Logical Chess Move by Move - Game #1

Alcher and Benedictine have very clear in mind that Chernev in his book "relates" the game. . . he does not "analize or critize" the game. He is not to be blamed if there was another ending for that number one game

On what basis do you, Alcher, consider that move # 18 (game 1) is wrong because the book is 50 years old?

And why do you not analize the book by yourself without using powerful engines?

I think though, that if you re-read the first post, he sort of stumbled upon the computer analysis and found the new suggested bishop moves. He didn't set up the computer to test the book, rather to test his own memory of the first game and then found the refutation by chance.

This is book is a great book. I'm really enjoying the touches of humour and classical insight. Of course, importantly, I think it might also help improve my understanding of the game in the long run as well. Fingers crossed.

@Benedictine - I'm going through the book a bit slow, but at last, at game 6 it was a Ruy Lopez :))

@tabor - Hi. Instead of rewriting all that I wrote when I first got a "complaint", you could just go to the first page and see what I mean. But on a nutshell:

Me when I analyze it without an engine: White is lost, forget it, next game.

Me when I analyze it with an engine: White can not only delay checkmate, he can prevent it and continue to play with a slightly worse but playable position.

"On what basis do you, Alcher, consider that move # 18 (game 1) is wrong because the book is 50 years old?"

It's wrong because there is no move #18. White resigned at move 17 so I don't know what you are talking about. About the book's age, books that were written and published before the existence of chess engines obviously have no chances of being computer checked. If Chernev would have published the book in 2008, he'll probably feed ALL games into stockfish (or whatever). He can still use game#1 (vonScheve-Teichmann) BUT he will surely add the computer's assessment after white resigned.

I just got this book, and played through this game, while running it through Stockfish. Enjoying the format of the book, and it's fun to discover an error.

One can see some discussion of the pros and cons of Chernev's Logical Chess at:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132019/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman118.pdf
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/logical-chernev
http://chessskill.blogspot.com/2013/01/logical-chess-book-review.html
http://chessskill.blogspot.com/2013/02/chernevs-errors.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104437/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/logichess.pdf
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/assorted-recent-books
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708091057/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review465.pdf

Here is a review that was, at one time, available online.

Logical Chess

Move by Move

Author: Irving Chernev

256 pages

Batsford (2002, reprint)

Reviewed by Randy Bauer

Randy's Rating: 9

  In the search for understanding in chess, this book has been a beacon for aspiring players for decades, and Batsford's reprint provides an opportunity for another generation to learn from the author. Perhaps the best testament to its greatness is the fact that Grandmaster John Nunn's outstanding book UNDERSTANDING CHESS MOVE BY MOVE (Click to see Donaldson's and Watson's reviews of Nunn's book.) is recognized as patterned after Chernev's work.

For those who didn't grow up in the era of descriptive notation, Irving Chernev wrote books that mostly appealed to the mainstream player. One of the first books I owned, Chernev's THE FIRESIDE BOOK OF CHESS guided me through the many facets of chess during my formative years. Even though he wrote many other good books (for example, every aspiring player should also own THE MOST INSTRUCTIVE GAMES OF CHESS EVER PLAYED), this is widely recognized as his best.

In this book, Chernev annotates 33 games and comments on each move for both players.  His goal is to explain what each player was thinking while making his move. In this way, the reader gets an insight into the rationale behind the moves of and the thought processes of a master player. The author splits the games into three chapters, dealing with kingside attacks (16 games), queen's pawn openings (7 games), and other concepts (10 games).  Given the book's original 1957 copyright, it is not surprising that the earliest game is from 1889 and the latest was played in 1952.

The author does a great job of connecting with the reader - one feels that they really are inside the head of the players and that Chernev is explaining what they were thinking while deciding upon their moves. As a result, the games are absorbing and the lessons learned (at least in my case) tend to stick with the player.

I first came across this book at an early stage in my chess career, and I believe that it helped form my understanding of what chess mastery is all about. In fact, one of the games, Blackburne-Blanchard, probably gained me 100 rating points in my class days. I used the structure and natural kingside attack from that game in many, many of my own encounters.

While not a world-class player, Chernev was a prolific writer, and that combination serves the reader well in this book. The author can better relate to the reader and provide them the sort of insight that may be lost on stronger players.

While this is a great book, there are some areas where it is showing its age (having first been issued nearly a half century ago). It is notable, for example, that by far the most popular opening represented is the Queen's Gambit Declined; by contrast, today's favorite Sicilian Defense is found in just one game. There is just one Queen's Indian and one Nimzo-Indian included; there are no games featuring the popular King's Indian, Grunfeld, or Benoni Defenses. The players you will encounter are Capablanca, Tarrasch, and Rubinstein rather than Karpov, Kasparov, and Kramnik.

I had a few quibbles not related to the age of the book as well. I found the print in this reprint to be a little light for my taste, and the diagrams a bit too small. Finally, why oh why are the Chapter headers for each game the site where the game was played rather than the players? "Lodz 1908" doesn't really tell me as much as "Rubinstein-Salwe."

Regardless of these types of issues, this is a very good book. Perhaps it isn't as timeless as it once appeared to me, but it should prove useful to any aspiring player wanting to better understand how to develop logical plans, moves, and thought processes in chess.

Some really good links there. Thanks.