|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Nov-24-04
 | | offramp: <Saruman: Think like a GM is a great book,although I have trouble to use the "tree of analysis" in practise".> I am not surprised! Dr Nunn pointed out what a load of rubbish it was! Chess players don't think like that and it doesn't work.
Kotov said that you select say 3 candidate moves, the choose the first and analyse it along the tree of analysis until you get as far as you can. Then you start on the second move...
Nunn said that you should analyse each move only a little. This should give you an idea of which line you should concentrate on. What - he says is the point of analysing Moves 1 and 2 right to the end, then starting on move 3 and you realise it gives a massive advantage? You have wasted lots of time. |
|
| Nov-24-04 | | Marco65: <offramp> I didn't read Kotov, but I know his thinking method from my chessmates. When I was younger, I felt like a stupid when I analysed a variation more than once. Then I read Nunn, and was happy to find that a GM agrees with my opinion about Kotov's work. Nunn states that, if a variation is critical (e.g. you're sacrificing a piece), you HAVE to check it more than once! Come on, Kotov, are you human or what? Never heard of blunders? Moreover, reportedly Kotov doesn't address at all how you could choose candidate moves. What sounds odd to me is that Kotov sometimes seems to consider people as flawless computers, but his thinking process is exactly the opposite to the way computers play chess. Computers use "iterative deepening" examining over and over the same variations at increasing depth. |
|
| Jun-19-05 | | Fritzin: Alexander Kotov's 'Think Like a Grandmaster' is a great foundation to start with and will forever be read and taken to heart. For a beginner it may seem a little thick to work through but it is definately worthwhile. Some critics point out that the tree of analysis is too time consuming if not out of date, I too find it dated since chess is ever evolving. However, the 'oldschool' grandmasters like Kotov, Tal, and Bitvinnik, have a lot to offer. Competitions from the 50's and before when studied seem like the original masters really did read 12+ moves ahead reliably, in a modern game this seems excessive even for Kasparov, instead a player today must remain very flexible and spread his/her ideas outward while Kotov recommended sticking to 3 or so main lines, this isn't a bad exercise but as soon as you play a modern player you will see that time trouble will be a big problem if all you do is read deeply into a few options. I still put this book at the head of the pack for no other reason than I believe if you are serious about Chess then you should study it in cronological order, starting with the pre WW2 Russians all the way up to Fischer. In fact that is what made Fischer such a formidable foe, his flexibility/creativity was revolutionary and the old Russian schools of chess where ill prepared to beat him, however even Fischer made blunders.
Kotovs book will make your mind work, perhaps for the first time in chess. What you may find as tedious analysis you will now find as crutial to your growth, "Think Like a Grandmaster" is a wonderful place to start. It makes thinking in Chess fun and will forever stay with you no matter what your style. |
|
| Jun-19-05 | | Caissanist: Is there any particular book of Nunn's where he goes over his own alternative way of thinking, as described above? |
|
| Jun-19-05 | | Eopithecus: Tisdall's Book is so much better than Kotov's. Think like a GM isn't trash but it isn't really a sophisticated guide either it is untrusworthy. |
|
Jun-23-05
| | offramp: <Caissanist: Is there any particular book of Nunn's where he goes over his own alternative way of thinking, as described above?> Yes; John Nunn has written a great book: http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_re... |
|
Jul-27-05
 | | chancho: Think like a Grandmaster is a great book. And will continue to be a great book for a long long time.They say that Kotov's book helped in the sudden increase of strong English players. I know a young kid, who read that book and from 1626, his rating jumped to 2100+. Not too many books will do that for you although talent does help. |
|
| Jul-27-05 | | aw1988: Nah, no talent needed. You just need fear, suprise, and ruthless efficiency. Or is that an almost fanatical devotion to the pope. Oh damn, you'll have to say it. |
|
| Sep-03-05 | | jahhaj: If you take it literally Kotov's recipe is impossible to follow (unless some of you out there really do have silicon chips in your heads). But if you read him as saying most people are indisciplined in their thinking and could shape up a little, then it's reasonable. Personally I got almost nothing from his book except an enjoyable read. But that's probably laziness (or lack of talent). |
|
| Sep-03-05 | | aw1988: My advice is to avoid Fine. His books can actually make you worse. |
|
Sep-03-05
 | | Sneaky: I read Kotov's "Think Like a Grandmaster" and reached one conclusion: I don't!! |
|
Sep-03-05
| | chancho: <aw1988> If fear, surprise, and the devotion to the Pope, helped you improve as a player, then I have got to try your suggestion.LOL, just joking. |
|
| Jan-07-06 | | BIDMONFA: Alexander Kotov KOTOV, Alexander
History Championship of S.S.S.R.
http://www.bidmonfa.com/historia.htm
_ |
|
| Mar-14-06 | | fred lennox: i agree with <chancbo>, Think like a Grandmaster is a great book. I believe it is the first book to seriously try to make an ambitious chess player train to be a GM. It is no ivory tower attempt. Kotov has trained such players and even GMs to be better players. It may be more accurate to title the book Train to think like a Grandmaster. Training is usually more rigid than practice so what is effective for training can be artificial in practice. Thie book Train Lik a Grandmaster, i was told, is a fiasco. Play Like a Grandmster is a good book, it's not in the same class. |
|
| Mar-14-06 | | Benzol: Train Like A Grandmaster I found helpful, in doing some of the bios. :) |
|
| Mar-15-06 | | PinkPanther: "In chess, only the attacker wins." Nonsense. That's about on the same level as Short's comments about pawn structure. |
|
| Apr-26-06 | | whatthefat: I think the quote is being misunderstood. "In chess, only the attacker wins," is true by definition. You can't win the game without performing some sort of 'attack'. The quote stems from the idea that whoever stands better should attack, or risk losing their advantage. And why do they stand better? Precisely because they have that option. |
|
| May-25-06 | | Knight13: You guys should really check this game out: Kotov vs Kholmov, 1971. |
|
| May-25-06 | | Benzol: <Knight13> It is a good game although a bit one-sided. I'd be interested in seeing <ray keene>'s game against Kotov because Ray was playing the Sicilian Defence and not a Flank Opening as Black. |
|
| May-25-06 | | Knight13: <Benzol> Yup. But I would like to see a more "one-sided" game than the Kotov vs Kholmov, 1971 one! :) |
|
| Aug-12-06 | | Knight13: <aw1988: My advice is to avoid Fine. His books can actually make you worse.> Not really. His book, "Basic Chess Ending" is way too much to learn and over my head. |
|
| Aug-12-06 | | James Demery: I`m reading Think Like A Grandmaster , but I still Play Like A Patzer. |
|
| Aug-12-06 | | pazzed paun: In the U.S.S.R. Kotov is not held in high regard as a player or as a trainer. In fact the books ...like a grandmaster... series are not even thought of as "his" but rather a poorly cobbled together selection of Russian chess folk wisdom. The books were some of the first systematic books available to westeren players and because of that are reference points for many westeren players. |
|
Aug-12-06
 | | Eric Schiller: <pazzed> Jon Tisdall criticized Kotov heavily in his excellent book Improve your chess now! Of course no one is respected in the ussr because it doesn't exist anymore. But much of Kotov has been discredited, you are right. |
|
Aug-13-06
 | | plang: It is one thing to criticize his writings but why his chess? He had a very solid career. He was one of the top ten players in the world in the period after WW II and had consistently good results in the interzonals and USSR championships. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
