ReneDescartes wrote on 03/06/17 at 16:56:14:



Your comments were not harsh in any way.

Paul Brondal wrote on 03/02/17 at 07:02:59:

Honestly, very inventive harsh expressions often occur to me, but I try to exercise restraint because I think that what is negative is usually vain in every sense of the word.

This is just a post in a chess forum, but I have noticed that, even in very great works, what is ultimately negative--for example, masterful sarcasm by Voltaire against the church--is eventually forgotten, while what  is of positive inherent interest, though it might be, for example, tragic, is remembered. But these matters are both subtle and complicated. I very much respect Oscar Wilde, for example. Anyway, I aspire to take care on this point whenever I write or speak.

I retract the first two paragraphs of the quoted post--the "Super Yusupov Challenge" and the reference to not upholding professed standards. I would be glad to ask a mod to delete it if other posters would agree to take it out of their quotes.

On the other hand, I stand by the last paragraph, which is not exaggerated with too-clever writing. Aagard is a tough-talking teacher of integrity--that's no act--as well as a businessman. Though clearly a super-GM talent like Sadler hardly needs to do the material the suggested way to get maximum benefit out of it, and maybe you and some others don't either--readers obviously vary in their ability to visualize without a board, even at the same level, and to hold a tree of variations in short-term memory--I think that for most people a rapid traversal is not as useful as a slow one. And while for someone like your friend doing them in a suboptimal way undoubtedly  really is better than not doing them at all, I still don't think it's a positive development for someone with Aagard's deserved influence or authority to encourage the general public to do them in a way that's not the best.

I was so inspired by the Yusupov Challenge, so that I decided to make an alternative Challenge: The Grandmaster Preparation Challenge. Have already tried these books earlier on but they were on the tough side. Did the first 39 exercises in Calculation in the chapter Candidate Moves and the results are really good now. Use about 4 minutes per exercise with a score of 70%!

ReneDescartes wrote on 02/28/17 at 13:00:55:




I think this is a little harsh - but I do know what you mean. It surprised me more than a little to see the suggested rate of progress.

Mind you the context of the blog post makes clear that JA is also planning to read 100 books this year. I’m surprised at that rate of progress too.

It’s not quite the same thing, I grant you, but I don’t think this is just about flogging books.

It’s a blog post, after all. That’s a pretty crappy method for flogging off books, I’d guess.

Why did QC not go all the way to the "super Yusupov challenge": not to read his books in the time recommended (1-2 hours per chapter and 1-2 more per test), nor even to punt each in 10-20 minutes, but--wait for it--simply to buy all 10 books in a year!

Admittedly it's a challenge making challenges less challenging. And evidently to maintain your professed standards while selling what was designed to be a long program of hard work to a public not patient enough to do it.

In this case I think the nervous-businessman Aagard got the better of the tough-talking-teacher-with-integrity Aagard. Maybe he justified it by telling himself that reading the books as blitz chess is better than not reading them at all, but it goes against his whole persona and I find it disappointing. But to err is human, and he does a lot of good things for the chess world.

JonathanB wrote on 02/10/17 at 13:40:29:

Yes, of course.

I think the teaching philosophy and the understatement of the target-audience rating are still the main difficulties, though. Unfortunately, these reinforce each other. A too-difficult problem in the everything-is-intricately-related style can look like chaos even when you read the solution, making you just feel lost. The pure style is not as demoralizing for those below the target audience (though in they many not be improving much); it may be impossible for a 1200 player to find Taimanov's corridor mate in three against Karpov, 1977, but once he reads the solution he remains oriented.

Excuse me, Golenischev, on which the Yusupov books were partly based. Guseinov is a contemporary player whose name was in my ear. I got them mixed up.

http://chessok.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=7_26_45&products_...

The book/program contains great explanations but in a clumsy translation, though the meaning is always clear. Great basic expositions of two-bishops technique, how to deploy three3 minor pieces against the queen, etc. Not super-wordy, but not as laconic as Yusupov either; just examples obviously chosen by a talented teacher, with clear to-the point comments at critical junctures. (The recent games added by the pedagogically untalented editors, however, are about as clear as mud. I just ignore them.)

There is also an Android version.