In my experience Chess books hep... sometimes. How's that for ambiguity? They offer insghts, really sort of like a Chess-Muse. Sometimes in chess, like in writing or school or life you get stuck at an impasse. You find yourself playing a lot, but not really getting much better. Books can act as a catalyst to get you past those impasses. Its like the rest of the world: there is a time for studying and a time for doing. In study you set the foundations, and in practice you exploit them. You can't spend forever on a foundation, eventually you have to put something on it. But you can only put so much on there before you need to reinforce it again.
Considering my own obvious weaknesses as a chess player I'm lecturing from a rather low pulpit here, I know--but I have a backup plan. I like casually reading chess books--is fun. Good ones ae an end unto themselves, regardless of whether I materially "improve".
Originally posted by deeploserout of 280 games here, I think I've had only one where opposition mattered. maybe two, but it's very rare (for me) in any case, like all theoretical endings.
I agree with this. I'd have never figured out opposition if someone hadn't written about it.
I still don't see anyone having a good case for any book making a real impact on their rating. getting to 1500 in years is not very good when 2 months of intense tactical training does the same. getting back to 1600 after being 1600 likewise. and peaking at 1800 without being able to hold it doesn't count either.
I've seen a lot of general talk about how book knowledge should be good for you, and I fully agree it seems like a reasonable idea. but I see no proof. nobody has stepped out and said: "I studied silman's book thoroughly, and it raised my rating from 1700 to 1900 permanently"
there are loads of 1500-1700 people here who have much, much more book knowledge than I do, and have been playing up to dozens of years. I have 96 000 tactical problems done and a rating of 1950, and I'm seriously questioning what those people got out from their books, except entertainment.
Originally posted by wormwoodI challenge you to study - I mean solid study of say 8-10 hrs per week - Dvoretskys endgame manual for three months and see if it doesn't permanently improve your knowledge and your rating.
out of 280 games here, I think I've had only one where opposition mattered. maybe two, but it's very rare (for me) in any case, like all theoretical endings.
I still don't see anyone having a good case for any book making a real impact on their rating. getting to 1500 in years is not very good when 2 months of intense tactical training does ...[text shortened]... seriously questioning what those people got out from their books, except entertainment.
Originally posted by MahoutThis is not to say the tactics training theory isn't accurate but just wondering if it eventually gives diminishing returns. And just because the tactics training is so effective doesn't exclude the possibility that the right book at the right time will bring real benefits to a player.
I challenge you to study - I mean solid study of say 8-10 hrs per week - Dvoretskys endgame manual for three months and see if it doesn't permanently improve your knowledge and your rating.
BTW IMHO: Dvoretsky's manual is tough going - not for the faint hearted - and really suited to someone at Wormwoods level and above (to tough for me at the moment), but both Marinakatomb and Sicilian Smaug on this site claim it's worth the effort.
Originally posted by MahoutI know people who have done that, and I'm already hundreds of points past all of them. clearly I'm doing something right.
I challenge you to study - I mean solid study of say 8-10 hrs per week - Dvoretskys endgame manual for three months and see if it doesn't permanently improve your knowledge and your rating.
and I'm sure it would improve my knowledge, but I'm not convinced it would significantly improve my strength. which is my whole point.
Originally posted by wormwoodBut if you did then this would be a good test of the question. The people you know who've done the doveretsky thing...well maybe they got onto it a little early. I do agree with your statement that better knowledge doesn't necessarily mean better play...just as in football you can know a lot about the game but not be able to make it happen on the pitch. But if you combine the knowledge and the skill...
I know people who have done that, and I'm already hundreds of points past all of them. clearly I'm doing something right.
and I'm sure it would improve my knowledge, but I'm not convinced it would significantly improve my strength. which is my whole point.
Of course studying chess from books helps. Then I mean studying not just reading like a plain novel. I have won many games just because I was better prepared in the opening. Only reading doesn´t get you very far. Very important thing is to solve tactics. Solve as many tactiacal quizes as you can get your hands on. It helps you finding them in tournament games, you will learn to look for patterns and most of all WHEN to look for them.
Also for intermediate players, like me, I don´t spend too much time studying boring endgames as only a fraction of our (at least mine) games ends in an equal endgame that´s hard to win. Most of the time it finishes in the middle part or at least goes into an endgame which is easily won by white or black.
Instead you should aim for the openings and middle game. Learn the openings you want to play and learn them well. Don´t play too many openings and don´t just learn the moves by heart, understand the opening and each move. That way it´s easier to punish your opponent for a small error.
Learn the basic ideas in the middle game, battles of ranks and files, role of each piece, pawn structures, when the right time is to look for tactics etc. By doing this you will learn which move is the correct one without so much thinking about it.
Like one grandmaster said when asked how many moves he saw ahead: "one. I just know it´s the right one". That is to say, the position tells him that this is the move to make. Of course it´s not that easy but genaraly this helps a lot.