John Nunn's Pair of Books - Opinion?

I am considering buying John Nunn's two books - Understanding Chess Middlegames and JN's Chess Course (based on Lasker's games).

My goal is improvement (I am an intermediate player, with around 1400 rating here). I already own Silman's Reassess and Amateur's Mind books (didn't yet read the former, and studying the latter now).
Do these Nunn's books add anything to Silman's? How good are they? They both got excellent reviews on Amazon.

All opinions on this are welcome.

Thanks!

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627012322/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen154.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708112708/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review943.pdf

The middlegame one is a very good book. He will introduce a concept, give a couple of examples from strong GM play and talk through them, but the emphasis is on you really to study it. I don't think you'll get too much out of skim reading it.

I prefer it to Silmans (Silman's isn't a bad book by any means, if a little dogmatic) as it's just a lot broader and it's probably a step up to really get the most from it.

Understanding Chess Middlegames by Nunn is excellent. That book will show you many middle game ideas/theme.

But when you study a chess book, you must play the moves on a chess board and digest the lesson. Just flipping page after page will not do that much for you.

I def don't do page flipping with any chess book - I always sit down with a chessboard on a game editor here. My concern is that if I get Nunn's book and it's similar to Silman's, it'll be a waste of money.

Has anyone heard of and/or read Rios's book?

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1784830003/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pd_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=3H49AXZFKLTPM&coliid=I12XLT8S0YED23

It's getting really excellent reviews on Amazon (sometimes I am skeptical of those thoguh) and seems to emphasize the middlegame too.

Getting Understanding Chess Middlegame by Nunn is not a waste of money because there are many themes/position/ideas in that book that you won't find in Silman books. It is an excellent book.

Nunn himself praised IM Silman's Reassess book in 2006. It doesn't seem likely that he would go on to knowingly write something that could be seen as a duplication of Silman's work. Also, as a famous GM, Nunn could be expected to produce something that would, to some degree, reflect his great accomplishment in the chess world. FM Carsten Hansen wrote, "For players rates from 1700 to 2400, [Nunn's 2011] book will provide ample study material to help make you a better and more knowledgeable player with sharper skills in all aspects of the game." The review of Nunn's 2014 Lasker book reproduces some samples of his explanations.

I've always found Nunn to be overly analytical in his works. Another problem is that he doesn't provide exercises for the reader. So the risk is that you're drown in a sea of maybe not too relevant variations (that's certainly the case in the Lasker book, which I didn't enjoy much for this reason).

Rios' book is much more reader-friendly, but it's probably better if you accumulate some more playing experience first to get full advantage of the book.

But then again, it's a question of taste : if you're motivated by a book, just go for it, because the best chess book is the one you use and read

Some alternate suggestions to consider though :

http://www.amazon.com/Simple-Chess-Algebraic-Edition-Dover/dp/0486424200

http://www.amazon.com/Chess-Secrets-Petrosian-Capablanca-Nimzowitsch/dp/1857445414

I think these two books above are excellent primers on positional play, and I believe the pedagogy is better than in Nunn or Silman's books.

Game collections are also a great tool to learn about positional play. The difference with strategy books is that you work to connect the dots when going over the games and you also see the transformation of advantages at work, like in a real game :

http://www.amazon.com/Masters-Chessboard-21st-Century-Edition/dp/1936490218/ref=pd_sim_sbs_14_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=41d40lXQQaL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR108%2C160_&refRID=0NWHDEY2K4QXATF4SQ0M

At the Gambit site, I believe one can see samples from both Nunn books.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104258/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review400.pdf

Yeah some of Nunn's book have many analytical analysis. But his Understanding Chess Middle has tone down that analytical variation and has more verbal explanation.

His verbal explanation on the book Understanding Chess Middle Game is brilliant. In my opinion Understanding Chess Middle Game is one of the best out there. It is rich/full of patterrn/middle game ideas.

I liked this one,but I'm partial to anthologies.

I agree with Hicetnunc. It would be nicer if there would be some application tips provided with the analysis. But it is a good book.

That's the thing about chess - it's useless explaining chess thru endless variations, because then there is no discernible strategy or thread to be found and that can be taught; and chess then becomes just about calculations. But relying on narratives and prose, without analyzing specific lines is useless too, since big picture strategy without analysis doesn't get you far either if it can be refuted by specific lines.

The success, IMO, is achieved when the balance between strategy/positional play is aided by analysis of some specific lines.

That is the beauty of Understanding Chess Middle by Nunn, it has great explanation and good analysis.

If anyone has read both books, Chess Middlegames by Nunn and Chess Structures by Rios - are they similar? Does it make sense to get both?

Thanks.

I have not read that Rios book, but the reviews are positive. I think it make sense to buy both as there might be materials from the Rios book that you will not see with the Nunn book. It is also possible that you encounter a subject in the Rios book(and vice versa), but for you to fully grasp the lesson you need more example on that subject. You might find that example on the Nunn book.

To improve at chess, familiarity of many position is a must. So having both book will in rich you with many chess positions. In fact this is how many GM train their students. They ask their student to collect as many as they can positions of same theme.

https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/chess-structures-a-grandmaster-guide/

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708092313/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review620.pdf

http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2012/4/1/book-notice-richard-retis-masters-of-the-chessboard.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233403/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review782.pdf

At the Quality Chess site, one can see a sample from the Mauricio Flores Rios book.

@Iggy82

I see your rating in your profile is the same that you said in 2015 you had - 1400ish.

I assume none of the books in this topic helped you improve?

He’s 1723 blitz which is the most underrated, he’s definitely better than 1400