Recommend me some annotated game books for Beginners!

I'm starting to study chess and I need some books with annotated games to study. I've thought about some books like: My Great Predecessors (Garry Kasparov), My 60 Memorable Games (Bobby Fischer), Understanding Chess Move by Move (John Nunn), among others but I worried this book is too difficult for me. So help with this!

And also recommend me others books about opening, tactics, strategy and endgame that may help me.

What is the point of posting the same question twice in one day?

Try: "logical Chess move by move" by Irving Chernev

the books you said are worth getting but later. first start with logical chess move by move by irving chernev. read the book game by game and take your time.get a good understanding about the game and learn about the openings. also the winning chess series books are good by yasser seirawan. winning chess tactics in this series is also a good buy. good luck  hope i helped a little.

i personally don't like logical chess move by move. i would skip it and get understanding chess move by move, which i don't think is particularly complicated, but is not an insult to your intelligence either.

Does it insult the intelligence of beginners though?

yes

My 60 Memorable Games (Bobby Fischer)

Buy it, Buy it, Buy it, Buy it.....right now if possible.

logical Chess move by move by Irving Chernev is appropriate for you

I'd recommend Logical Chess, Move by Move by Irving Chernev. I found it very useful and it has plenty of games to go over.

Would you care to expand? Can you give an example of the kind of intelligence-insulting you dislike?

How about every e4 game...'good move. This put a pawn in the centre of the board and opens the bishop and queen.'

Yeah, we know, you told us on the last 5 games. Now tell us, is Nf3 a good follow up after e5?

Fair comment, though I would personally consider that to be a minor annoyance and wouldn't write off the whole book on account of it.

he also contradicts his own advice. and gives a lot of "general principles" which are misguided at best.

Ok, but that's something different from intelligence-insulting. However, I'd be interested to know which general principles he gives are misguided in your opinion.

I read Euwe's Judgment and Planning when I started. It is very much strategy-oriented and very useful to beginners, as long as you really concentrate and try to get something from it. The strategical themes discussed in the book are all very common, so you'll be able to utilize what you've learned from the book quite often.

expecting people to lap up his advice while directly contradicting himself is pretty insulting.

as for principles, where to start?!? after 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e3 "Generally, it is dubious strategy to release one Bishop while shutting in the other". this sounds sensible enough i guess, but quite a number of common openings completely disreguard it, QGD, french, nimzo indian, slav, closed ruy etc. are all of these openings awful, or is this "principle" just wrong and useless?

this also happens to be one of the principles he also goes on to contradict.

the amount of venom he pours into chastising anyone who dares move one of the pawns infront of a castled king is also pretty ridiculous.

here is a quote from john nunn laying into chernev's ideas on the wrongs of fiancetto development.

"If you are unlucky, the 'general principle' being put forward may not even apply to the specific position under discussion. Referring again to Logical Chess Move by Move, Game 12 goes ...

• Pitschak - Flohr 0-1 [A29]

... 1 c4 e5 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 g3 d5! 4 cxd5 Nxd5 5 Bg2 Nb6! (his exclamation marks) and now we read

"There is another bit of subtlety in the Knight's move, one which the modern master frequently utilises. The Knight takes advantage of the Bishop's fianchetto development and bears down heavily on c4, a square weakened by the Bishop's absence." The italics are Chernev's so he obviously considered this point important. However, it is absurd. White will inevitably play d3 (or possibly b3) to develop his c1-bishop, after which the knight cannot move to c4. Even if it could, it wouldn't attack anything and would be instantly driven away again. The game continued 6 Nf3 Nc6 7 0-0 Be7 8 d3 0-0, reaching a standard position. The d3-pawn covers c4 and did so for the remainder of the game, so this isn't even a case of annotation by hindsight. Chernev was trying to formulate a general principle, this time on the defects of the fianchetto development, but it's not one that has any contact with reality.

"A player of his strength is unlikely to discover new general principles which somehow eluded great chess thinkers such as Tarrasch, Nimzowitsch and Reti.

(...)

"Every chess move adheres to some general principles but contravenes others."

You obviously feel strongly about this. I think this is fairly advanced critique for the beginner level - but I suspect our ideas of what constitutes a beginner may not be the same.

i think i'm just always surprised at how many people recommend this book. if it gets people interested about learning more about chess then that is a good thing, but i'm sure there must be better material out there for new players! (i only really started learning chess in august, so i'm barely past the beginner stage myself)

I agree with Moyuba, there is better stuff out there now for beginners. 

I teach beginners, and while it is appropriate to point out the effects of e3, that it locks in the bishop (which beginners may not even realize is an issue), it is a far cry from there to jump to the dogmatic view that it is always bad to do so.

For the OP, if you are really a complete beginner, I am going to recommend what I have on my desk that I bought for some students, a workbook by Bain called "Checkmate" for about $3.

http://www.chessforstudents.com./store/shop/category.asp?catid=12

Or the tactics workbook. These are appropriate for someone who knows the rules but not much else.