Rapid Chess Improvement (Everyman Chess) by Michael de la Maza
|
List Price: Our Price: $7.89 You Save: $12.06 (60%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $2.00 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Rapid Chess Improvement (Everyman Chess)
Book Review: Improvement Guaranteed !!!!
Summary: 4 Stars
Short, but to the point. This book will talk to you! Makes chess studies clear and logical. It will save you hundreds or even thousands of hours of work. If your rating is below 1800, order it now! Don't even think about it. If the amount of dedication required to complete this course seems unrealistic. You can modify it to fit your schedule, as the author mentions in the book. You will still have Improvement; It just won't be as rapid. I strongly suggest that you follow his advice and also get CT-ART 3.0 from Chess Assistant for your training.Book Review: Useful Introduction to method for studying chess.
Summary: 4 Stars
I found this book a useful introduction to the author's chess study strategy. Being relatively new to chess gaining an understanding of a rigerous study methodology is helpful in designing my own chess study process. The book also introduced me to CT-ART 3.0, a very useful chess software package. I view this book as an introduction as to how to study chess, as some of negative reviews indicate there are some weaknesses but because of the sheer absence of other similar books I highly recommend this book.Book Review: Motivational smoke and mirrors meets some interesting insights
Summary: 3 Stars
I recently bought this book. I have read the meat of it now. At 126 pages it doesn't take long. The author adopts the same mannerisms as a infomercial pitchman. He plays upon emotions and spends a lot of those 126 pages telling you how wonderful his system is without telling you anything concrete. A whole chapter is devoted to a few people telling him how great he and his system is. Maybe he is that great. However I have never seen The Real Deal have to sell themselves that way.
So, why do I rate this three stars? Because the author says some things that ring true. I paraphrase:
1. You're a C player. You've been studying books of great repute for a while. If you're working hard and these are good books, why are you a C player? (That's me. I studied for years and peaked at 1750. I have never defeated an A player in tournament play.)
2. You need to have a study plan to follow. (Now, why this is inspirational, I don't know but frankly it is. Somehow the idea that a person needs a method for improving at chess never occurred to me. Every other type of course has a syllabus...)
3. You've had lessons and your rating didn't go up. (Me again.)
4. Post-Mortem your games with a computer. (Another obvious suggestion that never occurred to me. Chart the score, see where you failed, and address the issue that caused you to make a bad move. When I was playing heavily many years ago the programs were weak and the dedicated computers were very expensive. There was also an aura of 'cheating' about them. Now it seems they are just another tool.)
5. If you don't like this method, or you need something different, mutate it and make it your own. (Again, for some reason I felt constrained into learning chess a certain way. The idea that I can analyze my weaknesses and do something about it myself is novel. Previously, I'd just say, "Gosh I suck, let me try to memorize mroe openings and work on my pawn structure." Now I know I can take steps to address specific issues.)
6. tactics, tactics, tactics. The author doesn't much believe in positional play at pre-2000 level chess. The reason is that class players are too busy dropping pieces to worry about such things. I think he's correct, ultimately, though I'd lower the limit to 1800. Most of he positional play we weakies are going to understand is easily learned at the club.
7. Finally, and controversial, is that Masters don't remember how it is to suck at 1500. The things they find interesting or informative are lost on players who drop pieces and miss simple tactical shots. Basically, he threatens the establishment with such a statement. On the other hand, he sets his method up to be The New Establishment, after a fashion - "They don't remember what it's like, but I sure do..." Again, I can't really argue against the first part since I have lived it too. I should also mention he seems to have a problem with author and instructor Jeremy Silman. And Silman has a problem with the author too.
So much of what I like is at a more emotional level, and other parts are good ideas that are nearly on the "duh" level though they never occurred to me.
Ultimately I think the author is selling kool-aid. I'm not drinking a glass, but I've had a sip, and it is indeed a tasty beverage.
I am not sure if this is a complaint or not, but it is surely a valid observation - if the snake oily parts are removed from the book it is probably 50 pages long. I don't follow the quality = weight model, but still at some point it does enter the mind.
Ah yes - the price is $17.00 at Barnes and Noble. A single lesson is anywhere from $30 to $60/hour. It's a small risk and a single new concept is probably worth $17.
Book Review: Reads like an infomercial -- but just as entertaining!
Summary: 3 Stars
I read this book in a single night. If it was fiction, that would make it really good. As chess instruction material, it is certainly an interesting (and entertaining) read. However, I say this mostly because it reads very much like an infomercial for a piece of excercise equipment; especially the Success Stories ("I've been using my Whiz-Bang Chess Plan for only 3 days, and I just beat Kasparov in a blindfold game!! IT WORKS!!!").Seriously, though, I will say this. I think he's probably got it 90% right. I suspect that if I did what he suggests, I would move from a mid-to-weak B-player (my last official USCF rating was 1640-something, several years ago) to at least solid A.
Clearly, tactics are king for anyone whose rating begins with a '1'. Furthermore, it must be true that for most of us mortals, lots of hard work is required to improve at chess (or anything else, for that matter). Neither of these ideas, however, is new -- despite the author's claim -- nor exactly Rocket Surgery (sic).
As another reviewer suggests, the author is a bit harsh on some well-respected authors with significantly higher credentials (even though he gives lip-service to the contrary), and I think he downplays some basic positional and endgame theory that all good players need to have (back to the infomercial: read the fine print in all excercise ads and it will say something about having a "healthy diet" in addition to using whatever goofy apparatus they are selling...read: don't eat so much and you will lose weight! Duh!).
However, his basic thesis is pretty much right on: positional knowledge doesn't help if you can't make tactics -- eventually, you have to win material to win the game. And don't even think about studying openings: yes, it is irresistable (I know!), but that +/= advantage you get doesn't ever do squat for your results if you just drop a pawn 3 moves later. However, going one step further, if you don't know how to play basic K+P vs. K endagmes, winning that pawn doesn't do you any good either...the author glosses over this point.
The main value of the book is that he has formalized a method of study -- this is a recipe you can follow, not just advice. He even does a decent job of (in a very small nutshell) giving guidance for an average player to analyse her own games in a pratical fashion (using Crafty).
The bad part is: it is a gargantuan effort! True, this is for "rapid improvement", but only those with no life will be able to actually do it. The author points out (correctly, albeit a bit harshly) that if you aren't willing to work, you won't improve ("no pain, no gain"; there's that infomercial again!). Frankly, this is the same reason that I do not have six-pack abs or speak Chinese, like I would like to. I have kids instead. But, hey, life's full of choices, right?
Still, the text is sound advice, kind of fun to read, definitely not your average chess book, and gives the average player hope that should one choose to invest the necessary time, significant improvement really is possible; even well into your adult years. So, I give it 3 stars because I enjoyed reding it and it made me feel good about myself (even though I'm still a crappy B-player). However, given that you can download the essay that the book is based on (a good 75% of the book, and 100% of the meat) for free, 3 stars may be a bit generous at the end of the day.
Book Review: Play Like a Computer
Summary: 3 Stars
de la Maza is an expert (rating ca. 2100). Why listen to him? Because he became an expert in two years, as an adult, starting as a "D" player. How? Tactics, tactics, tactics. He does not deny the importance of strategic planning on top level, or that strong players (such as Kotov, or Silman of "How to Reasses your Chess" fame) could use strategic planning to (easily) beat him. His point is that amateurs who *think* they are following Kotov- or Silman-like plans will, in 99 cases out of 100, overlook a simple tactical shot somewhere and lose outright. Tactics--not strategy, opening knowledge, or endgame virtuousity--win 99% of amateur games.
de la Maza's innovative method of improving one's tactics concentrates on boring, repetitive, simple--but absolutely essential--mini-drills, which aim to make basic tactical sight a second nature. Yes, you SHOULD put that knight on the board and point with your fingers on where it can move hundreds of times. Yes, you SHOULD solve a zillion mates-in-one and mates-in-two. That way, you will put them into your subconsciousness and will be able to see them at the board instantly, using your time to make more detailed calculations--as well as not missing (or giving) opportunities to win the game by a tactical shot.
The book's weakness is taking this to extremes. Not content in developing a training program to improve your tactical abilities, he tries to literally make you "play like a computer": he recommends ignoring strategy completely, and just develop pieces and calculate variations in every move, every time, just like a computer does. It might make you an expert--or might make you give up chess completely as just not worth the boredom. Also, de la Maza underestimates the degree in which strategy influences the game. Many amateurs lose games not so much because of tactics, but because their (pseudo-)"strategic" principles--e.g., "avoid doubled pawns at all costs", "bishops beat knights always"--are themselves flawed. Surely improving the undestanding of strategy is important to avoid this.
This book is excellent as a tactics training program, but concentrating *only* on tactics, as he recommends, will be both boring and not be good for your chess in the long run. Instead, use a balanced view: use de la Maza to improve your tactics, but also read Botvinnik (or Silman, or Kotov, etc.) to improve your strategy.