The first book I should buy is...

Played my whole life but just for fun. Never studied chess. Now I want to get better. The first book I should read is...?

Chess:5334 Problems,Combinations,and Games by Laszlo Polgar

Originally posted by JBru223
Played my whole life but just for fun. Never studied chess. Now I want to get better. The first book I should read is...?

Chess Self-Teacher is a good overall beginner book providing everything a beginner needs to know. It was my first book on chess, so it is an old book and has the drawback of being in descriptive notation since today almost everone uses algebraic notation. You can by it used at a reduced price, Here is a link:

http://www.amazon.com/Chess-Self-Teacher-Lessons-Quizzes-Reviews/dp/0060922958#_

Read the reviews

The Instructor

Logical Chess Move by Move,by Irving Chernev. 33 master class games,with every move explained in a clear,logical style. Best book for the aspiring player,IMO.

Originally posted by JBru223
Played my whole life but just for fun. Never studied chess. Now I want to get better. The first book I should read is...?

how to think ahead in chess, Horrowitz and Reinfield

Thanks everyone. A good start to my chess library

My System
Aron Nimzowitsch

Originally posted by sundown316
Logical Chess Move by Move,by Irving Chernev. 33 master class games,with every move explained in a clear,logical style. Best book for the aspiring player,IMO.

I have that book too.

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
I have that book too.

The Instructor

bwhaha

Understanding Chess Move by Move by John Nunn is good too. Similar to Chernov's "Logical Chess: Move by Move."

David Bronstein's "The Modern Chess Self-Tutor," is good.

One old book I have which was a great help was "Point Count Chess" by Horowitz and Mott-Smith. Point Count system was of questionable value, but I've not found another book which deals with as much of the basics of Chess in as comprehensive a manner as this book does. I don't think I learned as much from any other book I had starting out.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
how to think ahead in chess, Horrowitz and Reinfield

Not sure about this as a "learning" book for Chess. It is mainly a repertoire book, and frankly, I'd not recommend either Lasker's Defense, the Sicilian Dragon, or the Stonewall Attack as openings for someone starting out. I'm basically saying this because I have the book and actually adopted them, and referenced the book enough that my copy fell apart and is now in a small three ring binder. I'm just not sure that these are openings (particularly the idea of choosing the Dragon as a way of avoiding too much "theory"😉 are one's I'd choose for someone starting out. Better to look over of the Everyman Chess' "Starting Out" series and pick openings that look interesting (I've got the ones for The Sicilian, the English Opening, the Ruy Lopez, Alekhine's Defense, and the Nizmo-Indian).
But then, I'd not put any opening books as the first book I'd suggest for someone looking to improve their Chess.

Originally posted by HoosierPatzer
Not sure about this as a "learning" book for Chess. It is mainly a repertoire book, and frankly, I'd not recommend either Lasker's Defense, the Sicilian Dragon, or the Stonewall Attack as openings for someone starting out. I'm basically saying this because I have the book and actually adopted them, and referenced the book enough that my copy fell apa books as the first book I'd suggest for someone looking to improve their Chess.

The stonewall is the easiest opening i know, all one needs to know is when it works and when it does not work and why, the dragon is played at all levels and is not so hard to play, i play a variation of it myself and i dont know anything about openings past move six, as for Laskers defence, I had never heard of it before. The only reason i bought the book was that i was following the lecture bot on FICS and it mentioned the book, now i play the stonewall in blitz with more success than any other system i have tried. My recommendation for the book was based on the last chapter on inferior moves and why they are inferior which i think is quite instructive.

The mistake i have made in learning chess was to approach it strategically. I have a very good strategic understanding of chess but tactically i suck, its as if i have missed out on learning the pure basics and jumped ahead to something deeper without having the necessary skill to handle the day to day affairs. Now i simply spend my time doing hundreds of tactical exercises.

The author suggested the openings as those having little theory to learn, not something that's true of the Dragon. Lasker's and the Stonewall only have one page in both of my Chess Opening Encyclopedias, the Dragon and it's variations has over twenty. And I'd actually recommend the book, just not as the first one you buy.
Actually, thinking back, I'd probably recommend Reinfeld's "The Complete Chess Course." It was actually the book that introduced me to Chess. And still available today.

Originally posted by HoosierPatzer
The author suggested the openings as those having little theory to learn, not something that's true of the Dragon. Lasker's and the Stonewall only have one page in both of my Chess Opening Encyclopedias, the Dragon and it's variations has over twenty. And I'd actually recommend the book, just not as the first one you buy.
Actually, thinking back, I' ...[text shortened]... rse." It was actually the book that introduced me to Chess. And still available today.

you have got to remember the Dragon in 1950, was not the dragon that it is today.

An endgame book