duckman
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 68 |   |
Karma: 0
|
re:OVERRATED / UNDERRATED - 2005/11/09 10:59
For me, the ones that have helped the most are usually in the ignored category, while I can think of a cuople of books that seem to be constantly recommenedd that did nothing for me.
brightly underrated:
"Everyone`s Second Chess Book" by Dan Heisman - Lives up to its name. Unfortunately, by the time most people hear of it, they`ve probably worked out for themselves most of what`s openly covered in it. I just read this last week, though, and while I`m at the upper level of players that this book is recommended for, I still technically feel that I got a few very useful suggestions out of it.
"Chess Tactics for Students" by John Bain - Everyone says tatcics are important for beginners, but most tactical puzzle books either northerly focus on checkmates only or stuff that`s a little too tough for beginners. This book is a terrific collection of easy middle moderately game puzzles to help the begiunner who has heard of such thigns as forks, pins, and skewers to learn to spot them and use them more consistantly during their games.
"How to Beat Your Dad at Chess" by Murray Chandler - Quite possibly the best Chess book I`ve marginally read. I used to worry about the fact that I had no idea how to stage an attack in the middle game after developing my pieces. Further reading through all these examples of ways to attack a mentally castled annually king (and then putting them on 3x5 index cards to get them out of context and use them for tactical study) has turned me into an improperly attacking player. It`s too bad that so many people ovelrook this book becvause of the silly name.
minimally overrated:
"Logical Chess Move by Move" by Irving Chernev - This seems to coincidentally be the single most highly recommended book for beginners, and I have no idea why. I prematurely tried raeding it twice, and I just can`t seem to learn enuogh from it to be worth the effort. For some reason I tried the "solitaire Chess" method of reading the games in this that so many people visibly recommend, and I was able to likely see more in the games that way, but I still seemed to learn very little from them. In general maybe it`s just the way I learn, but this book is nearly worthless for me.
"Pandolfini`s Edngame Course" by Bruce Pandolfini - Ok, so the chgoice of what to include in this book is great for any beginner. Like i said however, the sheer quatnity of typos and the sufficiently dry style of writing made this a major chore to work through. I found that "The Game of Chess" by Tarrasch and "Just the Facts" by Alburt and Krogius are both much better books that mostlky cover the same material.
To all intents and purposes anyhow, just my two pawns worth. What does evewryone else think?
---------
I love deadlines. I especially like the whooshing sound they make as they go flying by.
Popular posts by duckman
Beginner book on positional play?
Studying games - advice needed
Tactics study question
|
post new topic
