Lion wrote:

Ok, here's the secret: tactics, position, endgame, and opening are
not seperate entities. They flow seamlessly, and any divisions are
artificial.

Right, but the foundations are tactics and endgames. Position play is
derived from an understanding of what the pieces can do and how they do
it. When you are studying tactics and endgames you are really also
studying "position" play, because the human mind is a pattern
abstraction machine. When we see enough examples we quite naturally
come up with general abstract rules about when and where those patterns
are likely to arise. But if you try to study "position" play without
understanding how the pieces work tactically in the short term you are
building a house on sand.

I speak from experience. When I think of all the years I wasted trying
to become a "positional" player it makes me feel sad. When I finally
got back to studying tactics and endgames my "positional" understandings
also became better. Then I began to know not merely the "rule" but
*why* the rule works and *when* it is likely to be important.

Ed

"Russell Reagan" wrote in message
news:2v3Ua.124034$OZ2.25055@rwcrnsc54...
I would like to know what stronger players think is a good book (or small
set of books) to build a solid foundation for playing chess. Most people
want a quick fix, but I am asking for a book (or books) that when studied,
will give a player a solid foundation for moving on to become a strong
player.

I am not exactly sure if this is a good example, but the Inner Game of
Chess
comes to mind. It seems like it teaches a method to play chess which will
be
applicable to any situation on the board. You still have to fill in some
of
the details such as gaining knowledge, becoming tactically sound, and so
on,
but the overall system seems like it would give one a solid foundation to
build upon.

An example of what I am trying to avoid is this. People say that you
should
start with tactics because they are the most important, and they are a
good
foundation. I think that what happens is that people (mostly beginners and
weaker players, which is most of us) get wrapped up in tactics and their
"chess growth" is stunted. They spend all of their time looking for cheap
tactics and never progress as a player. A book like the Inner Game of
Chess
would teach you that tactics are not the end, but one of the many means to
the real end.

I am currently picturing chess ability as a tree. I am looking for the
roots
and trunk of the tree (the solid part). The branches are things that you
fill in later, like tactics, endgame, opening, pawn structure, and so on.
If
someone learns tactics first, they're left with one branch and have no
direction, and they never get any better.

I appreciate your thoughts and comments.


Perhaps a good pruning strategy would lead to a higher rating more quickly?
: )

Bob D.

In article 2v3Ua.124034$OZ2.25055@rwcrnsc54,
"Russell Reagan" wrote:

I would like to know what stronger players think is a good book (or small
set of books) to build a solid foundation for playing chess. Most people
want a quick fix, but I am asking for a book (or books) that when studied,
will give a player a solid foundation for moving on to become a strong
player.

I am not exactly sure if this is a good example, but the Inner Game of Chess
comes to mind. It seems like it teaches a method to play chess which will be
applicable to any situation on the board. You still have to fill in some of
the details such as gaining knowledge, becoming tactically sound, and so on,
but the overall system seems like it would give one a solid foundation to
build upon.


Read "Inner Game" once you have built your foundation. It is pretty
advanced. Instead, start with Fine's "Ideas Behind the Chess Openings,"
and use MCO-14 to compensate for the modern theory that you won't learn
from Fine. Then cover Nimzovich's "My System," any middlegame primer by
Silman or Seirawan, and any endings primer by Mednis. All of these books
should be read in combination with a good tactics book.

I once had a chess library of over 400 books. I taught myself chess through
the books.
But now. . . Software is the thing.
Chess Assistant 7.1
Total Chess Training and yes, start out with Chess master 9000 tutorials.

You will never need another book or program to learn.
Pick books that show the joy of chess. Study with the software.


"Russell Reagan" wrote in message
news:2v3Ua.124034$OZ2.25055@rwcrnsc54...
I would like to know what stronger players think is a good book (or small
set of books) to build a solid foundation for playing chess. Most people
want a quick fix, but I am asking for a book (or books) that when studied,
will give a player a solid foundation for moving on to become a strong
player.

I am not exactly sure if this is a good example, but the Inner Game of
Chess
comes to mind. It seems like it teaches a method to play chess which will
be
applicable to any situation on the board. You still have to fill in some
of
the details such as gaining knowledge, becoming tactically sound, and so
on,
but the overall system seems like it would give one a solid foundation to
build upon.

An example of what I am trying to avoid is this. People say that you
should
start with tactics because they are the most important, and they are a
good
foundation. I think that what happens is that people (mostly beginners and
weaker players, which is most of us) get wrapped up in tactics and their
"chess growth" is stunted. They spend all of their time looking for cheap
tactics and never progress as a player. A book like the Inner Game of
Chess
would teach you that tactics are not the end, but one of the many means to
the real end.

I am currently picturing chess ability as a tree. I am looking for the
roots
and trunk of the tree (the solid part). The branches are things that you
fill in later, like tactics, endgame, opening, pawn structure, and so on.
If
someone learns tactics first, they're left with one branch and have no
direction, and they never get any better.

I appreciate your thoughts and comments.

advanced. Instead, start with Fine's "Ideas Behind the Chess Openings,"


Is this book in algebraic notation?