Interesting chessbooks

[Hans Jung]

Speaking of books, what book has made the most profound impression on you recently? - and reason why? My answer (of all the books I'm currently reading) is: Secrets of Chess Transformations by Drazen Marovic. Why? Because by reading it I feel that it is slowly opening my eyes to greater board vision and giving me more to think about during play.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

... by reading it I feel that it is slowly opening my eyes to greater board vision and giving me more to think about during play.

Don't you have enough already to think about during your games ? :)

[Hans Jung]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

Yes, the flip side to that is it makes me more confused.:o

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

I think every time a player reads a revolutionary new book on chess strategy, he has to struggle to integrate what seems like good advice in the book with his own previously developed conception of strategy. The result is often a temporary loss of rating points, as one struggles to unlearn and learn at the same time.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

a revolutionary new book on chess strategy

:D
Unless it comes from a TOP-20, they are just books about a chess strategy without a revolution.

[Hans Jung]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

I think every time a player reads a revolutionary new book on chess strategy, he has to struggle to integrate what seems like good advice in the book with his own previously developed conception of strategy. The result is often a temporary loss of rating points, as one struggles to unlearn and learn at the same time.

Uh-oh I guess my rating is headed down again

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

:D
Unless it comes from a TOP-20, they are just books about a chess strategy without a revolution.

Btw, have you read IM John Watson's 'Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy'?

Watson aims to sum up all the advances in chess strategy since Nimzovich, although one cannot help but feel that he is putting his own spin on many topics.

Even Nimzovich's 'My System' has come in for at least some unkind criticism from various authors, including Watson. Also, once the late Toronto based IM Geza Fuster described 'My System' as 'garbage'.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

Btw, have you read IM John Watson's 'Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy'?

Watson aims to sum up all the advances in chess strategy since Nimzovich, although one cannot help but feel that he is putting his own spin on many topics.

Even Nimzovich's 'My System' has come in for at least some unkind criticism from various authors, including Watson. Also, once the late Toronto based IM Geza Fuster described 'My System' as 'garbage'.

I think I read long time ago. Can't remember anything specifically, and don't have a copy to refresh memory

As for Nimzo: even the title says "MY", thus it is not for everybody.
Did Geza Fuster write anything monumental? It is easy to be a critic :p

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

I think I read long time ago. Can't remember anything specifically, and don't have a copy to refresh memory

As for Nimzo: even the title says "MY", thus it is not for everybody.
Did Geza Fuster write anything monumental? It is easy to be a critic :p

I myself could write something 'monumental', but then I am not a 'TOP-20' as one critic put it. :D

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

I myself could write something 'monumental', but then I am not a 'TOP-20' as one critic put it. :D

Tim Harding wasn't top 20 (that I know of) and he is a well respected author who has written many books and also a magazine. I used to keep current on his theory on the Ruy Lopez Marshall Gambit from his books and then CD.

So, if you want to write, write away!

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

Hi Gary

Competently expanding existing opening theory/explanations may well be an easier task than competently expanding on existing middlegame theory, or strategy, which I think Hans may have been most interested in when he started this thread.

I recall reading about Kasparov 'tactfully' admitting he was surprised that a 'weak' player could write so well, in refering to an opening book written by Peter Wells (a [non TOP-20] GM). Perhaps Wells could write innovative middlegame book(s) that would earn such 'praise' from Kasparov.

Strong players may not make the best teachers, but even lesser (than TOP-20) players may still have some good ideas. GM Suba (among others) has come up with some pretty novel middlegame theory in modern times, which has at least influenced other writers.

I know I would find writing about opening theory/explanations far less of a problem than coming up with a whole mass of novel half-decent middlegame theories. For one thing I'd need a bigger library. I might at least come up with some unique practical advice on various aspects of the game, but whether club players, at least, would follow it would be another story. I think they'd often prefer that I be a GM, though probably without my needing to be a TOP-20.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

Hi Kevin,

Good luck with a middle game book. Will you aim it at those who favour positional play or those who prefer tactical play? Will you target playing from the black or white side? Will you target the middle game of specific openings or defenses? There seem like a lot of considerations in planning that kind of book, unless I'm misunderstanding you.

With an opening book like Hardings on the Ruy Lopez Marshall or the Marshall Attack or the CD, Total Marshall (I have them all), it takes the player well into the middle game. If I was playing someone "booked up" on the Marshall and I didn't know much about it I'd simply play the exchange variation, 4. Bxc6 and go to the endgame.

Of course, Harding did books other than openings. An example is "Red Letters" which came with a CD as well as the book. It the correspondence chess championships of the Soviet Union going back to the 1940's. Maybe I'll read it this evening as I haven't had it off the shelf in a few years. This retirement is the pits in a way. In a way it's not.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

Hi Kevin,

Good luck with a middle game book. Will you aim it at those who favour positional play or those who prefer tactical play?

If one were to pretend to cover the middlegame phase of chess comprehensively it would require more than one volume in this day and age. Euwe & Kramer once wrote a two volume pair of thick Middlegame books. One volume was concerned with static features, the other book was concerned with everything else ('dynamic features'). These might be said to correspond roughly with positional and tactical considerations (probably each of the two volumes should be expanded into two or more volumes these days).

Will you target playing from the black or white side? Will you target the middle game of specific openings or defenses? There seem like a lot of considerations in planning that kind of book, unless I'm misunderstanding you.

Euwe & Kramer's first volume (static features) went through various common pawn structures and described various strategies that each side might use. That could help deal with the strategies for various middlegames that could result from any number of specific or non-specific openings.

The second (dynamic) volume dealt with a range of topics, such as the value of the pieces and how to use them, various styles, etc. General considerations in handling just the White or Black pieces in a game of chess, which Euwe and Kramer didn't much address, might thus nowadays be put in middlegame volume(s) dealing with dynamic considerations.

With an opening book like Hardings on the Ruy Lopez Marshall or the Marshall Attack or the CD, Total Marshall (I have them all), it takes the player well into the middle game. If I was playing someone "booked up" on the Marshall and I didn't know much about it I'd simply play the exchange variation, 4. Bxc6 and go to the endgame.

Of course, Harding did books other than openings. An example is "Red Letters" which came with a CD as well as the book. It the correspondence chess championships of the Soviet Union going back to the 1940's. Maybe I'll read it this evening as I haven't had it off the shelf in a few years. This retirement is the pits in a way. In a way it's not.

I once owned a book on chess strategy, designed for the club player, that was written by Harding. He did a good job boiling things down to the essentials when it came to the middlegame, considering that the book wasn't either very thick or too thin.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

I wonder how many of those books stand up to scrutiny with the computer software we have today.

Even decades ago it used to be fun looking for variations in ECO which had errors. The evaluation at the end of the line was OK. The problem was some of the lines contained kindergarten chess. Varying within the line changed the outcome. Kindergarten chess is where you make a move and your opponent busts you with his reply.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Interesting chessbooks

I wonder how many of those books stand up to scrutiny with the computer software we have today.

Even decades ago it used to be fun looking for variations in ECO which had errors. The evaluation at the end of the line was OK. The problem was some of the lines contained kindergarten chess. Varying within the line changed the outcome. Kindergarten chess is where you make a move and your opponent busts you with his reply.

I once happened to suspect an analytical mistake in a book by Nunn on the 6.Bg5 Najdorf, in spite of the fact he claimed he had checked all analysis in the book with Fritz. I looked closer on my board and it looked like it obviously turned a '+-' in a key variation into a '-+'. Nothing too deep. I double checked with my Fritz, and sure enough I was right.

I wonder how many other books make such cheeky computer-checked claims.