Anyone know of some good chess books for a beginner?

Try looking on Google. They're new, but good.

Lol, I guess I’ve said that to you? If not, great minds think alike.
I more wanted the opinions of those I know to be sharp people, then a list of popular books. Plus I wanted some sort of discussion. Oh well, can’t win them all.

LOL. Yeah, you've said that to me before. I'm not trying to be an ass. I get your point, and if i had anything useful to add i wouln't have said that. Anyhow, good luck with your chess venture.

You can be an ass if you'd like.

What's the name of that chess prodigy?? He was deported to Iceland recently. I think his first name is Bobby but I dont remember.

Bobby Fischer

You're thinking of Bobby Cox. He's in the ATL theese days.

playboy comes to mind.

oh you said chess!!!!

Sam, who is that bitch? It looks like Rachel Bilson.

That's who that bitch is.

Foxy!

Now that's good chest!

as odd as it sounds, the complete idiots guide to chess is actually a really good book for someone new to the game. i have always owned my brother at chess and he checked out from the library once to get some tips for beating me, and it had a lot of good stuff in it that even a pretty advanced player like me found useful

Do you really want too learn how to play chess???

What's wrong with chess?

Get Yasser Seirawan's "Winning Chess" series of books

whatever you get, make sure it uses algebraic notation, (for example 1. e4 e5) instead of English notation (example 1. p-K4 p-K4).

I'll second that.

When you get to be more intermediate, Silman's "How to Reassess Your Chess" is to chess what SSHE is to poker.

The above post has good starting books.

After that it's all about pouring over annotated books by all the greats, experience and keeping up with current theory.

Every few months I become obsessed with a new game, and this time it's chess, again. I search to see if anyone had a chess thread, and apparently I do. And it's from the olden times, when I used a lotta' emoticons, and Turd Ferguson and I hated each other, for some reason, but tried (and failed) to keep it hidden.

Anyway, I'm only now actually getting started, and I absolutely suck (I thought I must be world-class, because I can beat my friends). I stole a bunch of expensive programs to evaluate my play, and after a few moves, it started laughing at me, and then it suggested that I stick with poker, and then advised my heath insurance company to require me to wear a crash helmet, or cancel my policy.

Maybe I should read some of those books...

Best advice i got was to record your games. It gives you something to look at and more experienced players can look over them and give advice.

If you dont know a better player then post a game in here and the FCP community can look over it and give advice. I am pretty good and i am sure there would be a couple of others in here that can help.

I second this was, I was just about to post it. This one in particular took me from average donk to being able to beat most of my friends. The concepts are illustrated clearly and concisely, and the reading is easy, unlike most chess books.

This is also excellent advice. For a while I was serious, and I would record every game and then go back and replay them to see where I went wrong. Usually my mistake was about 15 moves before I actually lost the game, so I knew what I needed to focus on.

I play at Red Hot Pawn, it’s a site that you play through email correspondence, so I when you make a move I get a notification in my email and play when I get a chance, Some people are available to play multiple times a day, some people only move once a day, it’s a convenient way to play online.





I’m frustrated with the game right now and growing away from it. I feel my skills are weak and I don’t know what I’m doing. I’m such a problem solving guy that I find solutions during the game that are great moves and won a bunch of games against my friend who plays pretty frequently. A book would help a lot but they seem painful to read, basic opening strategies would help me out a lot I think. I tend to shoot myself in the foot early, and I don’t castle early enough either.

you can see all your old games and others peoples games through red hot pawn as well.

Just jump right in,

Speed chess on Yahoo is a good way to start, 5 or 10min games to get the feel of the game and the flow.

It's great to work on your openings.

Then get into some of the gambits and you will understand them a lot clearer.

Lightning chess is an awful place to start. It will show you alot of openings but most of them are for shock value and may be solved.
Also when playing lightning you dont get a chance to have a good long think when it reaches the end game as you are often in time trouble when you reach move 40. Which i think is the most important part of a player development. I have improved more as a player through one tough endgame in slow time then i have in any 50 lightning games.

Lightning may be good for working through lots of games to get familar with a new openings or just plain fun but i dont think it should be a starting point. (sure josh waitzkin started off playing speed chess but he also learned to bring out his queen and had Bruce Pandolfini not personally corrected it he still would.)

Play chess on chessbase.com , alot better place and you can play as a guest if you dont want to cough up money. The standard of play is miles better and the three move repetition and 50 move rules are enforced in the program (something not done in yahoo when i played). People 1600 and lower will play guests but if you want tougher comp then you will need to buy an account and rank up.

Is it a bad idea to just play the Fritz10 engine? I know I'll never beat it in this lifetime, but (a) is there a disadvantage to playing against a computer, and (b) is there a dis- or advantage to only playing someone/thing whose playing on that much higher a level than you?

Because I have ChessBase and all that jazz.

What you want to be doing is playing people no greater then 200 points your rating. Any higher then that and you risk the games being so loop sided that it would be pointless and bad for moral. If you are being beaten in 20 moves then i doubt you could learn much from it as he has probably taken advantage of 6 mistakes that you cant see yet.

Now playing against Fritz10 might not be bad if you can get it to give you the right handicap. Whether that is time or material or programing it.

A common complaint with the friend mode on computers compaired to humans is that it rarely makes small positional mistakes you can capitalise on and will often just make a blunder.
Here is an old artical talking about it.
Intelligent mistakes

If you are still keen to play computers i recommend the chessmaster series. They have a list of pre made characters to choose which i always found more useful then tinkering with fritz.

Grand Master Dutch will strike fear into the hearts of the weak.

If I had that title, I would absolutely walk around in an overly ornate robe and with a giant staff, and introduce myself using my title way more often than is appropriate.

Or am I thinking of Grand Wizard, again?

Oh, and thanks for the actual help, Fighter. If I can force myself to get serious, and read some books, I may post some games here.

Interesting article.

Chess is a game of pure, natural talent. If your mind isn't properly wired (particularly in the realm of spatial reasoning), you will never, ever be good at it no matter how hard you study. It isn't like poker where 'experience' is a factor. Chess is a game of cerebral acuity and whether you got it or not is decided by mother nature.
A naturally gifted 8 year old playing 2200 level chess will defeat- 99% of the time- a 30 year old 2000 level "well studied" player who has invested a lifetime of reading books yet is lacking the requisite natural talents.

Books and texts will make great players better (since high level chess is usually nothing more than variations on classical offense and defense openings) and they will make shitty players 'trickier' , but they will never make the naturally disinclined anything other than what they are.

I studied and studied and crushed about 99% of everyone I played, yet when I reached the high levels (a couple steps below the stratospheric levels) I had to face the hard truth and come to the realization that I just couldn't compete with those who were gifted with the ultra high level natural talent for the game. I just couldn't analyze all the variables that would occur 20, 30 or 40 moves in advance. Thusly, I couldn't beat anyone NM or higher. Like, ever. Me on my very best day and they on their very worst day, they would still win.

Jews tend to dominate Chess since the game is a hybrid between analysis and creativity- the two areas where the Jewish mind exhibits an amazing confluence of skill. You would think mongoloid Asians would be good at chess, but the "Creativity" part pretty much culls them from the high levels. They're masters at memorizing openings and employing static strategies, though.

[...]

[Shakes fist] Those fucking Jews!

I'm not looking to beat Viswanathan Anand, I just want to get pretty good.

They'll get ya every time....

My advice would be to seek out the notations of the great games, play them out on a real board and with every move, work on understanding the fundamental reasoning behind each move. Don't just "watch" the moves- understand them.
Reviewing the great games is probably the best way for a beginner to establish a solid foundation that could lead to higher level play. You have the advantage of seeing perfect play and mistakes alike.

Any of the Fischer games, any of the Kasparov games. If you want to play attacking, Latvian style Chess, study the games of Tal.
I ****ing love Tal. He was the Stu Ungar of Chess.

The reason I believe starting off by studying the games of masters is superior to studying sterile "chess theory" is that it helps you obtain a grasp of the real time decision making that is required to win. After you have looked over the great games, then study theory, but start with a study of the great games.

Tal?

Also, would that really help me at this point, considering that I know nothing about playing chess?

Oh, this Tal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Tal

Mikhail Tal


"I drink, I smoke, I gamble, I chase girls -- but postal chess is one vice I don't have." - Tal

Think he lived a wee bit of a "hard" life?

Tal at 32



Tal at 51



Video of Tal near the end of his life crushing Kasparov in a Blitz game (He is in his mid 50's in this video, yet he looks like he's in his 70s or 80s)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6nUvp5WRl4

Sweet. Is it wrong that we find that kind of thing awesome instead of sad? Prolly not.

Also, forgive me if I don't seem grateful of your advice; I think it's a bit over my head; you're talking about picking a style, and I'm like, "oh, cool. You said the Pawn and move two, sometimes, right? What the ****, you just moved the king two, and moved the one that looks like a tower to the other side of it. Bullshit."

Look over the early championship games. Emanuel Lasker vs Wilhelm Steinitz is a great set of matches.
They are alot more easier to understand as there is usually one central theme behind the game.
Compaired to the Anatoly Karpovs vs Garry Kasparov matches which can transfer into 5 or 6 different ideas and themes and flat out be a pain to study
Actually there is a good free demo from the from the web site Chess Mentor that has a couple of grandmaster games where they tell you the history and rational behind the moves as you play them out. Awful graphics though.




You dont really pick a style as much as you find yourself playing a certain way. Much like poker you dont choose to be gus hanson maniac or Chris Ferguson conservative you just find youself making certain stylistic choices. Really this only might become an issue when you choice an opening to study which you shouldnt really be doing at this time. Chances are whatever you are in poker you are in chess so that should help.

I'm stealing Chess Mentor as we speak. God I love the internet. $200 program, stolen in a couple clicks. Jail will suck, though.

"The Nimzovitch Gambit: A Practical Approach to Quantum Chess" is a good book for beginners.

So is "Chess for Mongoloids: How to Circumvent the Great Wall"