I'm learning to play chess!

Any of you kind folks here recommend a good book to help me learn tactics!

S'Novim Godom! (As we say in Russia)

greatest chess book ever written, in my opinion.

Logical Chess Move by Move by Irving Chernev. It takes you through through a number of games (24. I think) explaining the reason for each move, on both sides.

I own in in descriptive notation, but I think it is now available in algebraic notation.

Good luck.

is when you stand up, knock the table over and scream "You're life ain't worth a penny!"

It won't help you win, but it's very satisfying.

Khash.

Bobby Fischer teaches Chess by Bobby Fischer
The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Irving Chernev
The Art of Attack in Chess by Vladimir Vukovic

Check out chessclub.com it's great to be able to play a game within minutes 24/7..

She reminds me of a chess game
With someone I admire


just askin' :shrug:

There are chess problems to work through, great matches (Spassky v. Fischer, some of Morphy's games, et cetera), you learn all of the strategies and defences...it'll give you a good grounding and a fairly skilled computer opponent to practise against.

http://www.chessmaster.com

Fritz 9 for Christmas (I think), won't find out for sure until my family arrives tomorrow, when we celebrate it. What do you think of Fritz?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0671211145/qid=1135473572/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/104-6973925-3471131?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

"Winning Chess" by Irving Chernev. Basically takes all of the major tactical weapons in chess (pin, fork, discovered check, etc.) and has examples of each with the positions, you find the solution.

What you can do is this: Xerox the pages, cut out the board pics and put them on index cards with the solutions on the reverse side. That way when you shuffle them randomly and review the position, you are evaluating the position, and have to spot the tactical move available, instead of knowing that you have to find a pin or a discovered check within the position.

It's a whole bunch of excellent examples.

I think "Winning Chess" is about the most valuable book you could have starting out, because you really have to know the tactics before anything else. Studying opening theory etc. is useless unless you have a sense of what possibilities those opening variations lead to.


The second best book I've read is also Chernev: "Logical Chess: Move by Move (linked below)." Basically takes several master games (some are not so great but some are by old timey masters like Capablanca), but explains the purpose behind EVERY SINGLE MOVE. This is really good for players starting out trying to figure out a foundation for their play.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0713484640/qid=1135473572/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/104-6973925-3471131?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

I really, really think these two books alone will give you a seriously good foundation for learning.

If you start out trying to read Fischer's or Kasparov's games, I really think there's too much "foundation of knowledge" missing to really get a lot out of reading those books.

Start with Chernev.

It's an old Electronic Arts game that plays like chess, only the pieces actually fight each other and the result is not pre-determined. That means that even if a queen lands on a pawn square, the queen must fight the pawn and kill or be killed.

Any ideas to keep him interested and learning?

RL

is written by Graham Burgess titled, innocently enough, Chess with a subtitle "tactics and strategy"

Word is that it is a reprint of 'The mammoth book of chess,' only this is in a hardcover edition.

Whatever the case, it is a great introduction to chess because it gives the fundamental building blocks from the fundamental mates through the tactical themes, combinations, positional ideas, fundamental endgames, commented games etc. etc.

It's got it all. At a great price! $9.99 at Amazon(usa)

Graham Burgess


I'd also say that the Winning Chess series of books by Yasser Seirawan is very good for the new player, too.

Good luck!

The age old question for young and old:

Why must I lost to this idiot?




;-)

chess hand held game from Radio Shack for a christmas gift. The computer on it will show you
strategy moves and such. I think it was like
15.00

1. Pay attention to the board
2. have an attack plan and a defense plan
3. try to read your opponent's attack plan, why did they make that last move
4. try to get their power pieces (queen, rook) with your weak ones (bishop, knight) and avoid letting them do that to you
5. if you are playing someone who is better than you, trade queens if you can
6. if you are ahead, trade whenever possible (bishop for bishop or knight, rook for rook, etc.) (note: Capablanca and most experts say the bishop is more valuable than the knight, but among amateurs it is almost the opposite, forks are harder to see coming (I call that a Vitamin A deficiency which leads to Knight blindness))

generally a stronger player will be able to do more with less... I've always done the opposite, if I think my opponent is weaker or less experienced I will trade anything to get to the end game as soon as possible

as they can see through more moves than you can

"Getting their most powerful player still benefits you as they can see through more moves than you can"

Non sequitur

If one player is me and the other one is Kasparov, those are about as good of odds as I will ever get. I can analyze pawns and kings on an empty board about as well as he can. The more crowded the board is, and the more power that is out there the further apart we get in analytical ability, or the more our different analytical ability will be revealed.

" I can analyze pawns and kings on an empty board about as well as he can. "

lol, ok

Capturing the better player's points give the lesser player an advantage...if I am the lesser player, the only way to give myself any advantage is to take away their strongest piece and as many pawns as I can

it won't make any sense no matter how many times you repeat it.

You keep saying that an even trade favors the weaker player but you haven't shown any way in which it actually does give the weaker player an advantage.

the main pieces you'd want to take away are the queen and as many pawns as possible (and, of course bishops)

Anything I can do to make a better player work harder favors me even if it means it takes me longer to lose. Now, as to your goal to get to the end ASAP, I didn't notice you post any means of getting there...therefore I don't think we have any strategies to compare

So then you trade queens. All things are still equal except your opponent is better.

So then you trade rooks. All things are still equal except your opponent is better.

So then you trade bishops. All things are still equal except your opponent is better.

So then you trade knights. All things are still equal except your opponent is better.


"Now, as to your goal to get to the end ASAP"

No that isn't what I said, indeed that is exactly the opposite of what I said. If you are the weaker player you need to gain an advantage before the endgame. If you are the stronger player you want to get to the endgame quickly.

There is no endgame unless the players are almost equals. A better player does not need tricks on an endgame because they usually have a bishop, or rook that their opponent does not, (or they win the game with a checkmate way before that). One of their major weapons for building that lead is their queen. With queens on the board there are a brazilian more things to analyze both offensively and defensively. The longer both queens are on the board, the more chances a stronger player will have to take the weaker player's queen with a bishop, rook, or knight. Note too, I did not say to trade everything, only the queens, because of a) their power for your opponent and b) their vulnerability to you.

There are a lot of reasons why games between mismatched players are unlikely to reach an end game.

But you still haven't explained the advantage. Yes, when you trade queens your opponent no longer has 'their power' but neither do you. In what way have you gained an advantage? I like to trade queens with weaker players at times when they don't expect it, which will sometimes fluster them and give me a time advantage while they overcome their surprise... sometimes it will even yield a blunder.

A queen trade avoids four bad scenarios -
1) a checkmate - it is easier to checkmate with the queen than with any other piece
2) loss of your queen to a rook, bishop, knight
3) loss of other power pieces because of threats to the queen (for example I pushed a pawn which threatened his bishop. The bishop could not be saved because the pawn move also simultaneously opened his queen up to attack from my bishop)
4) your opponent takes a major piece with their queen and then trades queens

all those things apply equally to both sides... where's the advantage?

because the stronger player is more likely to do the good things, and the weaker player more likely to make one of the mistakes or fall into one of the traps. A trade reduces the stronger player's advantages and reduces the weaker player's vulnerabilities. I thought that was pretty obvious.

And making totally unfounded assertions.

In what way does an equal trade "reduce the stronger player's advantages and reduce the weaker player's vulnerabilities" ????

Yes, the stronger player is more likely to do the good things, and the weaker player more likely to make one of the mistakes or fall into one of the traps, whether they have a queen or not, however the stronger player probably is more experienced and skilled at combinations, strategy and tactics without the queen.

if they are better then their queen is more dangerous than your queen. If you neutralize it, then you have better odds, especially if you get to it before they cause alot of damage with it. Not that I have used is successfully, although I have beaten better players than me ratings wise, it just seems like a useful general rule.

If they are better, they are better with the queen or without it. And they are more likely to have more experience playing without a queen. Weaker players tend to rely on it too much. If your opponent can see more moves ahead, they can see more moves ahead with or without it.

But it is certainly true that the endgame favors the more experienced, disciplined player.

(among other things). I've got to brush up so I can play with him.

I've found useful:

The Middle Game in Chess -- Reuben Fine (The first half of the book is about tactics)

The Art of Sacrifice In Chess -- Rudolf Spielmann (discusses different types of sacrifices in chess)

Winning Chess Tactics Illustrated -- I A Horowitz (has 320 tactical game positions presented as chess problems with the solutions in the back of the book)

Although not recently published books, all are still available through Amazon & probably elsewhere.

I meant to include the Fine book in my list...