| |
Main
Date:
From:
Subject: How should I study endgames
|
|
|
| |
Date: 10 Jun 2006 19:29:28
From:
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
I would just add "Essential Chess Endings" by James Howell to the list
of good mid-level ending books. For a positive review of this book
that by Jeremy Silman that I am pretty much in complete agreement with,
you could try this link:
http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_js/js_essential_chess_endings.html
-Geof Strayer
|
| |
Date:
From:
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
|
| | |
Date: 11 Jun 2006 10:07:45
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
>> > My current rating is around 1900. I have a reasonable grasp of
>> > openings, middlegame and tactics but I am sadly lacking in the finesse
>> > of endgames.
>>
>> 1900 players don't have a "reasonable grasp" of anything but how not to
>> hang
>> pawns and maybe how to get a square here and there in enemy territory.
>
> You may not, but don't assume everybody has your failings and hang-ups.
Like yours of only having the balls to be rude from behind your monitor?
|
| |
Date:
From:
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
|
| |
Date: 03 Jun 2006 11:37:09
From: Nick
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
David Richerby wrote:
> Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Ray Gordon (Gordon R Parker) is rated 1900 USCF.
> >
> > Michael de la Maza, rated 2041 USCF (he retired at his USCF
> > ratings peak) has written a book, "Rapid Chess Improvement".
> >
> > Jonathan Maxwell, rated 2010 USCF, has written a book,
> > "Blitz Theory: How to Win at Blitz Chess".
>
> However, his peak quick rating is only 1556.
I was writing in the context of how the publishers would
attempt to promote their authors. Jonathan Maxwell's
publisher would prefer to advertise his 2010 USCF rating
rather than his 1556 USCF 'quick' rating.
> > There's probably someone ignorant enough to purchase
> > Ray Gordon's book.
>
> PT Barnum tells us that Mr Gordon might expect sales
> of up to 1440 per day!
But doesn't that upper bound overlook the possibilities
of multiple or repeat orders? Can ignorance have an
upper bound? :-)
--Nick
|
| | |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 12:17:41
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Nick <[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby wrote:
>> Nick <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Jonathan Maxwell, rated 2010 USCF, has written a book, "Blitz
>>> Theory: How to Win at Blitz Chess".
>>
>> However, his peak quick rating is only 1556.
>
> I was writing in the context of how the publishers would attempt to
> promote their authors.
Sure. I was just providing further information.
>>> There's probably someone ignorant enough to purchase Ray Gordon's
>>> book.
>>
>> PT Barnum tells us that Mr Gordon might expect sales of up to 1440
>> per day!
>
> But doesn't that upper bound overlook the possibilities of multiple
> or repeat orders?
An excellent point.
> Can ignorance have an upper bound? :-)
Depends on how you define ignorance. If it is defined solely in terms
of not knowing something that is true, somebody who knew nothing would
be maximally ignorant. However, if it includes believing things that
are false, there is no upper bound.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Pointy-Haired Gnome (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a smiling garden ornament that's
completely clueless!
|
| |
Date: 31 May 2006 16:58:10
From: Nick
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Ralf Callenberg wrote:
> 31.05.2006 09:10, Ray Gordon:
> > It's a "freestyle" book that is not rating-dependent and which
> > is geared towards those lower rated than me (i.e., weak players
> > who are addicted to purchasing chess books).
>
> I can imagine the catch phrase for the advertisement: "You are a weak
> chess player and addicted to purchase chess books - then this is for
> you!" Alternatively possible. "You are dumb enough wasting time and
> money in tournament chess - then this is for you!"
Ray Gordon (Gordon R Parker) is rated 1900 USCF.
Michael de la Maza, rated 2041 USCF (he retired at his USCF
ratings peak) has written a book, "Rapid Chess Improvement".
Jonathan Maxwell, rated 2010 USCF, has written a book,
"Blitz Theory: How to Win at Blitz Chess".
There's probably someone ignorant enough
to purchase Ray Gordon's book.
--Nick
|
| | |
Date: 02 Jun 2006 15:46:33
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Nick <[email protected] > wrote:
> Ray Gordon (Gordon R Parker) is rated 1900 USCF.
>
> Michael de la Maza, rated 2041 USCF (he retired at his USCF ratings
> peak) has written a book, "Rapid Chess Improvement".
>
> Jonathan Maxwell, rated 2010 USCF, has written a book, "Blitz
> Theory: How to Win at Blitz Chess".
However, his peak quick rating is only 1556...
> There's probably someone ignorant enough to purchase Ray Gordon's
> book.
PT Barnum tells us that Mr Gordon might expect sales of up to 1440 per
day!
Dave.
--
David Richerby Evil Game (TM): it's like a family
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ board game but it's genuinely evil!
|
| | | |
Date: 02 Jun 2006 13:09:01
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
>
>> There's probably someone ignorant enough to purchase Ray Gordon's
>> book.
>
> PT Barnum tells us that Mr Gordon might expect sales of up to 1440 per
> day!
Maybe 5-10 percent of all players ever hit 2000. With "freestyle" chess
being won by players as low as 1700 over GMs, it would make sense that many
lower rated players have something to offer as authors.
I specialize in one part of the game: the opening. I play it as well as
almost anyone, and definitely better than many authors of other opening
books.
A 1400-rated player can definitely benefit from seeing the full repertoire
of a player rated 600 points higher.
--
"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: 02 Jun 2006 18:35:08
From: Ron
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
In article <[email protected] >,
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote:
> I specialize in one part of the game: the opening. I play it as well as
> almost anyone, and definitely better than many authors of other opening
> books.
That's funny, because, you know, you've only posted a few games here
but I recall people pointing out that your opening choice in one was
rather mediocre.
>
> A 1400-rated player can definitely benefit from seeing the full repertoire
> of a player rated 600 points higher.
Of course, you can see the complete repertoire of almost any player of
international strength these days, thanks to the internet. Plus, you can
see the middlegame and endgame skills which make them that strong.
-Ron
|
| | | | | |
Date: 02 Jun 2006 15:09:21
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
>> I specialize in one part of the game: the opening. I play it as well as
>> almost anyone, and definitely better than many authors of other opening
>> books.
>
> That's funny, because, you know, you've only posted a few games here
> but I recall people pointing out that your opening choice in one was
> rather mediocre.
I'd have to see the specific games. My repertoire isn't bulletproof, and my
opponents often play well in the opening themselves.
>> A 1400-rated player can definitely benefit from seeing the full
>> repertoire
>> of a player rated 600 points higher.
>
> Of course, you can see the complete repertoire of almost any player of
> international strength these days, thanks to the internet. Plus, you can
> see the middlegame and endgame skills which make them that strong.
Unless they are playing 10,000 games a year, you are not likely going to see
that much of any player's repertoire, plus many players use multiple
variations.
--
"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: 31 May 2006 13:26:21
From: Nick
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Ray Gordon wrote:
> >>> It's a "freestyle" book that is not rating-dependent and which is
> >>> geared towards those lower rated than me (i.e., weak players who are
> >>> addicted to purchasing chess books).
> >>
> >> I can imagine the catch phrase for the advertisement: "You are a weak
> >> chess player and addicted to purchase chess books - then this is for
> >> you!" Alternatively possible. "You are dumb enough wasting time and money
> >> in tournament chess - then this is for you!"
> >
> > Alternative backcover blurbs:
> >
> > "This book saves you the trouble of having to check these position with
> > Fritz for yourself. If you are lucky the author even gave Fritz enough
> > time and actually looked at positions that are of interest to you."
>
> Actually, the content will go well beyond what a computer can do, but yes,
> giving the computer enough time for the right positions is crucial to any
> chess author, even a GM. The book also shows how to build an opening
> repertoire, so it can be applied to any openings the reader selects.
>
> > "Someone else may read this book, may discover something useful in it and
> > may then use it against you, if you happened to play a variation covered
> > in this book. Be prepared, even for this remote chance and buy this book!"
>
> I actually like that one!
>
> > "You are not going to improve ever, anyway, so you might just as well
> > waste your time with this book."
>
> I might say, "but wouldn't it be nice to slap a GM in the opening
> once in a while?"
Followed by "before probably losing in the middlegame or endgame".
> > "The author claims to be a reasonably good bullet player,
> > who actually played some rated games years ago."
>
> My USCF rating peaked at 2000 back in the days
> when we didn't have computers to help us train.
Why am I absolutely unimpressed by Ray Gordon's boast?
There are some players in the world who have become stronger
than 2000 USCF without ever using any computer engines or
databases in training and by using few, if any, chess books.
--Nick
|
| | |
Date: 01 Jun 2006 11:00:29
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
>> > "You are not going to improve ever, anyway, so you might just as well
>> > waste your time with this book."
>>
>> I might say, "but wouldn't it be nice to slap a GM in the opening
>> once in a while?"
>
> Followed by "before probably losing in the middlegame or endgame".
As opposed to the come-from-behind victory that would have occurred had the
player tried 1. g3 instead?
>> > "The author claims to be a reasonably good bullet player,
>> > who actually played some rated games years ago."
>>
>> My USCF rating peaked at 2000 back in the days
>> when we didn't have computers to help us train.
>
> Why am I absolutely unimpressed by Ray Gordon's boast?
2000 is hardly a boast for a chess author. Then again, 1700 has won
freestyle tournaments before.
>
> There are some players in the world who have become stronger
> than 2000 USCF without ever using any computer engines or
> databases in training and by using few, if any, chess books.
Today's players, even those who don't use computers, are playing against
opponents who do.
--
"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: 31 May 2006 13:20:39
From: Nick
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Ray Gordon wrote:
> tin Brown wrote:
> > My current rating is around 1900. I have a reasonable grasp of
> > openings, middlegame and tactics but I am sadly lacking in the
> > finesse of endgames.
>
> 1900 players don't have a "reasonable grasp" of anything but how
> not to hang pawns and maybe how to get a square here and there
> in enemy territory.
Is Ray Gordon (known to the USCF as Gordon R Parker),
rated 1900 USCF, speaking of his own limitations here?
> > I am interested in finding a book or software to study endgame
> > techniques from. I already have an old book by Renfield and Endgame
> > Studies 2.0. I find I am losing won positions in the endgame through
> > not being able to see the wood for the trees.
>
> You are probably losing them in the middlegame by
> not seeing ahead to the endgame.
Has Ray Gordon drawn that 'probable' conclusion
without ever seeing any of tin Brown's games?
> > What I would really like to find is a book that distils key endgame
> > knowledge and heuristics for practical games into the smallest number
> > of memorable rules possible.
> >
> > What is Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual like?
> > Or any other suggestions for a suitable book?
> >
> > Thanks for any enlightenment.
Look not toward Ray Gordon for 'enlightenment'.
> If you're going to study the ending, you might as well go
> all out and get as much specialized material as you can.
>
> 1234 Modern Endgame Studies is a good start, as
> is ECE if you're into the reference/drill approach.
Having read what tin Brown was asking for, my
impression is that he's not 'into the reference/drill approach'.
--Nick
|
| | |
Date: 31 May 2006 22:39:58
From: Bjoern
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Nick wrote:
> Ray Gordon wrote:
>
>>1900 players don't have a "reasonable grasp" of anything but how
>>not to hang pawns and maybe how to get a square here and there
>>in enemy territory.
>
> Is Ray Gordon (known to the USCF as Gordon R Parker),
> rated 1900 USCF, speaking of his own limitations here?
>
>>You are probably losing them in the middlegame by
>>not seeing ahead to the endgame.
>
>
> Has Ray Gordon drawn that 'probable' conclusion
> without ever seeing any of tin Brown's games?
See above, he's making inferences about other players with a rating
similar to his own. Losing in the middle- and endgame must have been
quite familiar to him back when he actually played chess at longer time
controls instead of bullet.
|
| |
Date: 31 May 2006 01:29:57
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
> My current rating is around 1900. I have a reasonable grasp of
> openings, middlegame and tactics but I am sadly lacking in the finesse
> of endgames.
1900 players don't have a "reasonable grasp" of anything but how not to hang
pawns and maybe how to get a square here and there in enemy territory.
> I am interested in finding a book or software to study endgame
> techniques from. I already have an old book by Renfield and Endgame
> Studies 2.0. I find I am losing won positions in the endgame through
> not being able to see the wood for the trees.
You are probably losing them in the middlegame by not seeing ahead to the
endgame.
> What I would really like to find is a book that distils key endgame
> knowledge and heuristics for practical games into the smallest number
> of memorable rules possible.
>
> What is Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual like? Or any other suggestions for a
> suitable book?
>
> Thanks for any enlightenment.
If you're going to study the ending, you might as well go all out and get as
much specialized material as you can.
1234 Modern Endgame Studies is a good start, as is ECE if you're into the
reference/drill approach.
--
"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: 31 May 2006 08:29:01
From: Bjoern
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Ray Gordon wrote:
>>My current rating is around 1900. I have a reasonable grasp of
>>openings, middlegame and tactics but I am sadly lacking in the finesse
>>of endgames.
>
>
> 1900 players don't have a "reasonable grasp" of anything but how not to hang
> pawns and maybe how to get a square here and there in enemy territory.
What are you writing you book about then?
|
| | | |
Date: 31 May 2006 03:10:17
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
>>>My current rating is around 1900. I have a reasonable grasp of
>>>openings, middlegame and tactics but I am sadly lacking in the finesse
>>>of endgames.
>>
>>
>> 1900 players don't have a "reasonable grasp" of anything but how not to
>> hang pawns and maybe how to get a square here and there in enemy
>> territory.
>
> What are you writing you book about then?
How to play the opening.
I have an electronic co-author who is much stronger. It's a "freestyle"
book that is not rating-dependent and which is geared towards those lower
rated than me (i.e., weak players who are addicted to purchasing chess
books).
--
"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: 31 May 2006 09:28:10
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
31.05.2006 09:10, Ray Gordon:
> It's a "freestyle"
> book that is not rating-dependent and which is geared towards those lower
> rated than me (i.e., weak players who are addicted to purchasing chess
> books).
I can imagine the catch phrase for the advertisement: "You are a weak
chess player and addicted to purchase chess books - then this is for
you!" Alternatively possible. "You are dumb enough wasting time and
money in tournament chess - then this is for you!"
Greetings,
Ralf
|
| | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2006 19:30:14
From: Bjoern
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
Ralf Callenberg wrote:
> 31.05.2006 09:10, Ray Gordon:
>
>> It's a "freestyle" book that is not rating-dependent and which is
>> geared towards those lower rated than me (i.e., weak players who are
>> addicted to purchasing chess books).
>
>
> I can imagine the catch phrase for the advertisement: "You are a weak
> chess player and addicted to purchase chess books - then this is for
> you!" Alternatively possible. "You are dumb enough wasting time and
> money in tournament chess - then this is for you!"
Alternative backcover blurbs:
"This book saves you the trouble of having to check these position with
Fritz for yourself. If you are lucky the author even gave Fritz enough
time and actually looked at positions that are of interest to you."
"Someone else may read this book, may discover something useful in it
and may then use it against you, if you happened to play a variation
covered in this book. Be prepared, even for this remote chance and buy
this book!"
"You are not going to improve ever, anyway, so you might just as well
waste your time with this book."
"The author claims to be a reasonably good bullet player, who actually
played some rated games years ago."
Well, I guess the best keting strategy would be to sign up some GM
who is desperate for money and let him "co-author" the book.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 31 May 2006 14:14:14
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
>>> It's a "freestyle" book that is not rating-dependent and which is
>>> geared towards those lower rated than me (i.e., weak players who are
>>> addicted to purchasing chess books).
>>
>>
>> I can imagine the catch phrase for the advertisement: "You are a weak
>> chess player and addicted to purchase chess books - then this is for
>> you!" Alternatively possible. "You are dumb enough wasting time and money
>> in tournament chess - then this is for you!"
>
> Alternative backcover blurbs:
>
> "This book saves you the trouble of having to check these position with
> Fritz for yourself. If you are lucky the author even gave Fritz enough
> time and actually looked at positions that are of interest to you."
Actually, the content will go well beyond what a computer can do, but yes,
giving the computer enough time for the right positions is crucial to any
chess author, even a GM. The book also shows how to build an opening
repertoire, so it can be applied to any openings the reader selects.
> "Someone else may read this book, may discover something useful in it and
> may then use it against you, if you happened to play a variation covered
> in this book. Be prepared, even for this remote chance and buy this book!"
I actually like that one!
> "You are not going to improve ever, anyway, so you might just as well
> waste your time with this book."
I might say, "but wouldn't it be nice to slap a GM in the opening once in a
while?"
> "The author claims to be a reasonably good bullet player, who actually
> played some rated games years ago."
My USCF rating peaked at 2000 back in the days when we didn't have computers
to help us train.
> Well, I guess the best keting strategy would be to sign up some GM who
> is desperate for money and let him "co-author" the book.
Never.
--
"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: 31 May 2006 09:04:56
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
>> It's a "freestyle" book that is not rating-dependent and which is geared
>> towards those lower rated than me (i.e., weak players who are addicted to
>> purchasing chess books).
>
> I can imagine the catch phrase for the advertisement: "You are a weak
> chess player and addicted to purchase chess books - then this is for you!"
> Alternatively possible. "You are dumb enough wasting time and money in
> tournament chess - then this is for you!"
While this won't be the keting strategy, I have no doubt it would be
profitable.
This book BETTER be good; it's going to take almost a year for me to finish
it.
--
"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: 30 May 2006 19:36:33
From: Nick
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
|
| |
Date: 30 May 2006 21:43:43
From: Ron
Subject: Re: How should I study endgames
|
In article <[email protected] >,
|
|
