Logical Chess should be everyone's first or second chess book. It is very good for what it is, but I agree that most of it will be beneath you at your level. I still like to read through my copy occasionally though.
Originally posted by kmac27 so at my level understanding chess move by move would be a better book for me?
yea, I think you're probably a bit pass logical chess. although it might be illuminating to see how simple chess can be. it certainly helped me a great deal, but I was still around 1500 back then...
I just got this book (from the library). I'm following along with the games in Crafty to compare results. It seems that Crafty is finding some obvious mistakes in the book's analysis. For example (if you have the book), in the first game the book rejects 8...Nxa5 saying that it gives White two pieces for a rook, but that seems to neglect the fact that 10...b5 would win back a bishop.
Now I'm wondering how much I can trust the book. It seems, at least from the first game, that the analysis is done based on knowing the outcome of the game and just saying all of the winning side's moves were good and all of the losing side's were bad. e.g. the book is very critical of 7.a4 and 9.h3, but Crafty seems to think these are fine, and the book praises 8...Ba7, which Crafty thinks is quite bad.
I'm not saying Crafty has to be right about everything, either, but I don't see much reason to doubt it in these cases.
(btw, here is the game in question, von Scheve vs. Teichmann 1907:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Qe7 5.O-O d6 6.d4 Bb6 7.a4 a6 8.a5 Ba7 9.h3 Nf6 10.dxe5 Nxe5 11.Nxe5 Qxe5 12.Nd2 Bxh3 13.gxh3 Qg3+ 14.Kh1 Qxh3+ 15.Kg1 Ng4 16.Nf3 Qg3+ 17.Kh1 Bxf2 0-1)
The analysis may be shot to $hit, but remember, the book is 50 years old & some of the games are over 100 years old.
The basic suggestions & "rules" are great for anyone just taking up the game or even lower intermediates to brush-up on.
Morphy was thought by both Kasparov & Fischer to be by far the most accurate player amongst his peers (& even many later GM's) but that doesn't mean a program won't rinse his games for perhaps many inaccuracies.
That's true--I'm sure the general principles being expressed are sound (at least to us weak-minded humans), even if in a particular position they don't make as much of a difference as it might seem.
I do find it interesting, though, how easy it is these days for a run-of-the-mill computer to find almost immediately these possibilities that master players of the past could miss. It's still surprising to me that we're already at the point where a decent laptop can beat almost anyone in the world (with good software).
i've heard great reviews. i'm going to read through logical chess then after i get that done with i'll read understanding chess move by move by john nunn. this should help me get a much better understanding of the game. thanks for the input.
"Logical Chess: Move by Move" (by Chernev), and "Chess: The Art of Logical Thinking" (by McDonald) both have the same format (every move is commented upon) and the same target audience (probably under 1600).
Chernev's writing style is so delightful that you think that you're just enjoying a good read when in fact you're also learning how to "think chess." This book is the only chess book that I consider a "must read." True, Chernev was a "weak" master (whatever that means), and some of his analysis isn't worth a fig. But the point of the book is to teach you general principles that govern virtually every move of every chess game. If you're under 1700 you'll get something out of it and have a great time in the process!
i almost never think of the best move i almost never even analyze until after i've moved! so this book should help me learn some stuff plus i looked in the toc and liked what i saw 93 pages of kingside attacks i have wanted to learn when to attack and how this should help ;-)
logical chess move by move
16 Jul '07 08:45
Back to Top