactics) from a book, this inevitiably takes time. You study some, you play some, you study more, you play more. Eventually you get better. Age matters, too. At my age (44), a lot of the gains seem transient. I notice that my tactics seem to get noticably better after solving puzzlebooks for a while (a week or two), but this only lasts for a month or so. After that, I seem to fall back where I was. When I was younger, these things seemed to stick better.
Originally posted by davidgraysonBooks really do help. I was stuck at 1100 USCF for a year and a half. I played many tournaments, almost about 2 a month, and yet I never got anywhere. I started studying books in may, and within one month- I went up 140 points. 7 months after I started studying, I had hit 1300. 9 months, 1395- 10 months, 1483- a 383 point increase in just 10 months! In 15 months, I had reached 1595- all of this through studying books- no coach. Studying books does help- however, it depends more on how you use them then the actual books themselves
How many players can really say that studying chess books brought
them from, say, class c to master. It seems to me, that most players
will get close to their maximum ability by merely playing. Books may
increase ratings by perhaps a hundred points or so, but not much more. It seems we all have an innate chess ability which cannot be increased much ...[text shortened]... much out of chess books.
I hope I'm wrong, and would like to hear some real success stories.
Chess books as a teaching tool provide information collected over four centuries of chess study and in particular the many sequences of opening moves [variations as a commonly used phrase],which have proved by trial and subsequent improvements to be the best ways of opening games of chess.In addition they offer clear insights as to the most logical methods of middle game tactical and positional play and end game principles for successful end game results.Memorization to the best of each players personal abilities combined with an ability to recognize good and poor move selection from both sides of the board during play, are a desirable combination which when applied correctly are of great assistance for improved game results.The majority of all chess games which are lost are the result of poor or not best move selections from one player and the correct expliotation of these moves by the opponent player.Books provide the information required to allow players to avoid such losing moves and combinations of such moves and are therefore an indespesable play tool when correctly applied to game play.It is the level of each chess players ability to absorb digest recall and correctly apply this information which determines how useful books are to each individual player,and consequently books will always be more useful to some players than others,however no matter how useful a player can make book information work to their best advantage it will only work to best advantage when combined with chess play experience and the more games which are experienced the easier it becomes to use this information correctly.