Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching (Read 9610 times)
OstapBender
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no spoon.

Posts: 1491
Location: not in Kansas anymore
Joined: 10/16/04
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #22 - 06/23/08 at 16:18:23
Post Tools
Quote:
This month, two new attacking manuals were published by Gambit: The Art of Attacking in Chess by Zenon Franco and How to Crush Your Chess Opponents by Simon Williams.

Reviewed at Chessvibes.  The Franco book sounds quite good.
  

"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates."  -Jay Leno
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Daniel ODowd
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 9
Location: Carlisle, UK
Joined: 05/08/08
Gender: Male
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #21 - 06/15/08 at 15:30:37
Post Tools
Just to say that I've now bought The Art of Attack, and having loaned the first half of Middlegame from my library, I'm going to see how they help me before I make any further middlegame book decision. Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #20 - 06/03/08 at 12:30:13
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/03/08 at 02:13:26:
HgMan,

Such a book exists!  It's by Mason, and was written about 1905.  Lips Sealed

I loved reading the link John Cox provided.  Yes Kramnik does indeed mention Chigorin, Markovich, and even puts him in a positive light compared to Steinitz.  He clearly believes that Chigorin was far more dynamic than Steinitz, but also that Steinitz was a more talented and hard working player.

Kramnik's study of the great masters of the past came after he had already received most of his training.  If this is true of Kramnik, think how much more true it is of the GMs that the internet age have created!


Yes, and I think that supports my point that these things are nice, but not essential, to know.

Somehow I missed Kramnik's remarks on Chigorin; thanks.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #19 - 06/03/08 at 02:13:26
Post Tools
HgMan,

Such a book exists!  It's by Mason, and was written about 1905.  Lips Sealed

I loved reading the link John Cox provided.  Yes Kramnik does indeed mention Chigorin, Markovich, and even puts him in a positive light compared to Steinitz.  He clearly believes that Chigorin was far more dynamic than Steinitz, but also that Steinitz was a more talented and hard working player.

Kramnik's study of the great masters of the past came after he had already received most of his training.  If this is true of Kramnik, think how much more true it is of the GMs that the internet age have created!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #18 - 06/02/08 at 18:17:14
Post Tools
IMJohnCox wrote on 06/02/08 at 17:51:41:
It occurs to me incidentally that a book on Philidor is long overdue. In fact a book on pre-Steinitz chess, really.


Couldn't agree more!  In addition, I always thought a book that examined the British scene mid-1800s would make for a fascinating read if it blended chess and history...
  

"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
IMJohnCox
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1551
Location: London
Joined: 01/28/06
Gender: Male
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #17 - 06/02/08 at 17:51:41
Post Tools
I suppose one might say exactly that, Stigma, that one sees the elements best in isolation. You only understand what Lasker had which, say, Steinitz didn't if you study Steinitz first. Something like that.

Kramnik's views are very interesting as always, but he strikes me as an unusually intellectual player. I suspect Anand, or indeed Carlsen, might say something different. From Nakamura of course one wouldn't expect anything else: even if he did study Philidor he'd never say so.

It occurs to me incidentally that a book on Philidor is long overdue. In fact a book on pre-Steinitz chess, really.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #16 - 06/02/08 at 16:48:38
Post Tools
IMJohnCox wrote on 06/02/08 at 14:41:09:
Here's one titled player's view.

http://www.kramnik.com/eng/interviews/getinterview.aspx?id=61

Though one cannot say he backs up his view with any very compelling arguments.


I just read that and it's quite interesting.  I was struck by his remark that defense requires better tactical skills than the attack.  I hadn't thought of that before but it seems obvious when you think about it.  Too bad he didn't talk about Chigorin, but you can't have everything.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3265
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #15 - 06/02/08 at 16:30:01
Post Tools
Very interesting views from Kramnik. It sounds a bit strange though to recommend going all the way back to Philidor when he considers Lasker the first player with a comprehensive, flexible understanding of the game! Why not start with Lasker, Capablanca and Alekhine and then skip to the post-WW2 Soviets? Maybe the idea is that you can pick up different elements of the game from Philidor, Morphy, Anderssen and Steinitz, but we can get those elements more easlily from books like My System, The Middlegame, Pawn Power in Chess, The Art of Attack, Reassess Your Chess etc. Or can't we?

On the other side, I remember Nakamura commenting in New In Chess after his first US Championship that he had only studied Fischer and Kasparov; the other historical players were too boring...
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
IMJohnCox
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1551
Location: London
Joined: 01/28/06
Gender: Male
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #14 - 06/02/08 at 14:41:09
Post Tools
Here's one titled player's view.

http://www.kramnik.com/eng/interviews/getinterview.aspx?id=61

Though one cannot say he backs up his view with any very compelling arguments.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #13 - 06/02/08 at 14:26:15
Post Tools
Holbox wrote on 06/02/08 at 07:56:23:
Quote:
Personally I think it may be much more important to go over recent games by strong players than to study old pedagogical works such as Euwe's middlegame set.  If others disagree, I'll be interested to hear it.


But anyway before to do that I think you should have your own basic understanding of chess. I mean you need an historical review of chess evolution. Without that I think It's impossible to understand today's chess.

By the way do you know a book with similar content than Kasparov's GP series but in resumed way?

Thx


Somehow I doubt that these young GMs that keep popping up these days have spent all that much time reviewing the historical development of chess.  The old masters probably understood how to handle open positions as well as the modern ones do, but I think one might as well study new games as old ones, even for that.  I admit that the old masters are worth studying for many reasons, but I don't think this study is necessary for becomming quite strong at chess.  I know that Fischer made a deep study of Steinitz and developed a style of play consistent with it, but I think that is unusual.

Maybe some titled players would care to contribute to this discussion, since I can hardly speak with authority.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Holbox
Senior Member
****
Offline


Saigón Café

Posts: 369
Joined: 02/08/05
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #12 - 06/02/08 at 07:56:23
Post Tools
Quote:
Personally I think it may be much more important to go over recent games by strong players than to study old pedagogical works such as Euwe's middlegame set.  If others disagree, I'll be interested to hear it.


But anyway before to do that I think you should have your own basic understanding of chess. I mean you need an historical review of chess evolution. Without that I think It's impossible to understand today's chess.

By the way do you know a book with similar content than Kasparov's GP series but in resumed way?

Thx
  

"Ladran, luego cabalgamos", NN
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #11 - 06/02/08 at 07:41:59
Post Tools
Markovich,

I agree with you that a better question than was asked in the initial post of this thread is if any of the mentioned books was worth the money and effort.  I even agree with you that studying today's players will be more
interesting and beneficial than studying the old masters!  (That's a painful admission.)

Max Euwe is one of my favorite players of the past (despite what I may say in front of the Dutch contingent here), and I do own his books.  However, those books represent part of my collection rather than what I use to teach chess.

I try to use games that have been played recently (usually within the last few weeks) in my lessons with students.  I do make homework assignments that may be from the classics, but in order to address the specific problems of converting various types of advantages, I like to show how today's players first gain an advantage and then drive the point home.

I've already mentioned the books that I use.  They are recent books which cover recent theory.  Kasparov's books are the most historical of the bunch, but his notes make the games fresh.  Max Euwe has earned his place on my shelf, but the books that are on my study table are by Khalifman, Stohl, Watson, and others of this generation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #10 - 06/02/08 at 01:45:40
Post Tools
@Daniel O'Dowd:  I suspect it's not your lack of talent but your lack of knowledge of how to handle given positions.  I think everyone suffers from that to some degree, us amateurs more than the big boys, of course.  Experience is the great teacher, so I think a player trying to improve has to immerse himself in the game and try all sorts of different positions.  And play over all sorts of games, not only the ones that touch upon your pet lines.

Personally I think it may be much more important to go over recent games by strong players than to study old pedagogical works such as Euwe's middlegame set.  If others disagree, I'll be interested to hear it.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Balrog
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 4
Joined: 06/01/08
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #9 - 06/01/08 at 23:29:27
Post Tools
Daniel ODowd wrote on 05/26/08 at 09:42:42:
I'm weighing up rather a big decision, between buying both volumes of The Middlegame, against The Art of Attack.

Ok, sounds like you're a much better player than I (~1300Elo). However, I own both Euwe and Vukovic, so my 2c:

As I'm sure you're aware, Vukovic is rather narrow, dealing with attacking the king position. Euwe is obviously a general middlegame text. Euwe is very good, but quite dense and requires a lot of effort from the reader (you're not really spoon fed). General structure is some introductory prose on the topic, then several heavily annotated games - it's probably a lot more digestible to a player on your level than me, but I personally found some sections heavy going. Euwe's 2nd volume has several chapters on attacking the king, but it doesn't do it in the level of detail that Vukovic does.

To my inexpert understanding it sounds like you achieve a good position, but then thingy it up - thus, you would benefit from improving your ability to conceive a plan based on the position in front of you OTB - ie "ok I'm better here, but what now?". In other words assessing strengths & weaknesses, and working out how to proceed from there. In this sense, Silman's "thinking technique" from How to Reassess Your Chess (suggested above) may be what you're looking for. It's not for everyone, but highly rated by many.

As for a choice between the 2 books, I'd go for Euwe - simply because it covers more than the attack on the king position.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3265
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Middlegame and attack books, and self-teaching
Reply #8 - 06/01/08 at 20:36:03
Post Tools
OK, you'll just have to wait for someone who has studied both Simple Chess and The Middlegame to read this thread then.

Daniel ODowd wrote on 06/01/08 at 18:06:46:
Not really. My lack of talent is such that it's taken my 6-7years to become in any way fluent in plans and characteristics of the openings I'm expert in, and even then I badly stuff up on occasion. It's not just a case of knowing how to play from those openings, but how to play chess. Smiley If I was to follow your line of thought, I would be buying dvds on all openings I face.


That is very modest, but I'm sure you could develop understanding of an opening more quickly if you gave it a try! I studied "Pirc Alert" for a month and then used the Pirc with success for years, and my memory is not especially good. I think knowing how to play those openings you face is a good thing to focus on after you have studied something like MG.

DVDs (and training CDs) can indeed be great for quickly learning about the main plans; some are very good but some don't give much insight on how to proceed after the first 15 moves. Most of the ChessPublishing authors also comment games well into the middlegame and endgame, so much useful thematic material here if you only look for it.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo