My plan is to do the Yusupov books first, then Calculation. But I think he's said that it's possible to do it for ambitious 1800+ players (but definitely not easy in that case, I think).
Dvoretsky's is more like 2400+, I think.
Is Aagard's Grandmaster Preparation: Calculation good?
Sort:
I heard about that but also that it's an excellent book. Some things in the GM Prep series I feel would be redundant since I have books or software on those topics. Only thing I'm lacking really is a good calculation book (I have Think Like a Grandmaster and How to Become a Deadly Chess Tactician). I intend to work hard and plow through variations (not just visualizing positions at the end of forcing variations but assessing them). I mostly got rid of retained image errors and other hazards of calculation but after about 5 moves or so things get hazy.
I have Aagard's Right Decisions Chessbase CD, which helped calculation and techniqueimmensely, but need a little something extra. That CD is mostly about solving chess problems and trying to find the best move, and the really good part about it is not all calculation exercises are attacking some involve putting up a tough defense and arriving at an at least equal endgame or patiently defending then stealing the initiative for my more powerful counterattack.
schack_2 wrote:
My friend, let me be blunt. If you're rated 1826 here, nothing in the GM Preparation books will be redundant. They are workbooks with difficult problems to solve. You might think you understand various themes, but even assuming that your knowledge is that of a master, the application of that knowledge still is difficult. Solving the problems will help with application.
That's just what I was looking for! It's obviously for OTB and live since calculation skill is meaningless in correspondance with moving pieces on an analysis board permitted. Can never have too many exercises or calculation work outs 
I just hope it isn't 100% attacking positions but with at least 20% defense too. Knowing Aagard he'll probably throw in some defensive tasks too.
Amen to the application being difficult too! That's why I like studying the same topic and even with familiar endgame positions certain maneouvers trip me until I grind them further. Sometimes it's even hard to pick a move because there are so many viable candidates and potential plans so prioritizing is important.
I'm not looking for defense exclusively (I'm buying Starting Out: Defensive Play for that) but realize that calculation doesn't just apply to attacking. I have Aagard's Basic Positional Ideas and Right Decisions so I know he has some good material. Haven't touched those in years though so I gotta dust off those disks and refresh.
Aagard states in the preface to the book that it is intended for 2400+ players, obviously that means that it's very very difficult.. With that said, if you want to use it anyways, make sure you spend a ton of time on each subject to try to make the most of it. I looked at a few of the excercises, being pretty decent a puzzles (high 1900's on chesstempo), but had no idea at all so I decided to put it off until I finished working on Yusupovs books and gained more experience with standard otb play. Either ways good luck with it, Aargard is a great author!
Yeah I'll go with something else then to bridge the gap to Dvoretsky's Analytical Manual. 2400 is way above my understanding. I don't mind doing a bit of work to improve but if I don't understand the material I won't progress at all.
schack_2 wrote:
Nowhere does he say that any of the books are for 2400+ players only. Positional Play can be profitably read by players over 1800 or so, and Calculation probably about the same.
Yeah actually that was my mistake. I remembered wrong, the book I was thinking of is Grandmaster preparation: Strategic play. But even though he says it is so difficult it is approapiate for titled leveled strenght, that doesn't mean people with less ability won't get anything out of it.
I just took a look at Positional Play and Calculation and they do indeed seem easier than Strategic Play, so maybe it's not a bad choice for the op. Either ways you're not wasting your money with any of the books as long as you work on them at some point.
Dec 7, 2013
0
#9
I'm always interested in opinions about the usefulness of books for players of different rating strength and the warnings that reading books aimed at upper level players is a waste of time for lower ranked players.
What I have found is that it depends on how much background information the author assumes with the reader, how much time the reader is willing to put in with study, and the nature of the material. For example, I've heard players warn that My System is too advanced for lower rated players, yet it contains no exercises that would cause problems for a serious reader.
On the other hand, many books like Aagard, Yusupov, Dvoretsky are workbooks containing exercises that are all but unsolvable by average players without a great deal of work and patience. An average player, faced with failure on each and every exercise would quickly give up and lower his/her sights to a more understandable level. Not a waste of time, perhaps, but a waste of money for the time being. But if a lower level player had the time and intelligence to struggle through these upper level books, who is to say they are of no value, and how would you measure that except by rating results?
mldavis617 wrote:
I'm always interested in opinions about the usefulness of books for players of different rating strength and the warnings that reading books aimed at upper level players is a waste of time for lower ranked players.
What I have found is that it depends on how much background information the author assumes with the reader, how much time the reader is willing to put in with study, and the nature of the material. For example, I've heard players warn that My System is too advanced for lower rated players, yet it contains no exercises that would cause problems for a serious reader.
On the other hand, many books like Aagard, Yusupov, Dvoretsky are workbooks containing exercises that are all but unsolvable by average players without a great deal of work and patience. An average player, faced with failure on each and every exercise would quickly give up and lower his/her sights to a more understandable level. Not a waste of time, perhaps, but a waste of money for the time being. But if a lower level player had the time and intelligence to struggle through these upper level books, who is to say they are of no value, and how would you measure that except by rating results?
I object to the language used in this post. it's just not accurate.
"average" players wouldn't be going through aagard's "grandmaster" series in the first place. it's a highly advanced chess training manual specifically aimed at ~2000-2100ish players who can't afford coaches. same with the yusopov and dvoretsky books.
I think before you touch aagard's, yusupov's, dvoretsky's stuff (if you are reading to actually train in chess and not research chess itself that is) it's advisable to first do 1000's of tactics and go through all of Silman's books and maybe even GM's Tisdall's book on calculation/visualization.
Dec 7, 2013
0
#11
I cannot speak for the Aagard series, but I do have the Yusupov series. In the introduction to the first book (1 Build Up Your Chess - Fundamentals), the author states that he developed his series for his 3-year training program in his chess academy and aimed the first series at under El0-1500 players. I would call that an "average" tournament rating.
It also depends on the definition of "average" players (not "average" rating), and the willingness, intelligence and ability of the student to apply those factors to the study of the material. To say that an intelligent student is incapable of gaining knowledge and playing strength from advanced materials is like saying it is useless for high school students to read Shakespeare until they have a doctorate in English literature. Is it the best place for the "average" student to begin? Probably not in most cases, but the individual determines the ability to understand the material.
As always, find a copy and look it over before spending money on it. All I'm saying here is that generalizations don't fit all situations, and while a book is "aimed" at upper level (2000) players, doesn't mean it is a useless waste of time for others. Sometime you have to take the training wheels off the bike.
I have been searching for theses books.... (I have Think Like a Grandmaster and How to Become a Deadly Chess Tactician..... but could never find them.... can someone point in to these online so I can buy them? I dont know the authors of the books either sorry
At first sight calculation seems like one of those abilities you can just practice by bringing up a game from a database (such as Big Database 13) and brute forcing away (I usually do this) and making evaluations at the end. However, this only practices an existing ability instead of developing a new skill altogether. I might be missing steps in calcuation. Since all other chess skills are rooted in positional factors and calculation it's one of the key skills that will automatically make my other skills better. Why just study defense (which I'll still study on its own) or some stupid variation when you can find out yourself by calculation and assessing who stands better by how much and why? I might get the book after all.
Jan 11, 2014
0
#14
I'd like to second Perfect Your Chess by Volokitin as being another good high level book.
I would called 1800-2000 elo average, 1500-1800 novice anything under is beginer. Since with right training getting to 1500 is under year if you just started and have no bad habits, after than you can get at least 100 may be 200 elo / year until you are average (with good working) after getting average level, other considerations comes into play if you want to get advanced level 2200+
A lot of tough books listed in this thread! This is a nice conversation!
I've had the Calculation book for awhile though only did a few pages. Some are quite difficult but other problems weren't trouble. They are higher quality problems than on CT-ART but some positions need positional understanding so you can properly assess a line and not reject a best move off faulty evaluation.
I've finished New Art of Defense in Chess and that wasn't too hard but could have used the refresher. Now I'm mostly focused on game collections for buying. I'm considering Tartakower's (from Russell Enterprises), Korchnoi's (from Edition Olms), and maybe a couple of the Polgar books (Quality Chess). I'll definately get the Python Strategy (their classics series, a 21st century edition of Petrosian's best games) one when it comes out (Quality Chess)... though maybe I said too much here and it'll get sold out before I can buy it.
I'm currently reviewing parts of Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, Survival Guide to Rook Endings, Secrets of Pawn Endings, and especially Endgame Strategy to keep from getting too rusty while reminding myself of the importance of the principle of two weaknesses, schematic thinking, bishop against a knight, etc. Not going through the whole books again just the parts I feel I need to review.
Study of Zurich 1953 by Najdorf and Karpov's Best Games are going along nicely. Exploiting Small Advantages, School of Future Champions 4 and 5 (I have the whole series,) How to Play Chess Endgames, and Dynamic Pawn Play are on my reading list for this year.
Verdict: It is indeed good but you need to have certain skills before attempting and do it right. Having a notebook to write down your thoughts and calculations isn't optional. It's an excellent workbook and every chessplayer should challenge themselves. Better to develop the proper skills in practice rather than need them but not have them over the board where you'd be too late to secure the narrow win or draw.
TheGreatOogieBoogie wrote:
Verdict: It is indeed good but you need to have certain skills before attempting and do it right. Having a notebook to write down your thoughts and calculations isn't optional. It's an excellent workbook and every chessplayer should challenge themselves. Better to develop the proper skills in practice rather than need them but not have them over the board where you'd be too late to secure the narrow win or draw.
Is this a 'must'? I jot down minor/short (3-movers) calculations but most notes are on assessments and follow-up plans. Nothing concrete but a general overall idea of what should be done.
It's best to keep a record to see what we need to correct. It's also a good way to study opening encyclopedias: write down notes to outline various potential plans and figure out why the assessment is the way it is. The difference between slight advantage for white and equality can seemingly be subtle too and discovering those nuances is important.
I'm familiar with a couple of his Chessbase CDs ("Right Decisions" has a few subtopics on calculation)
http://www.amazon.com/Grandmaster-Preparation-Calculation-Jacob-Aagaard/dp/1907982302/ref=pd_sim_b_24
I have an unlocked i7 Haswell so upgrading processor is out of the question, so that just leaves practical advices.
Is this a good stepping stone towards Dvoretsky's Analysis Manual? I hear that one is for 2000+ FIDE but since calculation is a very basic aspect of chess (that and positional understanding are at the heart of everything from attack to defense to principle of two weaknesses, etc.) it won't have the same diminishing returns as some other chess topics.