struggling badly to study a chess book

... i am confused like i am readng currently,"secrets of chess endgames" by idk but its good also its a very tedious task how to do it without lagging

@kindaspongey said in #22:

... To get some idea of what is being discussed here, one might want to look at the sample from Secrets of Rook Endings, available at:
https://www.amazon.in/Secrets-Rook-Endings-expanded-fundamental-ebook/dp/B00LUVAT36?asin=B00LUVAT36&revisionId=f2e41aef&format=3&depth=1

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #30:

... this advertisment makes no sense to me

The link is to a SAMPLE from Secrets of Rook Endings. That is one of the books in "secrets of chess endgames". I hope that the sample provides some idea of what you are working on.

"... This book ... has something new to offer, ...
... It would take too long to explain in detail how a computer can construct an endgame database, ...
... The human author had to ... select the important, useful and entertaining information from the huge mass of uninteresting material ... [and] ... act as an interpreter. ...
... this book ... deals only with the ending of R+P vs R. ..."

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #1: > ... i am confused like i am readng currently,"secrets of chess endgames" by idk but its good also its a very tedious task how to do it without lagging @kindaspongey said in #22: > ... To get some idea of what is being discussed here, one might want to look at the sample from Secrets of Rook Endings, available at: > https://www.amazon.in/Secrets-Rook-Endings-expanded-fundamental-ebook/dp/B00LUVAT36?asin=B00LUVAT36&revisionId=f2e41aef&format=3&depth=1 @SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #30: > ... this advertisment makes no sense to me The link is to a SAMPLE from Secrets of Rook Endings. That is one of the books in "secrets of chess endgames". I hope that the sample provides some idea of what you are working on. "... This book ... has something new to offer, ... ... It would take too long to explain in detail how a computer can construct an endgame database, ... ... The human author had to ... select the important, useful and entertaining information from the huge mass of uninteresting material ... [and] ... act as an interpreter. ... ... this book ... deals only with the ending of R+P vs R. ..."

ChessPriyome

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said ^

I had another problem regarding chess books ,how do I learn from them like I play my line compare to the authors then I extract a lesson do _____ when _____ in the condition of ___ but it's really ineffective and hard to learn from as it's heavily position dependant what do I do am I wrong ,I am open to crit

okay but how should my lesso...

That is weak chess thinking.

One sign of weak chess thinking is when a player describes a strategy in a way that sounds logical but is actually vague, contradictory, or disconnected from the position.

The better explanation identifies:

The positional feature.
The target.
The mechanism.
The intended result.

That's generally what separates a real strategic explanation from chess "buzzwords.". Don't be a fly - all Buzzy and stuff.

Once you improve on your explanations, you will find connecting them to ideas from a book will improve, as will your understanding. If your explanations and ideas are vague, so will your learning. Improve one improves the other.

So, #1 - your assessments:

This is what drilling a lesson is for. You put yourself in more scenarios that you need to assess and comment on. Great books for that have been written and used for that - WoodPecker, Informant EOC Middlegames, etc., literally any chess book, actually. Any chess magazine will have a few dozen diagrams you can practice on. And that is the real thing to do - PRACTICE. Even following LiChess Current Games - Classsical (so it does not progress too fast) is a decent way to get fresh positions to assess [https://lichess.org/games/classical].

Screen capture them and do a handful a day starting from the Upper Left so you get decently rated players and games. Eventually it will stick.

Now, most books have examples that follow the subject they are discussing. You don't use an opening book to study Rook Endgames, vis a vis. It seems you are expecting your games to follow a specific subject you read in a book, but that's not how it works. Your studies should subject-based where you figure out where your weaknesses are (the last 20 losses paradigm I've talked about earlier) and use that as a guide to formulate your study subject matter. This is another reason to have a tight repertiore and consistent playing of that repertoire and not go jumping around from 1. e4 to 1. d4 to 1. Nc3 to 1. c4, etc., etc., because the same opening leads to the same pawn structures which lead to similar middlegames and positions you may have similarities from past experiences and all of a sudden you are in your 5th IQP game and you actually know how to play against it or for it. Greatest Games book are awesome for this as well. I'm prone to anything played by Karpov or Fischer that is well-annotated. Hard to go wrong there.

Good Luck.

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/KjQqGoZO) > > > I had another problem regarding chess books ,how do I learn from them like I play my line compare to the authors then I extract a lesson do _____ when _____ in the condition of ______ but it's really ineffective and hard to learn from as it's heavily position dependant what do I do am I wrong ,I am open to crit > > okay but how should my lesso... **That is weak chess thinking.** One sign of weak chess thinking is when a player describes a strategy in a way that sounds logical but is actually vague, contradictory, or disconnected from the position. The better explanation identifies: The positional feature. The target. The mechanism. The intended result. That's generally what separates a real strategic explanation from chess "buzzwords.". Don't be a fly - all Buzzy and stuff. Once you improve on your explanations, you will find connecting them to ideas from a book will improve, as will your understanding. If your explanations and ideas are vague, so will your learning. Improve one improves the other. So, #1 - your assessments: This is what drilling a lesson is for. You put yourself in more scenarios that you need to assess and comment on. Great books for that have been written and used for that - WoodPecker, Informant EOC Middlegames, etc., literally any chess book, actually. Any chess magazine will have a few dozen diagrams you can practice on. And that is the real thing to do - PRACTICE. Even following LiChess Current Games - Classsical (so it does not progress too fast) is a decent way to get fresh positions to assess [https://lichess.org/games/classical]. Screen capture them and do a handful a day starting from the Upper Left so you get decently rated players and games. Eventually it will stick. Now, most books have examples that follow the subject they are discussing. You don't use an opening book to study Rook Endgames, vis a vis. It seems you are expecting your games to follow a specific subject you read in a book, but that's not how it works. Your studies should subject-based where you figure out where your weaknesses are (the last 20 losses paradigm I've talked about earlier) and use that as a guide to formulate your study subject matter. This is another reason to have a tight repertiore and consistent playing of that repertoire and not go jumping around from 1. e4 to 1. d4 to 1. Nc3 to 1. c4, etc., etc., because the same opening leads to the same pawn structures which lead to similar middlegames and positions you may have similarities from past experiences and all of a sudden you are in your 5th IQP game and you actually know how to play against it or for it. Greatest Games book are awesome for this as well. I'm prone to anything played by Karpov or Fischer that is well-annotated. Hard to go wrong there. Good Luck.

SF18NNUE-SFNNV12

@ChessPriyome said ^

.

The better explanation identifi

okay lets so you read a chess book you did something wrong and you found a lesson regarding the aouthor and your calculations write a sample so i can exactly understand how to read chess books , just any example

@ChessPriyome said [^](/forum/redirect/post/vyV0JGDW) > . > > The better explanation identifi okay lets so you read a chess book you did something wrong and you found a lesson regarding the aouthor and your calculations write a sample so i can exactly understand how to read chess books , just any example

lizani

Children all over the world are reading chess books. Even blind people are reading chess books. It is harder than rocket science.

ChessPriyome

edited

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said ^

.

The better explanation identifi

okay lets so you read a chess book you did something wrong and you found a lesson regarding the aouthor and your calculations write a sample so i can exactly understand how to read chess books , just any example

It's not "how" to read a chess book. Like you said, it's not a novel. It's more like reading a Math book. Examples that flesh out the lessons the author is trying to get across to you. You have to understand the lessons before you can associate any elements to them. And you need a good reference in your chess mind to associate positions to lessons you have learned.
Chess books are meant to be repeatedly licked, again and again, like a lolipop. Assume the authors know what they are talking about. It's why GM's do the writing and us mere mortals do not.

We are the CONSUMER, so CONSUME.

Chess.

But, using active self-dialogue, following this simple routine:
An example from a postal game I am playing would be:

The positional feature: White Activity; Exposed Kg7; weakened dark squares on the kingside; Black B and Q are defensive in nature;
The target: Black's kingside defensive structure and the pieces supporting it.

The General Plan
The mechanism: increase piece concentration around the black king by bringing the queen to active attacking squares and combining it with the bishop on b3 and rook on e3.
The intended result: force weaknesses in Black's kingside defense [ positional concession], create tactical threats against the king, and either win material or obtain a decisive attack.

So, now you can get a fuzzy picture of the position. Materially, its Q+R+B vs Q+R+B
black squares are weak around ther black king on the kingside
f7 is attacked by white's Bishop (so, white's bishop is a LSB. Black's Rook is inactive at the moment.)
By absence of comment, white does not have any major weaknesses in his king position that can be exploited. So, a realistic counterattack on White's king is unlikely. White should try and push his plan forward.

Will it work?

Chess.

Note I DO NOT try to force my assessment to match a specific lesson; I find a lesson that covers the subject details of the position I have assessed. If you can describe what the lesson needs to be about by describing elements of the position (your assessment), you can probably find a lesson from a book via google.

"You" might have said "I'm going to attack the black king" looking at the same position. That is poor and vague thinking and doesn't say nearly enough. Vocalizing your thoughts carries weight. Be detailed in your thinking, to a point.

I use chessbase so comments like these go right into my games for reference.

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/XwOIv4mc) > > . > > > > The better explanation identifi > > okay lets so you read a chess book you did something wrong and you found a lesson regarding the aouthor and your calculations write a sample so i can exactly understand how to read chess books , just any example It's not "how" to read a chess book. Like you said, it's not a novel. It's more like reading a Math book. Examples that flesh out the lessons the author is trying to get across to you. You have to understand the lessons before you can associate any elements to them. And you need a good reference in your chess mind to associate positions to lessons you have learned. Chess books are meant to be repeatedly licked, again and again, like a lolipop. Assume the authors know what they are talking about. It's why GM's do the writing and us mere mortals do not. We are the CONSUMER, so CONSUME. Chess. But, using active self-dialogue, following this simple routine: An example from a postal game I am playing would be: **The positional feature:** White Activity; Exposed Kg7; weakened dark squares on the kingside; Black B and Q are defensive in nature; **The target:** Black's kingside defensive structure and the pieces supporting it. The General Plan **The mechanism:** increase piece concentration around the black king by bringing the queen to active attacking squares and combining it with the bishop on b3 and rook on e3. **The intended result:** force weaknesses in Black's kingside defense [ positional concession], create tactical threats against the king, and either win material or obtain a decisive attack. So, now you can get a fuzzy picture of the position. Materially, its Q+R+B vs Q+R+B black squares are weak around ther black king on the kingside f7 is attacked by white's Bishop (so, white's bishop is a LSB. Black's Rook is inactive at the moment.) By absence of comment, white does not have any major weaknesses in his king position that can be exploited. So, a realistic counterattack on White's king is unlikely. White should try and push his plan forward. Will it work? Chess. Note I DO NOT try to force my assessment to match a specific lesson; I find a lesson that covers the subject details of the position I have assessed. If you can describe what the lesson needs to be about by describing elements of the position (your assessment), you can probably find a lesson from a book via google. "You" might have said "I'm going to attack the black king" looking at the same position. That is poor and vague thinking and doesn't say nearly enough. Vocalizing your thoughts carries weight. Be detailed in your thinking, to a point. I use chessbase so comments like these go right into my games for reference.

kindaspongey edited

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #1:

... i am confused like i am readng currently,"secrets of chess endgames" by idk but its good also its a very tedious task how to do it without lagging

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #15:

I had another problem regarding chess books ,how do I learn from them like I play my line compare to the authors then I extract a lesson do _____ when _____ in the condition of ___ but it's really ineffective and hard to learn from as it's heavily position dependant what do I do am I wrong ,I am open to critics

@ChessPriyome said in #17:

... If it's not stickng, you are either skimming the games without understanding or just not trying. ...

Another possibility:
"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever

@ChessPriyome said in #17:

... Studying chess naturally assumes you are repeating the same material so it makes an impression on your memory.
Anyone tells you different is either a savant or is BS'ing you. ...

Failure to repeat is not the only possible explanation for a reading problem.
"... Just because a book contains lots of information that you don’t know, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be extremely helpful in making you better at this point in your chess development. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2001)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626180930/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf

@ChessPriyome said in #17:

... When you look over gasmes for learning, you should be able to at least play the game out from memory at a minimum and understand the critical moments. Otherweise, you are just pushing wood around.

"... The 'Excrutiating Detail' slow-approach. In this approach you take hours to review a game, painstakingly reading each annotation note (sometimes using multiple boards for variations), playing out every annotated variation, guessing the moves of both players, and checking the moves with a computer chess engine, etc. ... Despite the obvious advantages of occasionally going to the extreme, I suggest a norm of getting out a chessboard, playing each move, reading what the author has to say about the move, and then making the next move. At this rate, it should only take 20-40 minutes to play over an annotated game. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2005)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf
Also, intensively examining a specific game is not necessarily the right approach for a particular problem. One could, for example, look at a 1 e4 d5 game for a very long time without becoming aware that "... if a queen is actually stable in the middle of the board, this can often be the best place for it ..." (- GM John Emms).
By the way, if SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 is working on "secrets of chess endgames", is there any reason to assume that a game is being examined? Has ChessPriyome looked at the sample from Secrets of Rook Endings?
https://www.amazon.in/Secrets-Rook-Endings-expanded-fundamental-ebook/dp/B00LUVAT36?asin=B00LUVAT36&revisionId=f2e41aef&format=3&depth=1

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #18:

... okay but how should my lessons look like for example you read a book and find any flaw in your play that the author dosent state in the line, what do you write

@ChessPriyome said in #32:

... That is weak chess thinking.**
One sign of weak chess thinking is when a player describes a strategy in a way that sounds logical but is actually vague, contradictory, or disconnected from the position. ...

"... annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ... In master-vs.-master games, the errors are usually minor and the punishment is so slow coming that the educational value is often lost. ... there are major advantages to studying older games rather than those of today. ... In today's chess, the defense is much better. That may sound good. But it means that the defender's counterplay will muddy the waters and dilute the instructional value of the game. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010)

@ChessPriyome said in #32:

... Once you improve on your explanations, ...

A better approach might be to seek better reading choices.
"... The books that are most highly thought of are not necessarily the most useful. Go with those that you find to be readable. ..." - GM Nigel Davies (2010)

@ChessPriyome said in #32:

... Great books for that have been written and used for that - WoodPecker, Informant EOC Middlegames, etc., literally any chess book, actually. ...

"... everyone is different, so what works for one person may likely fail with another ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627084053/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman19.pdf

@ChessPriyome said in #32:

... This is another reason to have a tight repertiore and consistent playing of that repertoire and not go jumping around from 1. e4 to 1. d4 to 1. Nc3 to 1. c4, etc., etc., ...

Is that a reaction to something in this discussion?

@ChessPriyome said in #32:

... I'm prone to anything played by Karpov or Fischer that is well-annotated. Hard to go wrong there. ...

"... My Sixty Memorable Games ... Fischer and co-author GM Larry Evans ... their intended audience includes players from mid-tournament range (at least FIDE 1600) up to grandmaster. Many of the games have no notes to the opening moves until Fischer decides which line or variation he wishes to play, within well-known tabiyas. So, there may be no notes for the first five or ten moves of the game. There are some that have earlier notes, but the intention is clear: Fischer and Evans are not trying to teach the reader about opening principles or even why those tabiyas were popular – that is assumed to be common knowledge by the intended readership. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2005)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #33:

... write a sample so i can exactly understand how to read chess books , just any example

@ChessPriyome said in #35:

... using active self-dialogue, following this simple routine:
An example from a postal game I am playing would be:
The positional feature: White Activity; Exposed Kg7; weakened dark squares on the kingside; ...

"... The Amateur’s Mind ... is one of the best instructive books in print. ..." - Taylor Kingston (1999)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708094419/https://www.chesscafe.com/text/ammind.pdf
The book contains many examples with specific positions.
There is no general-purpose reading method for all readers and all books. A reasonable first step is to get a proper book for a specific reader.
"... the situations in which trainers work vary enormously. ... Some trainers work with large groups of students and others individually; with average low-category players or with bright and highly talented potential stars. ...

That is why I am skeptical about any attempt to introduce a rigid methodology, rigid rules telling us what to do and how and in what order to do this or that. ..." - IM Mark Dvoretsky (~2003)

@SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #1: > ... i am confused like i am readng currently,"secrets of chess endgames" by idk but its good also its a very tedious task how to do it without lagging @SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #15: > I had another problem regarding chess books ,how do I learn from them like I play my line compare to the authors then I extract a lesson do _____ when _____ in the condition of ______ but it's really ineffective and hard to learn from as it's heavily position dependant what do I do am I wrong ,I am open to critics @ChessPriyome said in #17: > ... If it's not stickng, you are either skimming the games without understanding or just not trying. ... Another possibility: "... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015) https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever @ChessPriyome said in #17: > ... Studying chess naturally assumes you are repeating the same material so it makes an impression on your memory. > Anyone tells you different is either a savant or is BS'ing you. ... Failure to repeat is not the only possible explanation for a reading problem. "... Just because a book contains lots of information that you don’t know, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be extremely helpful in making you better at this point in your chess development. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2001) https://web.archive.org/web/20140626180930/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf @ChessPriyome said in #17: > ... When you look over gasmes for learning, you should be able to at least play the game out from memory at a minimum and understand the critical moments. Otherweise, you are just pushing wood around. "... The 'Excrutiating Detail' slow-approach. In this approach you take hours to review a game, painstakingly reading each annotation note (sometimes using multiple boards for variations), playing out every annotated variation, guessing the moves of both players, and checking the moves with a computer chess engine, etc. ... Despite the obvious advantages of occasionally going to the extreme, I suggest a norm of getting out a chessboard, playing each move, reading what the author has to say about the move, and then making the next move. At this rate, it should only take 20-40 minutes to play over an annotated game. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2005) https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf Also, intensively examining a specific game is not necessarily the right approach for a particular problem. One could, for example, look at a 1 e4 d5 game for a very long time without becoming aware that "... if a queen is actually stable in the middle of the board, this can often be the best place for it ..." (- GM John Emms). By the way, if SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 is working on "secrets of chess endgames", is there any reason to assume that a game is being examined? Has ChessPriyome looked at the sample from Secrets of Rook Endings? https://www.amazon.in/Secrets-Rook-Endings-expanded-fundamental-ebook/dp/B00LUVAT36?asin=B00LUVAT36&revisionId=f2e41aef&format=3&depth=1 @SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #18: > ... okay but how should my lessons look like for example you read a book and find any flaw in your play that the author dosent state in the line, what do you write @ChessPriyome said in #32: > ... That is weak chess thinking.** > One sign of weak chess thinking is when a player describes a strategy in a way that sounds logical but is actually vague, contradictory, or disconnected from the position. ... "... annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ... In master-vs.-master games, the errors are usually minor and the punishment is so slow coming that the educational value is often lost. ... there are major advantages to studying older games rather than those of today. ... In today's chess, the defense is much better. That may sound good. But it means that the defender's counterplay will muddy the waters and dilute the instructional value of the game. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010) @ChessPriyome said in #32: > ... Once you improve on your explanations, ... A better approach might be to seek better reading choices. "... The books that are most highly thought of are not necessarily the most useful. Go with those that you find to be readable. ..." - GM Nigel Davies (2010) @ChessPriyome said in #32: > ... Great books for that have been written and used for that - WoodPecker, Informant EOC Middlegames, etc., literally any chess book, actually. ... "... everyone is different, so what works for one person may likely fail with another ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002) https://web.archive.org/web/20140627084053/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman19.pdf @ChessPriyome said in #32: > ... This is another reason to have a tight repertiore and consistent playing of that repertoire and not go jumping around from 1. e4 to 1. d4 to 1. Nc3 to 1. c4, etc., etc., ... Is that a reaction to something in this discussion? @ChessPriyome said in #32: > ... I'm prone to anything played by Karpov or Fischer that is well-annotated. Hard to go wrong there. ... "... My Sixty Memorable Games ... Fischer and co-author GM Larry Evans ... their intended audience includes players from mid-tournament range (at least FIDE 1600) up to grandmaster. Many of the games have no notes to the opening moves until Fischer decides which line or variation he wishes to play, within well-known tabiyas. So, there may be no notes for the first five or ten moves of the game. There are some that have earlier notes, but the intention is clear: Fischer and Evans are not trying to teach the reader about opening principles or even why those tabiyas were popular – that is assumed to be common knowledge by the intended readership. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2005) https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf @SF18NNUE-SFNNV12 said in #33: > ... write a sample so i can exactly understand how to read chess books , just any example @ChessPriyome said in #35: > ... using active self-dialogue, following this simple routine: > An example from a postal game I am playing would be: > The positional feature: White Activity; Exposed Kg7; weakened dark squares on the kingside; ... "... The Amateur’s Mind ... is one of the best instructive books in print. ..." - Taylor Kingston (1999) https://web.archive.org/web/20140708094419/https://www.chesscafe.com/text/ammind.pdf The book contains many examples with specific positions. There is no general-purpose reading method for all readers and all books. A reasonable first step is to get a proper book for a specific reader. "... the situations in which trainers work vary enormously. ... Some trainers work with large groups of students and others individually; with average low-category players or with bright and highly talented potential stars. ... That is why I am skeptical about any attempt to introduce a rigid methodology, rigid rules telling us what to do and how and in what order to do this or that. ..." - IM Mark Dvoretsky (~2003)