| |
Main
Date: 27 May 2006 20:22:22
From: dajava
Subject: help : chess opening books
|
Hi,
My knowledge of chess openings is based on this and limited.
http://www.chesscorner.com/tutorial/openings/opening_survey.htm
Now, I consider to buy one of these books.
Winning Chess Openings by Yasser Seirawan
Nunn's Chess Openings by John Nunn, Joe Gallagher, John Emms, Graham
Burgess
Which one do you think is better for rme?
dajava,
|
|
| |
Date: 29 May 2006 07:56:30
From: Martin S
Subject: Re: Da Vinci Code in chess
|
Taylor Kingston wrote:
> Here's a link to an article about some of the religious and
> historical nonsense in "The Da Vinci Code":
>
> http://www.slate.com/id/2142157/?nav=ais
>
> I'm sure a web-search can turn up more on its absurdities and
> fallacies. For example the "Priory of Sion" is not a genuine
> institution, but the fantasy product of the imagination of some lunatic
> Frenchman.
Of course they would all like you to believe that wouldn't they.
That it is fallacies and absurdities and lunatic daydreaming...
Else it wouldn't be a world conspiracy :)
tin S
--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------- >>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
|
| | |
Date: 29 May 2006 08:31:34
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
>> I'd trust Fine over other authors even with dated material.
>
> But it would seem that you haven't actually 'read' any of the latest
> material (e.g. your reference to 'The Chess Struggle In Practice',...a
> work which hasn't gone by that name in over 15 years and ALL of your
> suggestions are well over a decade in age,...a couple of them more than
> TWO decades old and one coming up on its' 50th anniversary) so, how can
> you simply dismiss them out-of-hand?
I only like pre-computer era books because they have a purity of human
thought that is impossible now that the engines check and double-check
everything. They are reflective of authors who didn't have computers acting
like training wheels on a bicycle.
That said, I would read authors like Nunn even today, if I still read chess
books. I don't. Computers have made them almost completely irrelevant to
me, though I am writing a book myself which I think will become a definitive
opening manual.
>Your staunch adherence to 'the
> classics' as the only worthy source of knowledge reminds me of
> Tennyson's 'Charge of the Light Brigade' - a romanticized, pre-1914
> view of warfare and its' confrontation with the harsh realities of
> modern war. Personally, I don't think it's enough to merely parrot the
> age-old recommendations of 20 years ago.
By itself, of course not, but books are a joke now anyway, since the
computers can teach you everything you need to know and then some.
A player who needs books to learn chess isn't one I'd have too much faith in
today. Most of the top kids I spar with barely even use them.
I'm much more interested in logging the games of the supercomputers that
play on the servers or watching how they destroy the humans rather than have
some flawed human share his partial vision with me.
>> Today's material will also become dated.
>
> Thank you for that pointing that out.
>
>> Birds teach their young to fly by dropping them out of the nest.
>
> Actually,...they don't. More accurately the adult beckons the youngster
> from a short distance from the nest, often during feeding. If the young
> are to survive they must step away from the nest. A few hard falls
> later, the youngster gets the hang of it.
More or less the same way chess should be taught.
>> Coddling a beginner can lead to long-term problems if s/he has talent.
>> I'd
>> prefer to treat them as I would a future champion, because you never know
>> when you might be dealing with one.
>
> I'm pretty sure a 'future champion' wouldn't be looking for opening
> advice at www.chesscorner.com,...and I think any 'long-term problems'
> he might face is a WEE bit of an overstatement, don't you think? :/
Having taught beginners, and having seen a kid with very little potential
(or so I thought) 20 years ago turn into an award-winning player (I won't
name him but he's accomplishes), I don't rule anything out.
>> So a guy who wasn't anything close to a legend is going to tell me what
>> the
>> legends were thinking?
>
> Considering in has a current rating of 2538,
Which translates to an expected loss rate of about 97 percent against
Topalov (if k=5).
>is a very
> well-respected author and trainer (Judit Polgar's 2nd in Corus),
Too bad Polgar didn't write the book.
>and
> the book in question won the British Chess Federation's "BOOK OF THE
> YEAR AWARD"...Yeah!!,...you could probably stand to listen to what he
> has to say. Especially as it might be a valuable resource for you, as a
> fellow chess author and all, you might actually want to take the time
> to see what's currently considered to be cutting-edge in chess
> publishing.
I wouldn't read it, but I'd be happy to SELL an e-version of it if the
publisher wants some extra cash.
>Don't criticize something you've never read, or obviously
> not heard of, it only intimates stubborn ignorance.
I'm not criticizing the book per se; I just don't like books where people
try to analyze the games of someone stronger than they will ever be.
If you're 1800, do you want two 1200 players guessing what you were
thinking?
Alekhine once made an amusing comment on these lines: "____________ said I
played this move because I don't like semi-closed positions, which would
have resulted after ___________. In fact, I didn't play this move because I
don't like being CHECKMATED, which would have happened after ______________.
I hate it when people try to analyze my games."
>>> In any case, I hope that I did not offend you, but please understand
>>> that I was merely making some assumptions about the original poster's
>>> experience when I replied to your post. Let it be known that I
>>> wholeheartedly recommend all of your selections given that the reader
>>> is fairly experienced and willing to work...hard! :)
>
>> If he's not, what does it matter?
>
> I hope this isn't your attitude toward your readers in the book you're
> writting i.e., "I don't care what you know about chess 'cause I'm gonna
> tell ya what I know about chess,...blah,blah,blah,..." Should be a big
> seller. Good luck with that.
If they win with the book, why wouldn't it be? Readers are paying me to
tell them how I play chess.
Someone rated 1900 who just got checkmated on move 11 as White (extreme
example but there are two lines where I've done this) might decide I have
something to offer, while anyone rated say 1500 and watching me do that
will. Someone who sees me routinely winning games right out of the opening
without leaving my book might also be interested in what's in that book.
>> A simple opening book that is useful for the beginner is MCO, btw. That
>> was
>> what I started with.
>
> Not if you had read a chess book over the last 10 years.
MCO is still very useful as a single-volume reference. I began with MCO 10
I think it was, back in 1984.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| |
Date: 28 May 2006 20:13:50
From: fretburner
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
> Is it not useful to see how the Pelikan used to be thought a mistake?
>
> As for chess being demanding on the novice, is that not the appeal of the
> game?
It is useful to see how the Pelikan/Sveshnikov's 5...e5 weakens d6, but
only if it is presented in the context of modern play i.e. the dynamic
potential of Black's ...e5 strike in the center and the time it allows
Black to develop. Fine's book doesn't do this at all, and in fact he
totally ignores another variation that often features an early ...e5:
the Najdorf - arguably the most studied variation of the Sicilian
outside of the Dragon. Allowances can be made for its omission due to
the era in which it was written, but that fact alone should indicate
that this book's best days are well behind us. Imagine a modern opening
introduction to the Sicilian failing to mention the Najdorf - the
author would NEVER live it down. Granted, Fine's book was pretty good
information in it's day (the best we had for decades), but would you
trust your health to the medical knowledge of the 1940's? Of course
not, so why shouldn't you utilize all the advances that have been made
since.
As for chess being demanding there can be no doubt, but the original
poster cited the website he'd been using as reference for his opening
knowledge to date and a quick review of it leads me to believe he is
very much a novice (no offense, we were all there at one time). I made
my suggestions with that in mind and I apologize if I appeared to slam
your suggestions, all of which are very good, but I do think that he
would definately be diving into the deep-end if he picked up Geller's
book, as well as Bronstein's and Evan's (various contributors).
Again, these are all great books, but since I've started book
collecting again (about 5 years ago), I have to say that I'm much more
impressed with the modern publications than I am with the stuff I used
to work through. If you haven't bought a chess book in a while, I'd
highly recommend that you do. I'm currently going through in's
'Learn From The Legends', and it's a great 'read' as well as a learning
tool. I'm so happy that there are strong players who have a willingness
to devulge their secrets,...and have a command of the English language
- this is not always the case.
In any case, I hope that I did not offend you, but please understand
that I was merely making some assumptions about the original poster's
experience when I replied to your post. Let it be known that I
wholeheartedly recommend all of your selections given that the reader
is fairly experienced and willing to work...hard! :)
|
| | |
Date: 28 May 2006 23:25:51
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
>> Is it not useful to see how the Pelikan used to be thought a mistake?
>>
>> As for chess being demanding on the novice, is that not the appeal of the
>> game?
>
> It is useful to see how the Pelikan/Sveshnikov's 5...e5 weakens d6, but
> only if it is presented in the context of modern play i.e. the dynamic
> potential of Black's ...e5 strike in the center and the time it allows
> Black to develop. Fine's book doesn't do this at all, and in fact he
> totally ignores another variation that often features an early ...e5:
> the Najdorf - arguably the most studied variation of the Sicilian
> outside of the Dragon. Allowances can be made for its omission due to
> the era in which it was written, but that fact alone should indicate
> that this book's best days are well behind us. Imagine a modern opening
> introduction to the Sicilian failing to mention the Najdorf - the
> author would NEVER live it down. Granted, Fine's book was pretty good
> information in it's day (the best we had for decades), but would you
> trust your health to the medical knowledge of the 1940's? Of course
> not, so why shouldn't you utilize all the advances that have been made
> since.
I'd trust Fine over other authors even with dated material. Today's
material will also become dated.
> As for chess being demanding there can be no doubt, but the original
> poster cited the website he'd been using as reference for his opening
> knowledge to date and a quick review of it leads me to believe he is
> very much a novice (no offense, we were all there at one time). I made
> my suggestions with that in mind and I apologize if I appeared to slam
> your suggestions, all of which are very good, but I do think that he
> would definately be diving into the deep-end if he picked up Geller's
> book, as well as Bronstein's and Evan's (various contributors).
Birds teach their young to fly by dropping them out of the nest.
Coddling a beginner can lead to long-term problems if s/he has talent. I'd
prefer to treat them as I would a future champion, because you never know
when you might be dealing with one.
> Again, these are all great books, but since I've started book
> collecting again (about 5 years ago), I have to say that I'm much more
> impressed with the modern publications than I am with the stuff I used
> to work through. If you haven't bought a chess book in a while, I'd
> highly recommend that you do. I'm currently going through in's
> 'Learn From The Legends',
So a guy who wasn't anything close to a legend is going to tell me what the
legends were thinking?
>and it's a great 'read' as well as a learning
> tool. I'm so happy that there are strong players who have a willingness
> to devulge their secrets,...and have a command of the English language
> - this is not always the case.
I'll be doing my own book, but it's one that isn't rating-dependent (meaning
my expert rating "qualifies" me to write it), but I'm only doing that to
fund my training expenses.
> In any case, I hope that I did not offend you, but please understand
> that I was merely making some assumptions about the original poster's
> experience when I replied to your post. Let it be known that I
> wholeheartedly recommend all of your selections given that the reader
> is fairly experienced and willing to work...hard! :)
If he's not, what does it matter?
A simple opening book that is useful for the beginner is MCO, btw. That was
what I started with.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| |
Date: 28 May 2006 15:45:14
From: chasmad
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
Ray Gordon wrote:
> > Which one do you think is better for rme?
>
> Mine, whenever I get around to finishing it (current expected release date
> is next summer).
>
> Of the other books on the ket, you'd do best with a single-volume
> reference like MCO or BCO, or all five volumes of ECO if you are serious, as
> a starting point.
>
> For a "how to" on the openings, I like the following books:
>
> 1. "Ideas Behind The Chess Openings" by Fine
> 2. "How To Open A Chess Game" edited by Evans
> 3. "The Application Of Chess Theory" (Geller)
> 4. "The Chess Struggle In Practice" (Bronstein)
>
> Books #3 and #4 aren't opening manuals per se, but they are very useful
> teachers nonetheless.
>
Listen to Ray. Then you too can be awarded a GM norm for one-second
chess at the the Booty Chaser Chess Server. Ray, you are my hero!!
Charles
|
| |
Date: 28 May 2006 11:28:46
From: fretburner
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
>> You might also consider Sam Collins 'Understanding the Chess Openings'.
>> This is a modern, easy-to-read overview of all the major, and some
>> minor openings. It's kind of a modern-day version of Fine's 'Ideas
>> Behind the Chess Openings',...but with up-to-date analysis and
>> evaluations. Collins does an excellent job of communicating the key
>> 'ideas' of each opening system and gives the current assesment of its
>> reputation - great stuff!
> Only difference is Fine once played for the world championship.
I'm pretty sure that Fine didn't play for the WC,...He won AVRO in
1938, which gave him the chance to play against Alekhine for the WC,
but WWII interupted before they could have the match. When the war was
finally over, Alekhine went and DIED on him. He was then invited to
take part in the WC in 1948, but declined the offer. His 'official'
reason was that he wanted to finish his doctorate, but many speculate
that he was suspicious of the Soviet's throwing games against each
other to win the WC - he was probably right.
I like all your suggestions, and have read three of them (#1, #2, and
#4 (also known as 'Zurich 1953 Chess Tournament')), and never got to
finish the other (#3,...which reminds me that I should blow the dust
off of that one), but you would have to agree, with the acception of
Fine's book, all of these are pretty demanding reads for a novice and
even Fine's language gets pretty laborious and his analysis is very
antiquated: never push ...e5 in the Sicilian as it weakens d6,...I'll
leave it at that.
As several respected publishers and reviewers have noted throughout the
web, right now we are truly in the golden age of chess publishing and
there are so many great books being produced that are better for
up-and-coming players than what I grew up with - it's fantastic! I
haven't read all of Collins 'Understanding the Chess Openings', but my
nephew had it with him at a recent family get-together over a weekend,
and I spent about an hour and a half browsing through it on my Mom's
couch and it looked terrific! I wish I'd have had a book as clear and
concise as this one - nice effort Mr. Collins!
However, I don't think ANY of these books can beat having a good coach
- a strong player who can work with you and your openings. Having
someone to guide you and bounce questions and 'what if' scenarios is
definately the best option, but barring that, books are a wonderful way
to learn. Best of luck!
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jun 2006 15:53:52
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
fretburner <[email protected] > wrote:
> Ray Gordon wrote:
>> Only difference is Fine once played for the world championship.
>
> I'm pretty sure that Fine didn't play for the WC
You are correct: Fine never played for the World Championship.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Perforated Zen Beer (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a refreshing lager that puts you in
touch with the universe but it's full
of holes!
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jun 2006 13:11:31
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
>>> Only difference is Fine once played for the world championship.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure that Fine didn't play for the WC
>
> You are correct: Fine never played for the World Championship.
Fine was invited to play but instead chose to finish his doctorate. Close
enough.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| | |
Date: 28 May 2006 18:54:10
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
> I like all your suggestions, and have read three of them (#1, #2, and
> #4 (also known as 'Zurich 1953 Chess Tournament')), and never got to
> finish the other (#3,...which reminds me that I should blow the dust
> off of that one), but you would have to agree, with the acception of
> Fine's book, all of these are pretty demanding reads for a novice and
> even Fine's language gets pretty laborious and his analysis is very
> antiquated: never push ...e5 in the Sicilian as it weakens d6,...I'll
> leave it at that.
Is it not useful to see how the Pelikan used to be thought a mistake?
As for chess being demanding on the novice, is that not the appeal of the
game?
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| | | |
Date: 29 May 2006 21:29:22
From: 42N83W
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[snip]
> As for chess being demanding on the novice, is that not the appeal of the
> game?
No.
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 May 2006 03:49:02
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
>> As for chess being demanding on the novice, is that not the appeal of the
>> game?
>
>
> No.
Hey if you want to suck at something and still win some of your games, take
up backgammon.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| |
Date: 28 May 2006 09:28:16
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
> Which one do you think is better for rme?
Mine, whenever I get around to finishing it (current expected release date
is next summer).
Of the other books on the ket, you'd do best with a single-volume
reference like MCO or BCO, or all five volumes of ECO if you are serious, as
a starting point.
For a "how to" on the openings, I like the following books:
1. "Ideas Behind The Chess Openings" by Fine
2. "How To Open A Chess Game" edited by Evans
3. "The Application Of Chess Theory" (Geller)
4. "The Chess Struggle In Practice" (Bronstein)
Books #3 and #4 aren't opening manuals per se, but they are very useful
teachers nonetheless.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| |
Date: 28 May 2006 00:15:52
From: fretburner
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
You might also consider Sam Collins 'Understanding the Chess Openings'.
This is a modern, easy-to-read overview of all the major, and some
minor openings. It's kind of a modern-day version of Fine's 'Ideas
Behind the Chess Openings',...but with up-to-date analysis and
evaluations. Collins does an excellent job of communicating the key
'ideas' of each opening system and gives the current assesment of its
reputation - great stuff!
The downside is that it's pretty general in its coverage - much like
Seirawan's book, but is a good jumping-off point for starting an
unfamiliar opening system.
If you're a fairly experienced player (1400+), you might want to pick
up a copy of Gabor Kallai's two books: 'Basic Chess Openings' and 'More
Basic Chess Openings'. They are more sparce in regard to explanation,
but offer good coverage of mainline variations without getting too deep
into analysis. These are two of the better 'general introduction' books
as they strike a nice balance between depth and explanation (IMHO).
I'd only look at getting an NCO or similar product at around
1700+,...and even then I don't know if you'd really need it or be able
to make good use of it. NCO is fairly dense in it's coverage, but more
importantly, it does NOT have the benefit of providing the reader with
numerous explanations of the key points within an opening. +/-, or +=
evaluations are the norm and rely on your ability to understand the
author's reasoning behind the evaluations - not an easy task especially
as the authors are GM's.
|
| | |
Date: 28 May 2006 12:24:12
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
> You might also consider Sam Collins 'Understanding the Chess Openings'.
> This is a modern, easy-to-read overview of all the major, and some
> minor openings. It's kind of a modern-day version of Fine's 'Ideas
> Behind the Chess Openings',...but with up-to-date analysis and
> evaluations. Collins does an excellent job of communicating the key
> 'ideas' of each opening system and gives the current assesment of its
> reputation - great stuff!
Only difference is Fine once played for the world championship.
>
> The downside is that it's pretty general in its coverage - much like
> Seirawan's book, but is a good jumping-off point for starting an
> unfamiliar opening system.
>
> If you're a fairly experienced player (1400+), you might want to pick
> up a copy of Gabor Kallai's two books: 'Basic Chess Openings' and 'More
> Basic Chess Openings'. They are more sparce in regard to explanation,
> but offer good coverage of mainline variations without getting too deep
> into analysis. These are two of the better 'general introduction' books
> as they strike a nice balance between depth and explanation (IMHO).
>
> I'd only look at getting an NCO or similar product at around
> 1700+,...and even then I don't know if you'd really need it or be able
> to make good use of it. NCO is fairly dense in it's coverage, but more
> importantly, it does NOT have the benefit of providing the reader with
> numerous explanations of the key points within an opening. +/-, or +=
> evaluations are the norm and rely on your ability to understand the
> author's reasoning behind the evaluations - not an easy task especially
> as the authors are GM's.
Weak players who want to become strong players need to learn to take a GM's
analysis on faith **if he can't refute it**. That's just efficient.
|
| | | |
Date: 28 May 2006 23:49:34
From: Bjoern
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
Ray Gordon wrote:
>>I'd only look at getting an NCO or similar product at around
>>1700+,...and even then I don't know if you'd really need it or be able
>>to make good use of it. NCO is fairly dense in it's coverage, but more
>>importantly, it does NOT have the benefit of providing the reader with
>>numerous explanations of the key points within an opening. +/-, or +=
>>evaluations are the norm and rely on your ability to understand the
>>author's reasoning behind the evaluations - not an easy task especially
>>as the authors are GM's.
>
>
> Weak players who want to become strong players need to learn to take a GM's
> analysis on faith **if he can't refute it**. That's just efficient.
Typical Ray-Gordon-nonesense talk.
You need to understand what you are doing. So either you are really
strong, understand what the whole variation is about anyway and just
need to be pointed towards some variations / moves / novelties (in which
case just analysis is fine, but in that case you are strong enough to
just accept it and will almost certainly check it) or you don't fully
understand what's going on and then it is equally important to get
strategic (and/or tactical) explanations by the GM (or other qualified
person who understands the position). Of course ideally you'll also see,
understand and remember the variations, but quite often the ideas are
more important - particularly if you end up in a similar, but not quite
identical position.
The more one can still improve one's general play, the less point there
is in just learning opening variations. Once a player is strong enough
to really need a lot of knowledge about precise opening variations,
he'll actually not just be learning them, he will be understanding and
analyzing them.
Anyone who just memorizes is simply a too weak players doing the wrong
thing for really improving in a meaningful way. Once in a while he will
win a game due to it, but most of the time he'll just be out of his book
early on, but incapable of punishing the opponent's slight inaccuracy
(if that's what led to the end of his book knowledge) or incapable of
reacting correctly to the new idea/analysis the opponent knew about or
came up with.
To get to which books I would recommend:
Some recent (not so important because you really need all the latest
novelties, but rather because they'll write according to the current
approach to chess and will introduce you to what's currently fashionable
- which is also what one often sees at the amateur level) overview over
all openings written by an author who has a nice readable style. From
what I've seen in the other messages Collins may be a good idea for that
(I've never read it myself, when I started I had the Bilguer, which was
however somewhat dated even back then ten years ago). In fact this kind
of book is often available in libraries (while the specialist books on
certain openings usually aren't).
These books will however be pretty general. If you have actually made up
your mind that you want to play a specific opening, then it may be
better to get a book on one of them, but for that I'd carefully check
reviews or ask people, because a lot of them are a bit boring and/or not
in the right style. Although e.g. the Starting out serious is often
pretty good).
--Bjoern
|
| |
Date: 27 May 2006 20:55:05
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
Hi Dajava,
"Winning Chess Openings" says things like, "With 3... Nf6 Black
counters with an attack against the e4-pawn, initiating the Two Knights
Defense. White can shore up his e4-pawn by 4.d3 or 4.Nc6, or he can
initiate a complex attack with 4.Ng5. It's like a book that teaches you
things.
"Nunn's Chess Openings" says things like:
4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Bc5 6. c3 Nxe4 7. cxd4 d5 8. dxc5 dxc4 = (6. c5 d5 7.
exf6 dxc4 8. Re1+ Be6 =) It's like an encyclopedia where you can
quickly look-up good lines. It considers many alternatives, but there
are no explanations.
If you want to do some reading to improve your general knowledge of
chess openings, I suspect you would have more fun and success with
Winning Chess Openings.
dajava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My knowledge of chess openings is based on this and limited.
>
>
> http://www.chesscorner.com/tutorial/openings/opening_survey.htm
>
>
> Now, I consider to buy one of these books.
>
> Winning Chess Openings by Yasser Seirawan
>
> Nunn's Chess Openings by John Nunn, Joe Gallagher, John Emms, Graham
> Burgess
>
> Which one do you think is better for rme?
>
> dajava,
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jun 2006 15:50:56
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: help : chess opening books
|
[email protected] <[email protected] > wrote:
> "Nunn's Chess Openings" says things like:
> 4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Bc5 6. c3 Nxe4 7. cxd4 d5 8. dxc5 dxc4 = (6. c5 d5
> 7. exf6 dxc4 8. Re1+ Be6 =) It's like an encyclopedia where you can
> quickly look-up good lines. It considers many alternatives, but
> there are no explanations.
NCO is a reference encyclopaedia. The best way for most players to
use it is, after their games, to see where they, or their opponent,
deviated from NCO. Then, try to work out why the lines in NCO are
better than the line played in the game. Try to work out what the
ideas behind the book lines are.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Mouldy Indelible Cat (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a cuddly pet but it can't be erased
and it's starting to grow mushrooms!
|
|
