How Good Is Your Chess? (Dover Chess)

This is indeed an excellent book but it is not NEW. It is a REPRINT of the 1993 CADOGAN book by the same title. I really feel IT SHOULD BE ADVERTISED AS SUCH.

When I look over a grandmaster game, I don't ask, "Why'd he do that?" Anybody can wave his hands and answer something incontrovertible like, "This move supports the piece on x and prepares for an attack." How helpful is that?Instead, I ask, "Why didn't he do this other move?" This book makes an effort to answer that question for moves in about 20 master games of the 1990s.The format is simple and consistent. After each move by the losing side, you are asked to choose your own move. Then you are graded. You get an amount of credit proportional to the strength of your move. If it's a blunder, that is often pointed out as well.This helps you to learn from your own mistakes. It's far more instructive than most books of annotated games. It's simpler than Nunn's move-by-move book, deeper than Chernev's, and more like actually playing a game since you are only thinking about the moves made by one side.In a way, the book is similar to Chris Ward's 'It's Your Move', but vastly superior, as this book discusses more alternative moves and far more positions. (Ward's 'Improvers' version, however, is quite good.)Highly recommend for anyone with a rating between 1500-1700. I have no idea how accurate the rating predictions of the book are, but who cares?

This book contains twenty games played in the 1990s by world-class players (like Shirov, Anand and Kramnik) with questions and points awarded at critical move decisions. GM Daniel King's commentary is entertaining and insightful. In Christiansen-Browne 1990, game 4 entitled "Roll of the Dice," for example, he notes after move 17 "if by some brainstorm you came up with this move, take two points, a couple of tranquilizers, and rest of the week off work" before pointing out the positional considerations involved "the bishop on f4 is the one worth preserving as it is settled on such a good square." I am not claiming, however, this is a comprehensive chess self-improvement course. There is a didactic quality throughout the book but it is not in the style of Nunn's Understanding Chess or Chernev's Logical Chess. Just enjoy the games, watch how the pros do it, and take the rest of the week off work.

You can really improve your chess feeling in playing thru the interesting games only if you try to solve all the questions (a question a move) without looking at the answer. But if you do it, success is guaranted. The introduction to the games is interesting also and gives an inner view of the grandmasters world.