Hello:

Viking's suggestion is a good one. At the end of the book the author suggests books to deal with one's weaknesses. And IIRC, he does this by class.
One suggestion I have is not to fly through the book as I did. I now think I did not spend enough time on each problem.

Good luck,

Gerry

Viking wrote on 01/29/09 at 21:17:30:

I suggest you buy another book   :
Chess Exam by Khmelnitsky(?)

I think you need a test - to find your current strengths and weaknesses. If you do that you will know where you should put your focus next.

Greetings,

halfacreek
Nice list!

I've got quite a few of those myself.  

Two questions:

1) What's your rating? (If you've gone through even half of these, it's obvious you can't be a "Beginner/Novice".)
2) Could you re-do the list and indicate:
a) Which ones you've read
b) How you found them (in terms of difficulty, usefulness, etc)

You should be able to categorize your books into:

Endgames
Middlegame (Tactics; Strategy/Positional)
Openings
Games Collections

Rowson's Seven Deadly Chess Sins would be good for any improving player, his other book - Chess For Zebras is more aimed at the advanced/mature player with a more philosophical approach to various questions of chess in general; it won't be as useful for a beginner/younger player.

Tarrasch's book may be alright for those starting out - no idea of the moves - but for someone who's gotten past all that, there's little to recommend it. Similarly with Lasker's treatise.

For those who're interested in such for their historical value - or simply to see what they're like - then one could get them. I saw Tarrasch's book, many years ago as a teenager, and wasn't that impressed with it - but that's just my personal opinion, many here would disagree. (Apart from these, personally, I'd like to peruse Blackburne's book.)

swingdoc
Was that remark addressed to me, Sir?  

Anyone who manages to read Nimzowitsch's opus should be able to follow Watson's tome, which references it.

But I do take your point.

I could have listed more "clubplayer-oriented" books, such as Griffiths' and Hooper's book on how to improve your chess, or Taulbut's book on positional chess and others of that sort. Most improving players may wonder "Who are they?" compared with more well-known names.

My reason for listing the "difficult" books I did was that, reading between the lines of halfacreek's post, I inferred that someone with the proverbial large collection of chess books would be at a more advanced level than the above few examples would benefit.

Kindest regards,

Dragan Glas

Did halfacreek ever mention what books he had? That would make recommendations a heck of a lot easier 

Also, anyone else notice that too many people insist on reading books that are much too difficult for them? I assume they believe this will make them better faster when the opposite is true.

Greetings,

Matemax wrote on 01/28/09 at 21:38:44:

True.

I was about 1300-1350.

I hadn't played any chess between 1992 and 1996 - not even looked at a puzzle, diagram, book - anything.

I couldn't believe how bad my tactical-sight had become! I was leaving pieces en prise and missing double-attacks (with check) all over the place!

Embarrassed beyond belief, I went back to my books - and analysed my games, with the result as reported.

Now, not having played since 1999, I played in a blitz competition at my club here in Dublin - I did practice on chesstempo.com and FICS for a few weeks first.

Even so, I still dropped pieces and missed discovered checks/mates in one.

Out of nine games - I won one and lost the rest on time.

Time to hit the books again!

PS - I'm not an alcoholic!

Kindest regards,

Dragan Glas

Greetings,

This is always an interesting problem.

As I posted elsewhere, if you're returning to chess after a break - as I have on a number of occasions, and am currently doing - the answer is easy.

"Of the books I've read, if I could start again, which books - and in what order - would I prefer to have read?"

Re-read the books which made an impression on you.

For me, those are:

Winning Chess: How To See Just Three Moves Ahead - Chernev and Reinfeld
Chess Fundamentals - Capablanca
My System - Nimzowitsch

Now, in my current return to chess, I intend adding:

Chess Praxis - Nimzowitsch
Secrets Of Modern Chess Strategy and Chess Strategy In Action - Watson

... to bring me up-to-date with modern practice. I'll probably add Watson's opening trilogy, Mastering the Chess Openings for understanding the basic strategies underlying them, rather than specific lines - those would need specific books/databases.

Also, I'll add endgame books and tactical treatises.

For those starting out...

As others have posted, particularly Milen Petrov, I'd start with tactics, followed by endgames, then middlegames and finally openings.

The problem with endgames is that they can be quite boring, which is why so many avoid these!

Various books on tactics exist - Learn Chess Tactics by Nunn, for example. One should also study puzzles - ideally from easy to hard(est).

Once you have a fair grasp of these, Tactics in the Endgame is the ideal starting point to study endgames - one learns how to handle various types of endgames enjoyably without actually plodding through a course on endgames!

From there, one could then go through Howell's Essential Chess Endings (for the Tournament Player) and a endgame strategy book - How To Play Chess Endgames by Muller and Pajeken, for example, to learn "endgame technique".

Having covered tactics and endgames to a reasonable extent, one needs to learn to handle the transition from the middlegame to the endgame - From The Middlegame To The Endgame by Mednis is a very good book on this important phase of the game.

As for the middlegame itself, either of the Nimzowitsch or Watson duologies would be the way to go - particularly the latter for its relevance to current theory/practice. Similarly, Watson's trilogy for a general understanding of the openings can be recommended - one can then look for books on specific openings and/or a repertoire book according to your temperament and interest.

It is very important to instil in oneself the discipline of checking all checks and captures - whether for you or (particularly!) your opponent - on your move. [I've found this a constant issue on returning to chess - missing simple tactics (one-move mates/captures, leaving pieces en prise by both myself and my opponent) due to being rusty.]

Equally, one should also analyse one's own games. (I've never actually analysed master games in this way - I'd like to do Lasker's, Capablanca's, Rubinstein's and Karpov's someday!)

The previous time I returned to chess, (having reviewed tactics and strategy) I analysed mine by playing through each to the end - to remind myself of the game. Then I played through it looking at the pawn structures - when they changed and why, and if the reason for doing so was justified strategically and/or tactically. Thirdly, I played through them to see if the strategic plan (if any!!) and piece-play was in keeping with the pawn structures or not - and finally, worked backwards from the mate (like Fischer's method of teaching mates) analysing the tactical possibilities in offence and defence at each move.

A lot of work involved, but it did pay off - I went from about 1300 (which is to where I'd dropped from about 1860 in 1992) to 1950 in four years play (1996 to 1999).

Currently, I'm starting again...  

Kindest regards,

Dragan Glas

All the above is correct of course, but since you have the books (!), I thought of presenting you a different perspective:

a) If you don't enjoy reading them, forget about them.. You can have a cursory look from time to time, but as many of us I suppose you have many non-chess books (novels, scientific works etc.) in your bookcase you are not actually going to read (ever!). Time is precious and our hobby should give us first of all pleasure.

b) However, if you do enjoy reading (and working on) a chess book from time to time I would utilise some of these books (while also playing OTB games, doing my tactics and analysing my own games).

I would have started slowly, maybe 1-2 books / year. Some tomes are mainly for reference (depends on your level), e.g. some opening or endgame manuals, so I would have left these out for a while. Better go with the ones that are enjoyable to read, address your level of strength and also focus on your current weaknesses.

(caveat: depending on your chess knowledge and self-assessment) I suppose top choices are: A good book on positional play (as Stigma says: a good general middlegame/strategy book), a nice, small all-round primer on endgames and a good book on an opening you plan to use a lot.  (when I say good opening book, don't judge it only by the value of the opening it covers - I mean not boring and with fully annotated games).

c) Ever considered stop buying more books?  

Yep, analysing your own games is better then any book you'll ever read, at least that's what helped me a lot. The best thing would probably be to analyse them with chess computer and a strong player, or at least with a chess computer...

I go to such an extreme that I even take my online blitz games seriously and analyse each and every one. Obviously, one can't expect great chess in 5 minute game, but still it's a good way of seeing where you go wrong. 
I also have a word document named LOSSES where I write reasons for my every lost game (yes, even the blitz ones). 

If the reasons are: "played too passively", "haven't activated a king in the endgame" or similar I try to avoid doing that next time, but if it's something like: "played a wrong move in this and that line" I IMMEDIATELY fix the problem so that I never ever do the same mistake again.

This approach has really helped with my openings, after 50 or so blitz games analysed as objectively as possible it was already pretty clear to me what are my most problematic lines.

It's important not to play too much, you first have to fix what can be fixed and then go and play some more games.

Btw, this approach is definitely not very enjoyable, it can be very tiresome to go over some of your lost games after having suffered enough during the game. But it definitely pays off, my 5-minute rating (on Internet Chess Club) has jumped to unbeliavable new heights compared to how weak it was before.

I expect same from the OTB rating.