Originally posted by sonhouseI have been told it's a "must have", and I should buy it even though I already have "Reassess your Chess". I still haven't done so, but "Reassess your Chess" is very good.
I was curious what you all thought of this book, did I goof in buying it?
I am a 1600 ish player, is that book going to help me?
The book teaches you how to plan using a very methodical method known as the silman planning method, I finished it right after I resigned a good portion of my games so I cant really tell you the fruits of its study. I feel like I have a much better understanding of the game, and before I had no clue what to try and achieve. Well now it seems that I have no problem with planning and I'm moving alot quicker as I know what to do instead of looking mindlessly for moves. I also know how to extract an advantage out of the emballances in a position, as the book does a very good job of covering that topic. The book also is extremely easy to read I didnt even need to set up a game on fritz as the book has plenty of diagrams, and doesnt make one play through a bunch of moves.
It's not a "just out" book. Published in 1999 by Siles Press., out in Los Angeles, California. Recently Jeremy had issues with the New York Times over the printing of Siles's "Chess Bitch" by Jennifer Shahade. Uses the Silman method of imbalances, mostly in dialogue form where Silman offers advice to amateurs and deal with their misconceptions. With test questions/problems in back. According to Silman, designed for "average" player. If you're around 1600 uscf, you're probably on the upper end of the scale. It's an eminently readable book with lots of prose--not just diagrams and notation. Silman is a good teacher. As someone pointed out, this volume is a litte more elementary than Reassess Your Chess and Workbook. You can't really go wrong adding it to your collection. Silman's books are invariably well-produces, nice pictures, type, diagrams, presumably because he does it himself and doesn't just hand material over to a publisher, who prints it the cheapest way possible. Hope this helps.
Originally posted by NordlysI read it after Reassess your Chess and was slightly disappointed. It is all the same material, just in a slightly different format. At your level, I doubt it would be benificial.
I have been told it's a "must have", and I should buy it even though I already have "Reassess your Chess". I still haven't done so, but "Reassess your Chess" is very good.
Originally posted by zebanoI also read the Amateur's Mind after "Reassess Your Chess" and there was a greater focus on the psychological aspect of playing chess and how a chessplayer's thought process influence the moves the chessplayer makes in the Amateur's Mind. Silman works with chessplayers of various levels and it is interesting to see the reasoning behind the moves the chessplayer chooses. Silman includes useful tips and insight afer each move in the attempt to improve a chessplayer's thought/planning process. Even the 2100 player has critical flaws, and even masters waste critical tempi. The book touches on various aspects of chess - I would say Reassess Your Chess is more organized in presenting chess tips than the Amateur's Mind (i.e. slightly more readable). However, I actually prefer the Amateur's Mind because although it can be tedious at times - I enjoyed the fact that analysis was provided by amateur chessplayers and then correctional analysis/tips/psychological insight were provided by Silman.
I read it after Reassess your Chess and was slightly disappointed. It is all the same material, just in a slightly different format. At your level, I doubt it would be benificial.
It is true the material at times is similar or the same. But there are tips in this book that were not fully addressed in Reassess Your Chess (This is probably also true vice versa). (For example, in the Amateur's Mind: the pawn pointing strategy, minority attack, tips such as: "the best reaction to an attack on the wing is to counterattack in the center." ) Perhaps some of these suggested tips were mentioned in Reassess Your Chess - I have not read that book in a long time.
Originally posted by YugaThanks for the analysis. While you say a 2100 player has critical flaws you are not saying that person would get something out of this book would you? I would think there isn't much in that book that a 2100 player would have down pat. Correct me if I am wrong. Also, do you have a USCF or ELO rating? I saw your game with Arrakis, it seemed he self-destructed!
I also read the Amateur's Mind after "Reassess Your Chess" and there was a greater focus on the psychological aspect of playing chess and how a chessplayer's thought process influence the moves the chessplayer makes in the Amateur's Mind. Silman works with chessplayers of various levels and it is interesting to see the reasoning behind the moves the chessplaye ...[text shortened]... ips were mentioned in Reassess Your Chess - I have not read that book in a long time.
Originally posted by sonhouseA 2100 player would not get very much out of this book - that is true. Occasionally the 2100 becomes a little lazy with his/her planning, but is usually able to get him/herself out of complications. The 2100 player likely understands all the chess concepts that are laid out in the book. Nevertheless, as Silman says, all non-titled players are capable of playing very badly - in a tough spot they can go berserk like everyone else. Some highly rated players suffer from ghosts: pin-fear, aversion to doubled pawns, etc.
Thanks for the analysis. While you say a 2100 player has critical flaws you are not saying that person would get something out of this book would you? I would think there isn't much in that book that a 2100 player would have down pat. Correct me if I am wrong. Also, do you have a USCF or ELO rating? I saw your game with Arrakis, it seemed he self-destructed!
My USCF rating is still provisional. I played for my high school chess club (our team would play against other high school teams; we attended state and national tournaments - but we played in the unrated division; I played good chess, but had a bad blunder in a game from each tournament.) I would have attended a chess club - but it was too far away, and I was usually too busy, but I will occasionally attend one when I go off to university.
Yes, arrakis self-destructed in that game. We were in dtb. theory for 13 moves and then he gave away two pieces...😕...I guess he overlooked something...he's doing fine in our other game.