10 Nov 08
Never read a chessbook before and got it in the mail a few days ago. Im fascinated at how much it has made me think about the game of chess and understand the board. Im not able to thoroughly go over ever game or anything but just the literature in itself has opened up my mind like never before. is this how all chess books are? What effect did this book have on your rating?
10 Nov 08
Originally posted by TimInIraqYou were lucky to choose an excellent book as your first one. They're not all as good as that!
Never read a chessbook before and got it in the mail a few days ago. Im fascinated at how much it has made me think about the game of chess and understand the board. Im not able to thoroughly go over ever game or anything but just the literature in itself has opened up my mind like never before. is this how all chess books are? What effect did this book have on your rating?
I don't have time to study "How To Reassess Your Chess" properly, but I feel I have gained some very useful tidbits just by reading it rather superficially. For example, there's a bit about keeping your opponents knights out of your position by looking for infiltration squares - I had never heard of this before and it's something I always try to look for now.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24894
10 Nov 08
Originally posted by TimInIraqI have to say that i too found silmans writing very thought provoking but unfortunately as with a great deal of players around my level, the knowledge gained from his work has had minimal effect on my game.
Never read a chessbook before and got it in the mail a few days ago. Im fascinated at how much it has made me think about the game of chess and understand the board. Im not able to thoroughly go over ever game or anything but just the literature in itself has opened up my mind like never before. is this how all chess books are? What effect did this book have on your rating?
i put this down to there being a big difference between, as Purdy puts it, thinking and actually seeing.
Jonathan Rowson sums it up in his brilliant chess for Zebras by emphasising the difference between knowledge picked up from writers such as silman and Skill on the chessboard. One for whatever reason doesn't seem to enhance the other.
It's a very inetersting debate and i'd urge you to pick up a copy of CFZ for more on the subject.
11 Nov 08
4 edits
I understand that Silman plans to publish a new book soon called Reassess Your Reassessment. It trumps everything published in the old volume, and derides those who fail to purchase the updated wisdom as "troglodytic suckers", followed by a stage-villain laugh ("Mu-hahahaha" ). Evidently Silman has taken a page from Microsoft. Frequent updates will soon be required to avoid falling behind.
11 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by TalismanSays Rowson (pg. 25):
...Jonathan Rowson sums it up in his brilliant Chess for Zebras by emphasising the difference between knowledge picked up from writers such as silman and Skill on the chessboard. One for whatever reason doesn't seem to enhance the other. It's a very inetersting debate and i'd urge you to pick up a copy of CFZ for more on the subject.
Most players seek to increase their knowledge by learning new positions, and tend to study by “reading and nodding” as Nigel Davies put it. What they should be doing more often is honing their skills, however meager, by forcing themselves to think through training and practice.
And on page 28:
Chess skill emerges from chess playing combined with chess training, where ‘training’ means working things out by yourself. The main skill a chess-player needs is skill in making decisions, so that’s what you need to do and do repeatedly. If you want to become a better player, you need better habits, and you cultivate better habits through training. The best training is the kind that pushes you up against the edges of your comfort zone, where you force yourself to take responsibility for difficult decisions. It is so much easier to read books that give strategic guidelines, hints and tips, etc., but what you need is ‘know how’ and that means learning by doing.
There you are, then. Save yourself $29.95 (for Rowson's book) and simply DO IT YOURSELF.
11 Nov 08
Originally posted by TimInIraqRead it, go through everything on a board, sleep with it under your pillow, carry it everywhere with you. I went from 1450 USCF to 1600.
Never read a chessbook before and got it in the mail a few days ago. Im fascinated at how much it has made me think about the game of chess and understand the board. Im not able to thoroughly go over ever game or anything but just the literature in itself has opened up my mind like never before. is this how all chess books are? What effect did this book have on your rating?
11 Nov 08
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsYes, and he will overuse exclamation marks even more than the original does.
I understand that Silman plans to publish a new book soon called Reassess Your Reassessment. It trumps everything published in the old volume, and derides those who fail to purchase the updated wisdom as "troglodytic suckers", followed by a stage-villain laugh ("Mu-hahahaha" ). Evidently Silman has taken a page from Microsoft. Frequent updates will soon be required to avoid falling behind.
11 Nov 08
Originally posted by TimInIraqI'm glad you are doing well with your book. I get the idea that this has as much to do with your genuine interest in chess, as with the quality of the book (and it is a good one!) When you finish, you'll be a stronger player. You might also try My System by Nimzovich.
Never read a chessbook before and got it in the mail a few days ago. Im fascinated at how much it has made me think about the game of chess and understand the board. Im not able to thoroughly go over ever game or anything but just the literature in itself has opened up my mind like never before. is this how all chess books are? What effect did this book have on your rating?
😏
11 Nov 08
Originally posted by TalismanAs Jethro Tull said "You're wisemen don't know what it's like to be thick" (thick being a brit expression for very unintelligent.)
I have to say that i too found silmans writing very thought provoking but unfortunately as with a great deal of players around my level, the knowledge gained from his work has had minimal effect on my game.
i put this down to there being a big difference between, as Purdy puts it, thinking and actually seeing.
Jonathan Rowson sums it up in his brilliant c ...[text shortened]... a very inetersting debate and i'd urge you to pick up a copy of CFZ for more on the subject.
Rowson makes a fair point if you make an analogy with football where we know it's possible to be very knowledgeable but still be rubbish on the field. In chess it isn't necessarily the most knowledgeable players who are the best. And he talks of becoming exasperated with older players who repeatedly make the same mistakes despite a huge effort with study.
But this isn't the whole story. It depends on your starting point and what you don''t know. If a book plugs a gap for you at the right time then it'll help. And a good book can inspire, motivate and educate...so why not.
11 Nov 08
Originally posted by TimInIraqNeed any more books, or whatever. PM Granny and the group i belong to will see that you get it. Keep your head down.
Never read a chessbook before and got it in the mail a few days ago. Im fascinated at how much it has made me think about the game of chess and understand the board. Im not able to thoroughly go over ever game or anything but just the literature in itself has opened up my mind like never before. is this how all chess books are? What effect did this book have on your rating?
GRANNY.