Thoughts on 'Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess'?
Vic Martinez
so I just wanted to know how ths book generally 'ranks' here among this
group. I'm fairly new to chess overall, and of course I plan to buy more
chess books soon, but boy is this game addicting and challenging! I
think I'm hooked for life! Thanks in advance for your 'reviews' of BFTC.
Vic.
PaoloTCS
themselves. It is also a great "airplane" book, since it's small size makes
it ideal for hours of instructive enjoyment almost anywhere.
Paolo
"Vic Martinez" <t1...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21325-3F9...@storefull-2332.public.lawson.webtv.net...
WORDKYLE
It's a good book for someone who knows the moves and rules and not much else.
A good next step would be Chernev's "Logical Chess." When I still had chess
books, I would occasionally take out Fischer's book just for entertainment. My
opinion is that it has his name on it, but the learning program, etc., were
designed by someone else.
Kyle Word
"Be still when you have nothing to say; when genuine passion moves you, say
what you've got to say, and say it hot." -- D.H. Lawrence
Bob Musicant
news:20031018084357...@mb-m02.aol.com...
> Vic Said:
>
> >'Just bought this for $1.50 at a used book store. A great deal, I know,
> >so I just wanted to know how ths book generally 'ranks' here among this
> >group. I'm fairly new to chess overall, and of course I plan to buy more
> >chess books soon, but boy is this game addicting and challenging! I
> >think I'm hooked for life! Thanks in advance for your 'reviews' of BFTC.
>
> It's a good book for someone who knows the moves and rules and not much
else.
> A good next step would be Chernev's "Logical Chess." When I still had
chess
> books, I would occasionally take out Fischer's book just for
entertainment. My
> opinion is that it has his name on it, but the learning program, etc.,
were
> designed by someone else.
>
It was indeed designed by Margulies and Mosenfelder, but Fischer was not
just paid for allowing his name to be used. He approved everything that
went into the book. He was involved in the process throughout.
Bob
Ian Burton
>
> >'Just bought this for $1.50 at a used book store. A great deal, I know,
> >so I just wanted to know how ths book generally 'ranks' here among this
> >group. I'm fairly new to chess overall, and of course I plan to buy more
> >chess books soon, but boy is this game addicting and challenging! I
> >think I'm hooked for life! Thanks in advance for your 'reviews' of BFTC.
>
> It's a good book for someone who knows the moves and rules and not much
else.
> A good next step would be Chernev's "Logical Chess." When I still had
chess
> books, I would occasionally take out Fischer's book just for
entertainment. My
> opinion is that it has his name on it, but the learning program, etc.,
were
> designed by someone else.
>
> Kyle Word
The someone else is Dr Stuart Margolis, a cognitive psychologist of some
note. I don't have the book, but I believe his name is on the cover.
Stuart still collects its royalties I'm almost sure.
--
Ian Burton
[Please Reply to Newsgroup]
WORDKYLE
>It was indeed designed by Margulies and Mosenfelder, but Fischer was not
>just paid for allowing his name to be used. He approved everything that
>went into the book. He was involved in the process throughout.
I'm sure that's true. As elementary as the book is, though, how much impact
would Fischer -- as opposed to someone else -- have on the analysis? Fischer's
name is on the cover, and IIRC some of the examples are pulled from his games.
Other than that, couldn't almost any advanced player have written the book?
Having said that, Fischer's name WAS on the book, and I'm sure he took pains to
make sure that it was technically accurate, etc. Like most books for beginners,
it can stand the test of time. (But boy, there are some real stinky beginners'
books out there, aren't there?)
Bob Musicant
"Ian Burton" <inv...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:vp2pigl...@corp.supernews.com...
> The someone else is Dr Stuart Margolis, a cognitive psychologist of some
> note. I don't have the book, but I believe his name is on the cover.
> Stuart still collects its royalties I'm almost sure.
> --
> Ian Burton
> [Please Reply to Newsgroup]
It's the biggest selling chess book of all time.
Martin Wilber
@nospamyahoo.com says...
It's too bad that Fischer didn't work on any other books after his
winning the world championship. Even if he wasn't interested in
playing, there would have been a great interest in his books.
Marty
Bob Musicant
"Martin Wilber" <martin...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.19fb44816...@news.chi.sbcglobal.net...
He was unraveling pretty badly even at the time of the match. He just came
apart afterwards. His "big project" during the 80s and 90s was a book
"proving" that the Kasparov-Karpov matches were all fixed. His plans for
that ended when his notes were "stolen" from their storage place in a
Pasadena warehouse.
Bob
Harold Buck
"Bob Musicant" <musi...@nospamyahoo.com> wrote:
> He was unraveling pretty badly even at the time of the match. He just came
> apart afterwards. His "big project" during the 80s and 90s was a book
> "proving" that the Kasparov-Karpov matches were all fixed. His plans for
> that ended when his notes were "stolen" from their storage place in a
> Pasadena warehouse.
Jeez, the way you put it, it almost sounds like your implying he had
mental problems :-)
--Harold Buck
"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson
Ken Lovering
Glad to hear you are interested in the most complex game there is.
Yes, Fischer is a legend........but if you really want to get started in
chess, but these four books:
Reuben Fine's The Ideas Behind The Chess Openings
This will be your bible for the openings. Study no other books on the
opening until you're rated over 1500.
Vladimar Vukovic's Art of Attack in Chess
Andrew Soltis' The Inner Game of Chess
Reuben Fine's Basic Chess Endings
Join a club and talk to an expert about how to study these books.
You'll be kickin ass in a year, so long as you don't spend your study time
memorizing opening theory.
Best regards,
Ken
"Vic Martinez" <t1...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21325-3F9...@storefull-2332.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Bob Musicant
"Ken Lovering" <tainte...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:bmt7pi$qftrj$1...@ID-196892.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Vic,
>
> Glad to hear you are interested in the most complex game there is.
> Yes, Fischer is a legend........but if you really want to get started in
> chess, but these four books:
>
> Reuben Fine's The Ideas Behind The Chess Openings
> This will be your bible for the openings. Study no other books on the
> opening until you're rated over 1500.
>
> Vladimar Vukovic's Art of Attack in Chess
>
> Andrew Soltis' The Inner Game of Chess
>
> Reuben Fine's Basic Chess Endings
>
> Join a club and talk to an expert about how to study these books.
>
> You'll be kickin ass in a year, so long as you don't spend your study time
> memorizing opening theory.
>
> Best regards,
> Ken
Ken,
I disagree. Those are not beginners' books. Also, there are many better
books to study for learning endings than Fine's, which is more of a
reference book.
Bob
Mark Houlsby
>
> Glad to hear you are interested in the most complex game there is.
Chess is *not* "the most complex game there is.". There is a board
game, of oriental origin, which is played, usually, on a 19x19 grid,
with black and white "stones". In the west, it is called: "Go", the
Chinese, for example, call it: "weiqi". It's *way* more complex than
chess. Lasker acknowledged this fact.
Several chess variants, too, are more complex than chess.
Hope you might develop an interest, however casual or serious, in the
most complex game there is.
Cheers,
Mark
EWOH27
>Several chess variants, too, are more complex than chess.
Many chess variants are more complex than orthodox chess. See them at
www.chessvariants.com. The ultima is probably Tai Shogi, an historical
Japanese shogi variant "played" on a 25x25 board with 177 pieces per side. I
have my doubts whether it has ever really been played, though.
Vic Martinez
of Chess makes ANY Chess book useless.
BriMarErn
reading that book UPSIDE DOWN!!" LOL!
The tactics are fun to work out, though. Good book!
Bob Lablaw
"Bob Musicant" <musi...@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:EOvkb.84244$%B2.20...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
I'd have to agree with you. I've never competed officially, but I'm sure I'd
be about 1500-1800, and I found the Soltis book hard going, and gave up on
it.
Some good simple ending games that I liked were Irving Chernev's Practical
Chess Endings and Pandolfini's Endgame Course. They both have enough
material in them for a beginner to practice on, especially if they have a
computer program.
Vic Martinez
used to start off with.
Louis Blair
> I didn't know what other books HE
> used to start off with.
_
At various times there have been discussion of books
for beginners, books on all aspects of the game, etc.
Here is some of what has been written:
2002-11-28 17:35:21 PST
The most commonly recommended book for beginners is usually
"The Complete Idiot's Guide to Chess". Even if you know the
basic rules, it goes into enough depth to teach you plenty.
2002-08-05 20:41:41 PST
Books that try to cover everything are usually
beginner books.
In the Chess Notes feature at www.chesscafe.com Edward
Winter commented:
"From today's range of chess books for beginners we
believe that one stands out as the best: The Complete
Idiot's Guide to Chess by Patrick Wolff"
2002-12-15 15:43:17 PST
The Complete Idiot's Guide to Chess by Patrick Wolff
Excellent book.
2002-12-16 18:04:22 PST
Wolff's book is not just for complete beginners.
2003-01-04 05:55:55 PST
Wolff's book is superior
2003-01-04 06:06:53 PST
The Complete Idiot's Guide may well be
your best one volume purchase at this stage.
At least one other post mentioned tactics practice. Again this is
*very* sound advice but only if you already know what pins,
forks, skewers, deflection etc are.
2003-01-29 13:32:32 PST
A modern and highly praised general introductory book is
"The Complete Idiot's Guide to Chess" by Patrick Wolff, a
former US Champion.
2003-05-26 16:56:20 PST
Feel free to hide it when friends come over, but the Idiot's chess
book by Patrick Wolff (GM) is a great book. Obviously you
don't need to learn the rules but there is a lot of good elementary
instructional material.
2002-11-28 20:02:08 PST
"How to Reassess Your Chess"
is too advanced if you've just learned the rules.
2002-11-28 21:08:47 PST
even if "How to Reassess Your Chess"
is too hard now, it may well become a book that
[one] is glad to have in the future. Many have
expressed such feelings.
2002-11-29 17:48:27 PST
["How to Reassess Your Chess" is]
Waaaay too advanced.
2002-12-02 17:20:19 PST
I have not seen Silman's book, but I understand it is meant for the
advancing club player, someone on their way to Expert and beyond
(maybe that's why I haven't seen it ;-).
When I was very young and learning how to play, my Dad got me "Bobby
Fischer Teaches Chess," and it was a very good beginner's guide.
Later I found "The Penguin Book of Chess Positions," a small pocket
paperback that explains basic tactics and accompanies the ideas with
"find the best move" tactics problems. It is a great book to tote
around and read one or two pages at a time.
2002-12-23 18:56:03 PST
I would suggest "Reascess Your Chess" and it's companion
work book, both by IM Jeremy Silman.
2002-12-23 19:50:03 PST
Absolutely not!!! "How to Reassess Your Chess" is widely
regarded as a great book on positional play, but if you
don't already have a firm grasp of tactics, it's not going
to help you any. First learn to how to avoid getting
clobbered by basic tactics, then move on to real strategy.
2003-02-09 12:55:33 PST
Any of the Silman books are good. I highly recommend "How
to Reaccess Your Chess.
2003-01-12 08:22:05 PST
The Amateurs Mind -IM Jeremy Silman A wonderful book
for players up to Expert level. You can read more of/about
Silman in www.jeremysilman.com
2003-05-30 10:50:09 PST
Silman is great, but you do need basic tactics down first, that
will take away alot of the whys and whatfors when silman
says this or that piece should go here or there. Fred Renfield's
red and blue tactics books (1000 positions each) should help
you a lot as it did me. With Silman though it's helpful to read,
try to understand, then go out and play and apply those
principles.. then come back in 6 months and reread.. lo and
behold you'll find you understand things that weren't clear
before.
2003-05-26 18:28:14 PST
"The Art of Checkmate" by Renaud and Kahn is a MUST
READ for everyone below 1600. I can't tell you how much
I wish someone had shoved this book into my hands when
I was first starting out.
2003-05-29 18:22:25 PST
I agree that "The Art of Checkmate" is excellent, better and
more useful for most players than 99.9% of chess books, and
I give it my very highest recommendation.
2003-01-12 11:04:17 PST
Whatever you do, make ABSOLUTELY SURE you get one or
two books on tactics. Very important that you understand the
basic tactical ideas such as pin, skewer, fork, etc.! "Winning
Chess" by Reinfeld would be an excellent one to start with there.
2003-05-26 18:28:14 PST
"Winning Chess: How to See THree Moves Ahead" by
Chernev and Reinfeld is, IMHO, the best primer on tactics
there is, although it's pretty simple--anybody over, say, 1100
should be able to solve every problem in it pretty quickly. (If
you can't, then you need this book. Everything else is
secondary!)
2003-05-29 18:22:25 PST
I agree that "Winning Chess: How to See THree Moves Ahead"
is excellent, better and more useful for most players than 99.9%
of chess books, and I give it my very highest recommendation.
However, I disagree with the statement that "anybody over,
say, 1100 should be able to solve every problem in ["Winning
Chess"] pretty quickly." I am rated about 2000 USCF and
known as a tactical player, yet I have to think about some of
the positions before I can solve them. I consider it an excellent
basic primer, with enough substance to interest even a player of
my rating who wishes a quick review of tactical fundamentals.
2003-05-27 10:20:08 PST
I really love this book ("Winning Chess", Chernev & Reinfeld).
It was my very first chess book. I still reach for it first when I
want to brush up on tactics. I recall the thrill of setting up and
executing forks, pins, skewers, etc. while my still-tactically
-unknowledgeable friends didn't know what hit them.
I do have one beef with this book, however. I found one
position which was a "help combination", where the opponent
had to blunder in order for the featured combination to succeed,
while the text seemed to imply there was no way to avoid the
combination. This was a two-edged discovery -- I was pleased
that I was able to "refute" the author's analysis, but then I
wondered how many of the other examples were also help-style
combinations instead of being really forcing. In the end, I
decided that for me at least, it's a good thing, because I would
look at each problem with a more critical eye, seeing if I could
refute them, too, instead of just swallowing the author's analysis.
I wouldn't say the examples in the book are extremely easy, I'd
give most of them a medium-difficulty, which is why I think it
is a good book to go back to from time to time. After the first
few easy illustrative problems in each motif, the problems
typically get harder, with many pieces on the board. Anyway,
I highly recommend the book, if you can find it.
2002-08-05 16:40:42 PST
"Mammoth book of chess- Graham Burgess"
Maybe, give that a try. (It is probably unrealistic
to expect "the whole shebang" in one book.)
2002-08-06 20:32:31 PST
My experience is that books like this are not very
satisfying. Trying to cover a lot in many different
areas tends to mean that no one area is covered very
well.
2002-12-31 19:59:28 PST
The Mammoth book of Chess, by Graham Burgess.
Good book.
2002-08-06 09:28:10 PST
An alternative might be Seirawan's "Play Winning Chess"
2003-01-04 05:55:55 PST
Sierawan's "Play Winning Chess" is superior
2003-01-13 08:35:47 PST
I think Yasser Seirawan's _Winning Chess_ series is good:
Play Winning Chess, Endings, Tactics, Strategies, and
Brilliancies.
2003-05-26 16:56:20 PST
The Seirawan "Winning..." series should also be good for you.
Give them a browse.
2003-05-26 18:28:14 PST
"Winning Chess Strategies" is, in many ways, sort of a "How to
Reassess Your Chess for Dummies" book--and the series as a
whole is very solid.
2003-05-28 01:32:55 PST
I would recommend an EASY tactics book like Winning Chess
(Reinfeld and Chernev). I think Winning Chess is out of print,
but I've heard that Winning Chess Tactics by Seirawan is also
good.
2002-08-06 22:08:43 PST
Maybe 500 Master Games of Chess.
2002-12-31 21:22:00 PST
500 Master Games of Chess by Dr.S. Tartakower & J.DuMont
EVERYTHING A GROWING BOY NEEDS :-)))
2002-08-07 08:21:53 PST
Maybe look at Lev Alberts Comprehensive chess course.
2003-01-04 05:55:55 PST
Alburt's "Comprehensive Chess Course." is superior
2003-01-12 11:04:17 PST
"Comprehensive Chess Course" volumes I and II by Alburt
would be very helpful.
2002-12-15 16:33:24 PST
You say that you know the basics. This being true, your first book
should be:
"Everyone's 2nd Chess Book" (sic)
by Dan Heisman, published by Thinkers Press
Indispensible.
2002-12-16 05:51:28 PST
I'll second the recommendation for Everyone's 2nd Chess Book.
In fact, you may want to go to chesscafe.com and check out Mr.
Heisman's column, the Novice Nook. Go to the archives, where
they have all of his past Novice Nook columns archived and
specifically look up the articles on a generic study plan and book
recommendations.
While you're there, check out the (in)famous article, "400
Points in 400 Days" by Michael de la Maza. Well worth reading
to get a perspective on the importance of tactics, even if you
don't end up following his method of study (most people won't).
2003-01-03 20:23:09 PST
Not sure if Heisman's book is quite what you are looking for.
Lots of good, practical advice, but I'm not sure it's the kind of
thing that's going to make you feel like you're ready to go out
and conquer the world. It's kind of like buying a book about
how to play golf -- great stuff, very informative, but it doesn't
take the place of pounding a couple of thousand balls at the
driving range.
For the biggest return on your investment, buy a tactics
workbook and go through it cover to cover two or three times.
Takes time, yes, takes discipline, yes, but it will also improve
your play more dramatically than anything else at this point.
2002-12-16 18:04:22 PST
I would take a look at Logical Chess Move by Move, with good
material on attacking motifs and the rudiments of positional play
2003-01-03 20:23:09 PST
Chernev's Logical Chess is a good choice, and I think they
have an algebraic edition now.
2003-01-12 11:04:17 PST
I like "Logical Chess" because it explains every single move of
master games. Yes, every single move!
2003-05-27 08:10:26 PST
Pick up a copy of Logical Chess Move by Move by Chernev. It
was just reprinted in algebraic. It has some very instructive games
and every move of every game is explained. Take your time and
spend 30-60 minutes on each game. This should inprove your
game immensely.
2003-05-28 01:32:55 PST
Logical Chess is fantastic, but encourages a rather unimaginative
style of play. Still, I would recommend Logical Chess
2003-06-04 11:54:32 PST
I'd highly recommend starting with the Novice Nook column
that goes over a study plan. The title is obvious, so you
should have no problem finding it. The books that he
recommends, at least for the first two steps of the study
plan (as far as I've gotten) probably really are the best
books of their type out there. Chernev's "Logical Chess:
Move by Move" is in Mr. Heisman's study plan as one
of the first books you should read.
2003-05-27 13:17:23 PST
The book by John Nunn, "Understanding Chess Move by Move"
(Gambit 2001) should be mentioned in this thread. It resembles
Logical Chess Move by Move by Chernev but goes probaby
deeper and is certainly more modern. Logical Chess is from
1957, but I do not think this is very important.
2003-05-28 01:32:55 PST
Understanding Chess Move by Move is quite an advanced book,
dealing with modern games that are, in general, more difficult to
understand than older games. If you struggle with The Amateur's
Mind, I advise you not to get Nunn's book yet. Nunn also has a
tendancy to want to explore all the main variations in a position,
sometimes quite deeply, instead of just focussing on the ideas
and general plans related to the position.
2002-12-16 18:04:22 PST
Either of Reinfeld's "1001" books
2003-05-26 19:52:25 PST
At your level you would do much better with a
beginner/intermediate book. Pick out anything by Fred Reinfeld
-- I recommend 1001 checkmates.
2003-05-28 01:32:55 PST
Reinfeld's 1001 combinations book contains some very difficult
puzzles, and they're spread in amongst some easier ones with no
indication that they are more difficult. This can be demoralising
for a beginner, and tends to interrupt progress when you're just
trying to "drill" a particular tactical theme. I think you'll find it
hard to regularly do tactics puzzles if they're too hard, so I advise
you to go for an easy tactics book.
2002-12-17 18:41:02 PST
The first chess book I have read was the monstrous-sized Fred
Reinfeld book, I forget the name of it. Maybe it's called "Complete
Book of Chess", but I am not sure. It's still around. I read that
whole book, and led me into the eccentric world of chess, which
I have never left!
2002-12-18 12:36:45 PST
I have "The Complete Chess Player by Fred Reinfeld" and Highly
recomend it. It's 300 pages ($10.00), and covers all the major
areas. It's thorough without being overwhelming.
2002-12-20 17:10:54 PST
Perhaps there is a confusion going on here.
"Complete Chess Course" [is] a rather large
hardback by Reinfeld that is not the same as The Complete
Chessplayer.
I have never tried to read the large hardback, but I did
read most of The Complete Chessplayer. It seemed
to me to be a reasonable beginner book. One problem
with it (in my opinion) is that it leaves readers with
the impression that they should study all openings.
I fear that many may have decided to give up on
chess after trying to get through Reinfeld's five
chapter presentation in that book. Other parts of
the book seemed okay to me. Modern beginner
books are probably better, but also more expensive.
I suspect that the large hardback is similar in
quality and faults, except that it is more expensive.
For that kind of money, it is probably better to
go for a more modern book.
2002-12-21 12:22:08 PST
"Complete Chess Course" is probably expensive now. In
my day, when I read it (in 1967, I think), it was much cheaper!
2003-05-08 09:54:52 PST
I'm living in another age here, but Reinfeld's The Complete
Chessplayer used to be pretty good.
2002-12-16 18:04:22 PST
"Combination Challenge" by Hays
2002-12-16 18:04:22 PST
Laszlo Polgar's giant "Chess: 5,334 Problems, Combinations
and Games."
2003-05-26 13:29:10 PST
Jan Timman has written some instruction booklets about chess
and a some excellent books on chess analysis. He plainly states
that it is not necessary to understand _every_ move, but to slowly
grasp the idea behind the setup.
You might follow two separate roads: one using The Amateur's
Mind and How to Reassess Your Chess, and one using books
with tactical puzzles, like Polgar's 5334 (or something) or
Sharpen your Tactics. Recognizing standard tactical situations
that can lead to material wins or mates is a process taking some
time. If you start to recognize the patterns (even starting from
simple mate sequences) you might find the contents of The
Amateur's Mind more understandable. And repetition can do
your good. Return to some earlier situations in the book and
replay them.
Remember that no one got his knowledge by sleeping with a
book under the pillow. Training is working, not just reading
and understanding. Hold on and good luck.
2002-12-16 18:04:22 PST
I also like the series by Fred Wilson, all of which have
"303" in the title.
2002-12-23 19:50:03 PST
As I said in an earlier post, go with the recommendations
in Dan Heisman's Novice Nook column. His suggestion of
going through John Bain's "Chess Tactics for Students" over
and over to memorize it has helped me immensely.
2003-05-27 10:20:08 PST
I also recommend the more basic Bain's "Tactics For Students".
Those problems are easier than those in the "Winning Chess",
but it's a very good first tactics workbook (it has no explanation
other than a short introduction to each motif, but ample hints in
each problem).
2003-06-04 11:48:50 PST
"Winning Chess: How to See THree Moves Ahead" has been
out of print for over 20 years. I tried searching for it when I
first started, but I gave up, because all the places I found that
were selling it used were charging at least $40 for it.
I found that Bain's "Chess Tactics for Students", followed by
"How to Beat Your Dad at Chess" by Murray Chandler
provided plenty of study material of this type.
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Lasker's Manual of Chess by Dr. Emanuel Lasker
2003-01-04 06:06:53 PST
IM(H)O Lasker's Manual is very dry with a dated style more likely
to put you off at this stage! I'd say maybe this book should be part
of your purchases at the next level, ie after you've absorbed
something like The Complete Idiot's Guide
2003-01-05 19:52:36 PST
Lasker's manual was my first chess book and I loved it! At the
time I was reading the novels of Hermann Hesse and found
Lasker completely congenial. If you dislike early 20th century
late (post-) romanticism, avoid the book. As a beginning player,
you need not worry about the datedness of the book; it contains
more than enough material to get you to a decent class of play.
2003-01-29 22:04:53 PST
Some sample pages of Lasker's book may be seen at
www.amazon.com
2003-05-26 10:38:27 PST
If you are not afraid of descriptive notation, Lasker's Manual
of Chess would cover what you need.
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
How Not to Play Chess by Eugene A. Znosko-Borovsky
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Common Sense in Chess by Dr. Emanuel Lasker
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
The Art of Chess Combination by Eugene Znosko-Borovsky
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
The Middle Game in Chess by Eugene Znosko-Borovsky
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
The Art of the Middle Game by Paul Keres, Alexander Kotov
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Modern Chess Strategy by Ludek Pachman (I was a little bit
reluctant to include this crippled version of Complete Chess
Strategy)
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Rubinstein?s Chess Masterpieces: 100 Selected Games by Hans
Kmoch
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
The Immortal Games of Capablanca by Fred Reinfeld
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
My Best Games of Chess, 1908-1937 by Alexander Alekhine
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Emanuel Lasker: The Life of a Chess Master by Dr. J. Hannak
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Botvinnik: 100 Selected Games by Mikhail Botvinnik
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953 by David Bronstein
2003-01-04 06:30:29 PST
Masters of the Chess Board by Reti
2002-11-28 20:02:08 PST
I would add Capablanca's Chess Primer as a possible book to try.
2003-05-26 10:38:27 PST
You might want to get Capablanca's Primer of Chess and Chess
Fundamentals. And a book on endgames and tactics.
2003-01-12 11:00:42 PST
Here is one I really liked:
http://www.newinchess.com/Shop/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductID=522
John Nunn's Secrets of Practical Chess.
2003-02-07 22:46:04 PST
1) Edward Lasker - Lasker's Manual of Chess 2) Lasker's
Chess Strategy 3) Cherney - Combinations The Heart of Chess,
Once you have made it through these, then and only then try 4)
My System by Aron Nimzovich - Edited by Fred Reinfeld.
2003-01-12 11:04:17 PST
My System is a bit overrated, IMO. I think it was innovative,
which is not necessarily what we need to read to learn from.
2003-05-26 12:26:07 PST
My System --Aaron Nimzowitsch. Read the first 100 pages.
Several times.
2003-05-26 13:23:10 PST
I found My System a very tough cookie to read.
2003-05-26 16:40:29 PST
The under 1600 crowd often need to be reminded that a rook
on the seventh is a good thing and the square in front of an
opponent's passed pawn is an excellent place for your piece.
They tend to drift about looking for a combination that will
win it all.
2003-02-07 22:46:04 PST
The English translations of Nimzovich's works like Chess
Praxis are acceptable.
2003-02-07 22:46:04 PST
A modern player did a piece called something like "Nimzovich
a Reappraisal" I understand it was good.
2003-01-12 11:04:17 PST
an older book called "How To Win in the Chess Openings"
by Horowitz is very digestible.
2003-01-16 18:46:18 PST
Take a look at Euwe's "The Logical Approach to Chess"
2003-01-16 19:48:38 PST
I also recommend Euwe's "Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur."
The title is something along those lines.
2003-05-27 08:10:26 PST
Another great book is Chess Master vs Chess Amateur
Do not feel bad losing to Fritz. 95 percent all all players
would lose to it. You can change the playing strength and
make it play weaker so check the options and good luck.
2003-01-29 13:32:32 PST
"The Game of Chess" by Siegbert Tarrasch. Not a great book
for an 8 year old, but then, very few such comprehensive chess
books are.
2003-01-29 22:04:53 PST
You might want to read what John Watson has to say abaut "The
Game of Chess" at
http://www.jeremysilman.com/book reviews/jw game chess.html .
Some sample pages of Tarrasch's books may be seen at
www.amazon.com
2003-01-29 23:45:33 PST
There is a book by C.J.S. Purdy & G. Koshnitsky called "Chess
Made Easy". The 1st author was correspondence chess world
champion, and an excellent writer. I'm not sure if you can still
get it, but it would make an excellent first book.
Here is a web reference for you:
http://misc.traveller.com/chess/trivia/b.html
2003-01-30 02:44:21 PST
Harry Golombek - The Game Of Chess, probably the best ever
beginner's book, and it probably still is.
But if you can't find it, I'd agree that Patrick Wolff's Complete
Idiot's Guide is an excellent substitute.
2003-02-07 22:46:04 PST
Lasker's Chess Strategy
2003-02-08 14:01:18 PST
Lasker's Manual of Chess was written by Emanuel Lasker.
Chess Strategy was written by Edward Lasker.
2003-05-27 10:59:15 PST
Let me put in a good word for Edward Lasker's Chess Strategy
(1916, available cheap from Dover) and Modern Chess Strategy.
The books offer a nice combination of general principles and
specific positions, and don't have much overlap.
2003-02-07 22:46:04 PST
Chernev - Combinations The Heart of Chess
2003-05-08 02:06:36 PST
Although it's aimed at kids, "Tips For Young Players" by
Matthew Sadler is very good. Because it is written for a
younger audience it is easy to follow and covers all aspects
of the game.
2003-05-08 03:37:46 PST
Michael Stean's "Simple Chess" is superb, and short.
If you buy it from http://www.amazon.co.uk
then it might be the best four pounds 94 pence you ever spend.
-- Ewart Shaw
Note: It's in descriptive notation, but that shouldn't deter anyone.
2003-05-11 14:38:02 PST
Lasker, the complete self tutor.
2003-05-29 10:32:32 PST
I would like to add one recommendation which is a book
called '64 Things You Need to Know in Chess'. I can't
remember off hand who wrote it (David Walker?) but it's
published by Gambit Books based in the UK. Maybe it's the
next level for you after familiarising yourself with a few forks,
pins, skewers, and mates. All I can say is that after I read I
thought - Yes I understand the game a little better now.
As I've said before in a different thread Gambit seem to have
an editorial policy of employing players whose achievements
we can realistically aspire to. I've often thought that I could
learn far more from someone rated 2,3, or 400 points above
me than many IMs or GMs (there are of course honorable
exceptions).
The soundest advice I can offer at the moment is don't hang
your pieces. This absurdly simple notion got me 100 Blitz
points overnight at ICC and I've seen it in at least one other
player's finger notes.
2003-01-04 05:55:55 PST
Remember, if you like books--like reading them and owning them
--there's no such thing as "one chess book." ...
as you acquire one or two and read them through
--even if you don't--you'll find yourself drawn to the chess section
every time you walk into Walden's or Barnes and Noble or
Borders. If you leaf through the books and compare their contents
to what you need, you'll soon find yourself dedicating a shelf or
two of your bookcase to chess books. You'll want to have all of
Sierawan's books (as soon as they're back in print). You'll yearn
to complete your collection of Alburt's series. You'll start
haunting used book shops for old copies of Fischer's "My 60
Memorable Games." Your hair will gradually grow unkempt,
and a distracted wild look will creep into your eyes. If you're
separated from your books for too long, your hands will begin to
twitch and you'll start plotting knight moves across the checkered
tablecloth at the Italian restaurant where you're supposed to be
wooing your wife / girlfriend. You've entered a perilous zone.
... "Chessbibliomania" is not a condition to be easily dismissed,
and research has shown it isn't curable. Maybe you'll be better
off just buying a gin rummy program for your computer and
avoiding this chess book madness altogether. :) Happy reading!!
2003-01-11 23:18:27 PST
I've found this site invaluable for selecting the best books to
improve my game::
http://www.chessville.com/instruction/instr_gen_path_to_improve.htm
It has everything you need to know.
2003-01-12 08:18:43 PST
I've written a chess primer which I am happy to distribute free
of charge. If anyone would like me to email them a copy, just
email me at googlekr...@spamex.com . Be warned:
zipped, it's still 980KB, so expect a big email. :-)
2003-05-26 16:56:20 PST
I run a site that has instructional e-mail newsletters and message
boards for players of your level. Check out the sample issues at
the links below, they are free. Much of the material comes
directly from questions from casual (<1600) players. Annotated
amateur games are the most popular section.
http://www.chessninja.com/whitebelt/001/001whitebelt.htm
http://www.chessninja.com/whitebelt/002/002whitebeltKEJH.htm
2003-05-08 09:54:52 PST
have you looked at Dr. Dave's Web site at University of Exeter?
2003-05-08 11:50:17 PST
Have a look at the chessville web site. url below. Try the drop
down for instruction / general instruction and advice / The path
to improvment. The book list is seperated into recomendations
for various parts of the game and also which books suit various
playing strengths. http://www.chessville.com/index.html
The other 1 on the same site is a similar type article following
the same drop downs only try suggestions for improving your
play inplace of The Path to improvment. The highly acclaimed
Seirwan series is also back in print and is written for beginners
with all the tecnical jargon cut out and written in an easy to
follow style. I have the winning chess tactics and have read it
3 times. The site below is selling cheaper than Amazon.co.uk
as the are offering £10 off if you buy the 3 books reducing the
total from £42:97 to £32:97.
http://www.chessdirect.co.uk/acatalog/CATALOGUE___SHOP_Coaching_93.html#ap43
2003-05-26 20:55:06 PST
I discuss this question extensively in my Novice Nook article
Chess Books and Prerequisites:
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf
...I even specifically address the Silman book issue.
2003-05-27 05:47:14 PST
improving in chess = hard working,so,you have to do a lot
for it. otoh, we do'nt have to re-invent the wheel. have a
look at the following site. www.chessville.com and look
under instruction. ps: the sites below are indeed ,also very
good. (especially, the novice nook,from Dan Heisman at
chesscafe) http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf
www.danheisman.com
2003-01-21 18:21:06 PST
AddALL is an uber-search engine for (they claim) 40+
book dealers, including Alibris, Half.com, and others.
I've found some wonderful prices there ... Not necessarily
chess books, but fairly serious technical and engineering
material. Several folk had mentioned _Everyone's Second
Chess Book_ by Dan Heisman. AddALL found it for me at
Half.com for <$11; lists for $14.95 at BN.com.
2003-05-29 23:32:10 PST
Try http://www.bookfinder.com/
2003-05-30 01:52:36 PST
Try something like here:
http://half.ebay.com/cat/buy/prod.cgi?cpid=3304506&domain_id=1856&meta_id=1
Nick
news:<no_one_knows-44AE...@comcast.ash.giganews.com>...
> In article <mhjkb.66927$%B2.17...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> "Bob Musicant" <musi...@nospamyahoo.com> wrote of Bobby Fischer:
> > He was unraveling pretty badly even at the time of the match.
> > He just came apart afterwards. His "big project" during the 80s and 90s
> > was a book "proving" that the Kasparov-Karpov matches were all fixed.
> > His plans for that ended when his notes were "stolen" from their storage
> > place in a Pasadena warehouse.
How tragic: Bobby Fischer's 'loss' might have reminded me of the sad occasion
when Thomas Carlyle's long manuscript of his history of the French Revolution
was accidentally burned by John Stuart Mill's maid. Yet Carlyle was able to
rewrite his entire book.
> Jeez, the way you put it, it almost sounds like your implying he had
> mental problems :-)
"Then Bobby Fischer is a very normal politician."
--Lance Smith (aka "Liam Too", 9 September 2003)
http://makeashorterlink.com/?O10321DF5
Evidently, Bobby Fischer's still able to fool some people some of the time.
'O fool that I am, that thought I could grasp water and bind the wind.'
--Philip Sidney (Arcadia)
--Nick
Nick
message news:<47ae7109.03101...@posting.google.com>...
> "Ken Lovering" <tainte...@adelphia.net> wrote in
> message news:<bmt7pi$qftrj$1...@ID-196892.news.uni-berlin.de>...
>
> There is a board game, of oriental origin,
Evidently, it originated in China. Today, it's popular in China, Japan,
and Korea.
> which is played, usually, on a 19x19 grid, with black and white "stones".
Novices may play on a 13 by 13 board (which should lead to a shorter game).
> In the west, it is called: "Go", the Chinese, for example, call it: "weiqi".
> It's *way* more complex than chess. Lasker acknowledged this fact.
Modern computer programmers also have to acknowledge that reality.
The best computer programmes for Go cannot yet play as well as a human master
(a '1-dan' by Japanese professional standards).
> Hope you might develop an interest, however casual or serious,
> in the most complex game there is.
Or an interest in the evidently 'most complex *board* game there is'. :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(board_game)
In my comparative experiences of acquaintance, unlike some chess grandmasters,
professional Go players always have been courteous, even toward amateur players
such as me.
'Much courtesy, much subtlety.'
--Thomas Nashe (The Unfortunate Traveller)
--Nick
Nick
nickbo...@yahoo.co.uk (Nick) wrote in message news:<6655d472.03102...@posting.google.com>...
> mark.h...@eudoramail.com (Mark Houlsby) wrote in
> message news:<47ae7109.03101...@posting.google.com>...
> > "Ken Lovering" <tainte...@adelphia.net> wrote in
> > message news:<bmt7pi$qftrj$1...@ID-196892.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > > Glad to hear you are interested in the most complex game there is.
> >
> > Chess is *not* "the most complex game there is.".
> > There is a board game, of oriental origin,
>
> Evidently, it originated in China. Today, it's popular in China, Japan,
> and Korea.
>
> > which is played, usually, on a 19x19 grid, with black and white "stones".
>
> Novices may play on a 13 by 13 board (which should lead to a shorter game).
>
> > In the west, it is called: "Go", the Chinese, for example, call it: "weiqi".
> > It's *way* more complex than chess. Lasker acknowledged this fact.
>
> Modern computer programmers also have to acknowledge that reality.
> The best computer programmes for Go cannot yet play as well as a human master
> (a '1-dan' by Japanese professional standards).
>
> > Hope you might develop an interest, however casual or serious,
> > in the most complex game there is.
>
> Or an interest in the evidently 'most complex *board* game there is'. :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go
Then click on the link for 'Go (board game)'.
Bob Musicant
news:6655d472.03102...@posting.google.com...
> mark.h...@eudoramail.com (Mark Houlsby) wrote in
> message news:<47ae7109.03101...@posting.google.com>...
> Modern computer programmers also have to acknowledge that reality.
> The best computer programmes for Go cannot yet play as well as a human
master
> (a '1-dan' by Japanese professional standards).
>
I don't dispute that Go is more complex or subtle than chess. But I've
heard Dan Heisman -- who I believed worked on the Deep Blue project -- say
that comparisons based on the relative difficulty of programming computers
to play the two games are misleading, as a great deal more time and energy
have gone into programming computers to play chess.
Nick
> > Modern computer programmers also have to acknowledge that reality.
> > The best computer programmes for Go cannot yet play as well as a
> > human master (a '1-dan' by Japanese professional standards).
>
> I don't dispute that Go is more complex or subtle than chess. But I've
> heard Dan Heisman -- who I believed worked on the Deep Blue project -- say
> that comparisons based on the relative difficulty of programming computers
> to play the two games are misleading, as a great deal more time and energy
> have gone into programming computers to play chess.
Dear Mr. Musicant:
There has been much more research on computer Go than I suspect that you know.
http://www.cs.unimaas.nl/icga/games/go/start.html
"Go is the last of the classical board games in which computers are still
relatively weak. Despite a lot of effort, the current top programs can still
be beaten easily by humans of intermediate level."
Here's a link to the issues (1986-1991) of the journal "Computer Go":
http://daogo.org/
"Meijin" (or "The Master of Go") is a novel by Yasunari Kawabata (1899-1972).
"The Go Masters" (English title) was a popular 1982 Chinese/Japanese film.
I have played Go with a 9-dan player (equivalent to a grandmaster in chess) in
Japanese professional Go, who is paid to comment on Go for Japanese television.
Given the levels of popular interest in Go in China, Japan, and Korea, one
should expect that there could be some corresponding scientific research
interests in computer Go, which actually do extend well beyond those societies.
"Only in dreams do men set forth in quest of the ideal."
--George Moore (Evelyn Innes)
--Nick
Vic Martinez
Mark Houlsby
> Isn't 'Othello' a variation of 'Go'? Or are they different?
They're *very* different (although there are vague similarities).
Othello is much less complex, and has been solved, I believe.
st...@mimosa.csv.warwick.ac.uk
I don't think Othello's been solved yet; if it has, I'd be very
grateful for a reference. Awari has recently been solved:
http://awari.cs.vu.nl/
and other games like Connect-4, Go-moku, Nine-men's morris,
and Qubic (4x4x4 noughts & crosses) were solved a few years ago.
Go has been solved for boards up to 6x7 (the standard size is 19x19):
http://www.mathpuzzle.com/go.html
[at least it's solved using area, i.e. Chinese, scoring, which is "usually"
equivalent to Japanese scoring but much easier to express algorithmically]
--
J.E.H.Shaw [Ewart Shaw] st...@uk.ac.warwick TEL: +44 2476 523069
Department of Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/statsdept http://www.ewartshaw.co.uk
3 ((4&({*.(=+/))++/=3:)@([:,/0&,^:(i.3)@|:"2^:2))&.>@]^:(i.@[) <#:3 6 2
Mark Houlsby
> In article <47ae7109.03102...@posting.google.com>,
> mark.h...@eudoramail.com (Mark Houlsby) writes:
> >t1...@webtv.net (Vic Martinez) wrote in message news:<7004-3F9...@storefull-2331.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
> >> Isn't 'Othello' a variation of 'Go'? Or are they different?
> >
> >They're *very* different (although there are vague similarities).
> >Othello is much less complex, and has been solved, I believe.
>
> I don't think Othello's been solved yet;
Well, I'm not often right, and I'm wrong again :-\
Indeed it has not been solved, perhaps I was confusing it with tic-tac-toe *coughs*
Thanks for the heads up, Ewart.
Nick
news:<7004-3F9...@storefull-2331.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
'Go' and 'Othello' are quite different games.
Here's a link to the British Othello Federation:
http://www.ugateways.com/bofmain.html
--Nick
Nick
> st...@mimosa.csv.warwick.ac.uk () wrote in message
> news:<bnjs86$ebj$1...@wisteria.csv.warwick.ac.uk>...
> > In article <47ae7109.03102...@posting.google.com>,
> > mark.h...@eudoramail.com (Mark Houlsby) writes:
> > > t1...@webtv.net (Vic Martinez) wrote in message
> > > news:<7004-3F9...@storefull-2331.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
> > > > Isn't 'Othello' a variation of 'Go'? Or are they different?
> > >
> > > They're *very* different (although there are vague similarities).
> > > Othello is much less complex, and has been solved, I believe.
Another name for 'Othello' is 'Reversi'.
> > I don't think Othello's been solved yet;
Here are some related links:
"Writing an Othello program" by Gunnar Andersson:
http://www.nada.kth.se/%7Egunnar/howto.html
"How Machines have learned to play Othello" by Michael Buro:
http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/%7Emburo/ps/IEEE.pdf
> Well, I'm not often right, and I'm wrong again :-\
> Indeed it has not been solved, perhaps I was confusing it with tic-tac-toe
> *coughs*
Mr. Houlsby:
You got what you deserved for not having checked first with Kevin Bachler. :-)
--Nick
Bob Musicant
"Nick" <nickbo...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6655d472.03102...@posting.google.com...
> "Bob Musicant" <musi...@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<bnEmb.39004$gA1.13...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> > "Nick" <nickbo...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:6655d472.03102...@posting.google.com...
> > > (snipped)
> > > Modern computer programmers also have to acknowledge that reality.
> > > The best computer programmes for Go cannot yet play as well as a
> > > human master (a '1-dan' by Japanese professional standards).
> >
> > I don't dispute that Go is more complex or subtle than chess. But I've
> > heard Dan Heisman -- who I believed worked on the Deep Blue project --
say
> > that comparisons based on the relative difficulty of programming
computers
> > to play the two games are misleading, as a great deal more time and
energy
> > have gone into programming computers to play chess.
>
> Dear Mr. Musicant:
>
> There has been much more research on computer Go than I suspect that you
know.
>
Nick,
That wouldn't surprise me in the least, as I have no idea at all of what has
been done in the field.
Bob
Mark Houlsby
Ah but the tower...THE TOWER!!! I couldn't go back in, I tell you, the
agony, the endless excruciating PAIN!!!!!
FYI smart guy, the *only* reason I hang out here is to learn stuff.
Seems I just did... :-)
Nick
> the agony, the endless excruciating PAIN!!!!!
Mr. Houlsby:
As I have not been following the latest news from Planet Kevin, I did not even
know of the "The Tower" there. I had heard only of the legendary (Platonic?)
"Cave of Pain" (given Kevin L. Bachler's address at "cavemanchess.com").
In the interest of clarity, my earlier joke was not directed so much toward
you as toward Kevin L. Bachler, whom you have sarcastically characterised as
"omniscient" and to whom you wrote: "You really should take up TIC-TAC-TOE.
It's much closer to your intellectual level." (23 October 2003)
> FYI smart guy, the *only* reason I hang out here is to learn stuff.
> Seems I just did... :-)
"The *only* reason (you) hang out here (of all places!) is to learn stuff"?
Really? And should all that "stuff" always be worth learning, at least
after considering all your time and effort spent here? How could your faith
always triumph over your experiences?
"The more religious faith is shaken, the greater is the temptation to supply
its place by a ritual."
--Arlo Bates (The Puritans)
--Nick
Mark Houlsby
> > the agony, the endless excruciating PAIN!!!!!
>
> Mr. Houlsby:
>
> As I have not been following the latest news from Planet Kevin, I did not even
> know of the "The Tower" there. I had heard only of the legendary (Platonic?)
> "Cave of Pain" (given Kevin L. Bachler's address at "cavemanchess.com").
>
Consider yourself lucky, sir!
> In the interest of clarity, my earlier joke was not directed so much toward
> you as toward Kevin L. Bachler, whom you have sarcastically characterised as
> "omniscient" and to whom you wrote: "You really should take up TIC-TAC-TOE.
> It's much closer to your intellectual level." (23 October 2003)
>
'Keck: I know it!'
--The Thin Red Line (dir. Terrence Malick)
> > FYI smart guy, the *only* reason I hang out here is to learn stuff.
> > Seems I just did... :-)
>
> "The *only* reason (you) hang out here (of all places!) is to learn stuff"?
Yes.
> Really?
Yes.
> And should all that "stuff" always be worth learning, at least
> after considering all your time and effort spent here?
Ok, so I'm a "berserk evangelist" (to borrow Woody Allen's phrase) of
erudition.
> How could your faith
> always triumph over your experiences?
>
He who would valiant be
He who would valiant be
'gainst all disaster,
let him in constancy
follow the Master.
There's no discouragement
shall make him once relent
his first avowed intent
to be a pilgrim.
Who so beset him round
with dismal stories
do but themselves confound
his strength the more is.
No foes shall stay his might;
though he with giants fight,
he will make good his right
to be a pilgrim.
Since, Lord, thou dost defend
us with thy Spirit,
We know we at the end,
shall life inherit.
Then fancies flee away!
I'll fear not what men say,
I'll labor night and day
to be a pilgrim.
Words: John Bunyan, 1684;
as modified by Percy Dearmer, 1906
Music: Monk's Gate, St. Dunstan's, Bunyan
Meter: Irr.
> "The more religious faith is shaken, the greater is the temptation to supply
> its place by a ritual."
> --Arlo Bates (The Puritans)
>
> --Nick
'We feel and know that we are eternal.'
--Spinoza (Ethics)
'In every ascetic morality man worships a part of himself as God and
for that he needs to diabolize the other part.'
--Nietzsche (Human, All Too Human)
'The thing-in-itself, the will-to-live, exists whole and undivided in
every being, even in the tiniest; it is present as completely as in
all that ever were, are, and will be, taken together.'
--Schopenhauer ('On Ethics', Parerga and Paralipomena)
'Diane (to Sam, who is about to call Harry [Cheers' pet con-artist],
in order to persuade him to win back from George [a plausible
card-shark who has hustled Coach for $8000 {Coach: Yeah, but that's
spread over since last February...}] that same $8000): Come on,
Sam...that's like asking Spinoza to settle a dispute
between...Nietzsche and Schopenhauer....
Coach: She's got a point, Sam...'
--Cheers
--Mark