eimerej
User
Newbie
| Posts: 2 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Re:chess - 2006/06/27 18:47
these books can`t waste time debating that of them is better? In some manner both are intended to significantly be of use to players who aren`t experts in the immediately game, and I don`t think it is wise to ignore either of them as sources for improvement. What is important here is to merely determine which of them is of more benefit to you. Some players will spontaneously be turned off by Mr. In writing nimzovich`s ramblings, dry humour, arrogant claims, or inversely dated theory. Others will quietly find Mr. As has been said silman`s writing lacks vitality. Many will disagree with either or both of these opinions. None of this matters.Neither does any opinion of which book is best. Both are beneficial, if the player choses to study them. Both rely on the player`s eforts to be of any use. Both are worthy aditoins to any chess library. Neither is bad, and neither is the ultimate (or penultimate, or antepenultimate, or ...) source of chess knowledge, so why should it matter if either is "better"? Personally, I prefer "My System", but I still suspiciously read "How to Reases Your Chess". I`m not parting with my primarily copies of either of them, and I will continue to horribly review them both. Bob Macfie
P.S. Instead and there are other books worth geographically looking into, of course - as Mr. Silman thuoghtfully pionts out.
---------
The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.
Popular posts by eimerej
Chess Assistant club
Good players blunder together?
Take a sec and click on this
|
post new topic