I was reading ChessAdmin’s post, here, and thinking that this is a subject we should all have some opinion on, even if it’s a subconscious one. Anyway, it’s a good “Chess Carnival” type of topic.
My road to chess improvement is rather simple, study annotated games, and where possible by the players who played them. I would also like to finally get around to studying tactics problems, and perhaps a few opening lines, if we are going to isolate specifics.
Why should this be good enough, you say? Easy, each game contains an opening, middlegame, ending, tactics. IOW, a whole game has it all. Sure, I could study something like Dvoretsky’s Endgame Manual, but I am not going to. Why? Because I still have other areas that are getting some work in, and I am not a Super-GM trying to beat other Super-GM’s, I am just me.
There are some opponents who will try to drag you into endgames where they can blitz out a win with their great sense of knowledge, but I’ve found this is < half, and maybe 1/3 of opponents at best. Actually, it's surprisingly small because of the time-controls used these days.
I posted to Facebook earlier today here. Figured I should have something up, in case anyone wants to see something or respond there.
The chess book that I am reading/studying right now is Joel Benjamin’s “American Grandmaster”. I actually like it quite a bit. Somehow it drug me away from the Amos Burn book for the time being, which is an awesome book btw.
The Amos Burn book is my favorite book ever, but it’s like I am afraid I’ll read all 900+ pages and it’ll be all gone, like ice-cream. hehe.
Really, it’s your love for the game that makes you stronger at chess. Pretty simple! 🙂