Rating: 
Summary: A lovely book (in chess???) and an inexpensive YmCA seminar
Review: This book deserves 4 1/2 stars, there is missing something which I could not put a finger on yet.
There are three things about this book. It's of high quality, writtin by a GM, many chess champion. He shows many "memorable" games throughout his career. Now I see what was missing; one appendix chapter demonstrates on how he planned, worked, and succeeded in one of his important tourney. Yery professional work.
Next is the entertaiment, there are more jokes in his books than a season of "Friends" show. I understand only 20% (compared to 5% of Watson's Secrets) of his book for now, without these jokes I wouldn't have bought the book (I re-read and reconsidered to buy it at least 5 times. Finally I saw how to use his book efficiently, in next point.)
How often do we plan to pay money to attend some chess seminar? How much does each cost per lecture? 30, 40 50 USD? This is an expensive YmCA (Yermo master Chess Academy) course. He has about one and a half dozens lectures here which he teaches at
his academy. One good lesson from book, we get about even with the cost of his book. Two lessons, we're ahead in our investment...
Very high quatily book, I wish I could give it 5 stars, but some other books are a little better, so we need to differentiate. Maybe after I fully understand his work, then...
Rating:
Summary: A lovely book (in chess???) and an inexpensive YmCA seminar
Review: This book deserves 4 1/2 stars, there is missing something which I could not put a finger on yet.
There are three things about this book. It's of high quality, writtin by a GM, many chess champion. He shows many "memorable" games throughout his career. Now I see what was missing; one appendix chapter demonstrates on how he planned, worked, and succeeded in one of his important tourney. Yery professional work.
Next is the entertaiment, there are more jokes in his books than a season of "Friends" show. I understand only 20% (compared to 5% of Watson's Secrets) of his book for now, without these jokes I wouldn't have bought the book (I re-read and reconsidered to buy it at least 5 times. Finally I saw how to use his book efficiently, in next point.)
How often do we plan to pay money to attend some chess seminar? How much does each cost per lecture? 30, 40 50 USD? This is an expensive YmCA (Yermo master Chess Academy) course. He has about one and a half dozens lectures here which he teaches at
his academy. One good lesson from book, we get about even with the cost of his book. Two lessons, we're ahead in our investment...
Very high quatily book, I wish I could give it 5 stars, but some other books are a little better, so we need to differentiate. Maybe after I fully understand his work, then...
Rating:
Summary: A breath of fresh air
Review: This book is essentially a book of Yermolinsky examining some of his games and game fragments,along with some light chess philsosophy and plenty of humor and frank comments.I love the way he cuts through some of the bull that is prevalent in many chess books,and especially games collections.He almost snorts at the mysterious 'positional chess' comments that many,many chess masters and writers have long used in their writings,and seems to prefer more pragmatic and direct analysis.A favorite section is his look at a famous Capablanca vs. Janowsky game,and his analysis of what *really* happened,as opposed to Capa's (and many other writers) vague comments.I agree with Yermo that it would be extremely naive to believe that a strong player such as Janowsky would not have seen the drawish line,and that he in all likelyhood was avoiding this line and playing for a win,as was his style.Yermo examines this game is a direct,earthy style,and I'd love to see him write a book concentrating entirely on these classic games,through his own eyes.Very entertaining,and enlightening.I don't believe that Capa didn't beat Marshall,or whoever,because he was a more profound strategist,I think he beat him because he was just a stronger player overall,strong though Marshall was.
I also appreciate that Yermo doesn't try to denigrate the older players--he realizes that they played chess in a more sophisticated manner than the general rules they sometimes espoused would imply.
It's also refreshing to see Yermo examine some of his bad games,and figure out where he went wrong,and why.We see this in very few games collections,sadly.His annotations are rich in both verbal explanations and variations,and will be pretty tough sledding for new players.I think this book is more for 1700-1800 and up players,and there are some good tips here for players of that strength.
I'd like to see more books from Yermo,since he's an entertaining writer.We need more chess books like this.
Rating:
Summary: Thoroughly Enjoyable
Review: This book is extremely entertaining. I am currently using Yermo's opening ideas against the benko and as white in the exchange QGD. Yermo is honest enough to admit that you cannot "teach" grandmaster chess in any book, but that you can study your games and "if you see a good move, make it!". I think this is good advice for the typical class player such as myself. He admits that he has struggled in chess he even shows several games where he makes obvious blunders just to show how important tactics are and how difficult they are to master. The writing is full of interesting stories and useful advice that just reads darn well. I recommend this book for class B players and above.
Rating: 
Summary: Hard to put my finger on.
Review: This book is really for strong club players and beyond, who have a good knowledge of the strategies in the Euwe/Kramer and Pachman books. I think it's important to understand the rules, which apply to about 80% of the cases (according to GM Gufeld), before learning about the exceptions. Yermo's book goes beyond those, in noting various exceptions to the strategical "rules", instead teaching the way children learn languages, by just seeing how people play (speak). He also has a lot of practical advice that he weaves into commentaries on his own games.There are comparatively few topics covered in depth, outlining various plans, e.g. the Grünfeld pawn center, a good line for White in the enchange QGD. He also discusses the role of a lead in development as crucial to the success of the Benko.
Showing that the "Grand Prix" attack against the Sicilian is not to be feared will benefit many players. On the last, Yermo strongly recommends against mickey mouse openings, or trying to take a much stronger opponents "out of book". Rather, he points out that the point of an opening is to gain a good middlegame, and if playing a "proper" opening is "standing on the shoulders of giants". He says he has no problem against offbeat openings that give him a good position with plenty of pieces on: "I'll find a way to outplay anyone 300 rating points below me." I agree though with critical comments about what Yermo says about Botvinnik and Tal. But he is more charitable than John Watson about the classical authors. He points out that they knew perfectly well that what they wrote was only a guide. And like himself, found games with a clear strategic theme the most instructive for their readers, while acknowledging that this is rare between evenly matched players.
Rating:
Summary: Very useful -- for those who have absorbed the "classics"
Review: This book is really for strong club players and beyond, who have a good knowledge of the strategies in the Euwe/Kramer and Pachman books. I think it's important to understand the rules, which apply to about 80% of the cases (according to GM Gufeld), before learning about the exceptions. Yermo's book goes beyond those, in noting various exceptions to the strategical "rules", instead teaching the way children learn languages, by just seeing how people play (speak). He also has a lot of practical advice that he weaves into commentaries on his own games. There are comparatively few topics covered in depth, outlining various plans, e.g. the Grünfeld pawn center, a good line for White in the enchange QGD. He also discusses the role of a lead in development as crucial to the success of the Benko.
Showing that the "Grand Prix" attack against the Sicilian is not to be feared will benefit many players. On the last, Yermo strongly recommends against mickey mouse openings, or trying to take a much stronger opponents "out of book". Rather, he points out that the point of an opening is to gain a good middlegame, and if playing a "proper" opening is "standing on the shoulders of giants". He says he has no problem against offbeat openings that give him a good position with plenty of pieces on: "I'll find a way to outplay anyone 300 rating points below me." I agree though with critical comments about what Yermo says about Botvinnik and Tal. But he is more charitable than John Watson about the classical authors. He points out that they knew perfectly well that what they wrote was only a guide. And like himself, found games with a clear strategic theme the most instructive for their readers, while acknowledging that this is rare between evenly matched players.
Rating: 
Summary: good book
Review: this book is very good, and for players 1600+ it may very well improve your game if you work through it thoroughly. Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: Less than meets the eye?
Review: Yermolinsky has written an entertaining, provocative chess book. I here offer only a slight reservation.... We club players tend to engage in a never-ending search for a book that will lift from our shoulders the awful responsibility that accompanies our limited talent and limited capacity for particular kinds of hard work. We tend to unconsciously deny our own shortcomings by suspecting that previous chess authors have lied to us or have kept the "real" secrets from us. Enter Yermolinsky. As a gentle warning, would-be readers might ponder one example of a 'new' assertion in the book. More than one reviewer has noted favorably a Yermolinsky claim about Botvinnik and Tal. Typical are the remarks of reviewer J. Watson (writing in TWIC): "I was also very interested in Yermo's discovery that the styles of Botvinnik and Tal during their two matches differed by a lot less than they were advertised to by chess journalists, and in much subtler ways. This is an original observation; I didn't touch upon the subject in my book, but I considered making a similar point about characterizations of 'style' in general, e.g., pointing out the exceptional tactical eyes of 'positional' players like Petrosian and Karpov." With respect to the cited example, an examination of Yermolinsky's book reveals: (i) Not one example is offered to support the vague claim about (external?) similarity of playing style. One can only wonder: Does Yermolinsky believe that in the first match, for instance, Tal's winning style in game 6 is 'close to' Botvinnik's winning style in game 9! (ii) More importantly, Watson's own remarks betray the vagueness of Yermolinsky's claim. Note the equivocation: By the time Watson gets to the bit about the 'tactical eyes' of Petrosian and Karpov, we are probably no longer simply talking about 'external' style but, rather, more about the 'internal' way a player comes to a decision. Of course the equivocation makes some sense, since in his book Yermolinsky repeatedly hits at Botvinnik for his talk of "positional judgement." Unfortunately for Yermolinsky (and for Watson), Tal's own book about the first match offers striking comments that support Botvinnik and undermine Yermo's claim. Consider especially Tal's comments about game 9. The two players had a postmortem. With respect to a crucial position that arose in the game, Tal writes that he began describing his thought process; it comprised a mountain of "I do this; he does that..." Botvinnik in turn replied that HIS thought was simply that the position was better with queens off the board! Startled, Tal at first found Botvinnik's approach to be "too abstract." But later, after further examination of the position, Tal was duly impressed.
|
