Originally posted by WulebgrSorry, I hope I'm not hijacking this thread, but I wasn't sure this deserved a separate, new post, as I don't expect to get many replies to this one.
Edward Winter's outrage is well supported by close scrutiny of the text. Getting one of Capablanca's endgames wrong appears the most egregious error among those Winter lists, IMHO.
In case any reader isn't familiar with Edward Winter, I guess I should point out that, while he is a first-class chess historian, he is sometimes accused of being too pedantic and worrying more about typos and historical mistakes than general readability and usefulness to the reader. I guess I wouldn't be too opposed to de Firmian's version of Capablanca's Chess Fundamentals, as long as the buyer of his book knows of the changes de Firmian made compared to the previous versions.
I AM curious about this alleged famous pawn ending boner that Capablanca has been accused of making. I have the 1994 Cadogan edition and the original 1921 USA edition. (I also have a copy of Winter's Kings, Commoners and Knaves book.) I think I've figured out the basic issue - The first two sentences in Example 8 in the 1921 USA edition state "In the above position White can win by 1. P-B5. Black's best answer would be P-Kt 3 draws." I think the mistake is that either Capablanca or the editor should not have added the word "draws" in the second sentence. (Apparently all of the UK editions, including the 1994 Cadogan edition, are correct by leaving out the word "draws". Unfortunately, the mid 1930s US edition compounded the problem by changing the first sentence to state that White CAN'T win by 1. P-B5. This attempted correction was completely incorrect and only made matters worse.)
Winter doesn't say what the exact mistake was that de Firmian made regarding this endgame. He only states, "...and on page 14 he even goes wrong with a famous pawn ending presented by Capablanca." Can anyone out there with a copy of de Firmian's book tell me exactly what de Firmian did? (And if I don't get an answer, I'll soon be hunting the book stores to find a copy of de Firmian's book to satisfy my curiosity.)
BTW, in case anyone is wondering what the position is for Example 8, it's
White King on d4
White pawns on f4 and g4
Black King on d6
Black pawn on g7
and White to move. (sorry, I didn't want to learn how to enter FENs or fancy board positions just for this one post.)
Originally posted by Mad Rook
Sorry, I hope I'm not hijacking this thread, but I wasn't sure this deserved a separate, new post, as I don't expect to get many replies to this one.
In case any reader isn't familiar with Edward Winter, I guess I should point out that, while he is a first-class chess historian, he is sometimes accused of being too pedantic and worrying more about typos rn how to enter FENs or fancy board positions just for this one post.)
My edition is the 1934 U.S. edition. It horrifies me to learn that it differs from the original 1921 edition.
Winter is pedantic, to be sure. But unlike many pedants, he is generally correct.
Back to basso's original question - While I haven't read any of these, Dan Heisman's site gives a few recommendations for positional books.
He mentions that there aren't many beginner books on positional ideas. (Seirawan's Winning Chess Strategies might be one of the few beginner books, but Dan doesn't mention this one - I don't know why he doesn't.)
Dan mentions Nimzovich's My System as a famous one that tries to cover the whole range from beginner to advanced. (And an algebraic notation edition is available.)
Dan mentions about four intermediate positional books. The two more well-known works are Pachman's Modern Chess Strategy (alas, still in descriptive) and The Middle Game (Volumes 1 and 2) by Euwe and Kramer (available in algebraic from Hays Publishing).
Hmm, I just read the Amazon reviews for The Middle Game - One negative is that a couple of reviewers reported that the binding was terrible and the book quickly came apart on them. :-(