A bit of hollow propaganda I can stand or ignore if there are things useful for me in the writting. Botvinnik was quite proud of his Soviet styled achievement in his introduction to his best 100 games and the essay on Soviet chess, but there were useful tips and insights as well.

Another thought:
If Kotov's books are seen as collections of Russina chess folk wisdom, is there a better collection?

And another thought:
I suppose this all could spin off into a topic I have recently become interested in - what made Soviet chess different from what came before? If they were different, why did they become different, what were they reacting against?

If anyone could provide an insight regarding this, or books or materials that touch upon this, I would appreciate it.

<If Kotov's books are seen as collections of Russina chess folk wisdom, is there a better collection?> Suetin's "School of Chess Strategy and Tactics" comes to mind as an alternative. Not necessarily better, but different, focussed on dynamics of chess.

When I don't get Soviet Chess by Soltis for Christmas, I will go out and buy it myself.

I stumbled across R. N. Coles Dynamic Chess for under $3.00 in a used book store. I haven't had time to play over the games yet.

p.16"When I revealed that I was writing a book to tell all that I knew about analysis, based on what I had learned from other grandmasters and what I had discovered myself, I was rewarded yet again by applause. I came to realise that players even in high grades need such guidance. Then I said jokingly, 'Botvinnik is working hard at trying to make a computer play chess as well as a human being, so let me teach human beings to analyse with the accuracy of a machine.' "

p.17"Practice has shown that only a few players have mastered the technique of analysis; even highly rated players are lacking in this respect."

p.19"Having examined the games of other players, particularly masters, and read the occasional comments on this point that appeared in game annotations, I became even more convinced that the ability to analyse clearly a sufficient number of variations so as to clarify the position was the basic condition for success... How should one go about this training?...I chose a method which seemed to me the most rational...I selected from tournament books those games in which great complications had arisen. Then I played them through on a board but when I reached the crucial point where there were the greatest complications and the largest number of possible variations I stopped reading the notes. I either put aside the book or covered the page with a sheet of paper and set myself the task of thinking long and hard so as to analyse all the possible variations...I would sometimes write down the variations I had examined and then I would compare them with those of the annotator... Naturally I analysed without moving the pieces so as to make it just like a tournament game... In this fashion I examined a large number of very tricky and complicated positions."

p.24"Three factors guarantee finding the right move. They are: an accurate analysis of all variations that can be logically considered, confidence that you have taken account of all the best moves and strict economy in thinking time."

p.44"A grandmaster is obligated to examine all the candidate moves in a given position."

p.68"When you have finished analysing all the variations and gone along all the branches of the tree of analysis, you must first of all write the move down on your score sheet before you play it... You should write the move down in the long form... Every figure, every letter should be written very clearly and carefully... Spend another minute looking at the position.. and look at the position through the eyes of a patzer."

p.83"Steinitz and his successors introduced the following concepts about the basic elements of a chess position:

1. Open lines and diagonals
2. Pawn structure and weak points
3. Piece position
4. Space and the centre

They also considered the posession of the two bishops as a real factor in guaranteeing an overall advantage, though this particular question, more than any other, is today a controversial one."

p.147"One factor is always present in all a grandmaster does. He always takes account of it when planning for the immediate or the distant future. This factor is the pawn formation in the centre. The method of play to be adopted depends crucially on this pawn formation and we shall consider the various types of central formation and advise on the appropriate method of play for each."

Will she, will she
Always Flohr me?
Will she never Phil-adore me?
Will she never
Care a damn bit
For my Center
Counter Gambit?

I will have to pull my neck in
For she dotes upon Alekhin.
I will have to pull my oar in
For she dotes upon Tchigorin!

Yes --
An' what of
Kotov?

I do not decry Flohr. There is virtue in sheer truth. But Flohr could have written sympathetically or purely factually, without spiteful overtones."

-- C.J.S. Purdy on page 137 of the September 1963 Chess World when discussing Alexander Kotov