Rating: 
Summary: Great book
Review: Don't listen to the critics. Don't even ignore them! (Samuel Goldwyn).
For any chess fan, you MUST own this collection of books. Kasparov's love of chess and chess history comes through like a beacon in the writing.
I love chess, and am a 2100 player, but let's face it, READING the words in chess books is usually a big bore. This one (and volume 2), I read over and over again. It's one of the few chess books that one can read for the words, not just the games.
And I love his verbal descriptions of the games; the games literally come to life in my mind, battles between 2 human beings, not just abstract moves on a chess board. This is the true value of the book. Kasparov has captured the human element of the history of chess, like no other chess writer before him. The critics have completely missed this aspect of the writing, preferring instead to concentrate on an error in analysis twelve moves deep into the third side variation.
Errors in analysis? I'm sure. Big deal. Anyone looking for final truth, take up philosophy and religion not chess.
Kasparov didn't write it all? Who cares? Maybe the maid wrote some of it. Whoever wrote it did a darned fabulous job!
Some eccentric opinions? Hey, I lived through the age of Fischer (and the borough he came from), so there's no way Kasparov can take the claim of tops in eccentricity. And anyway, does anyone expect anything else from a chessplayer? It's part of the romance of the chess culture. If you want dry, noncontroversial statements, go listen to a politician, don't come to the chessworld.
To sum up, BUY THIS BOOK. I cannot see a chess fan being disappointed, especially given the reasonable price. I can't wait for the future volumes to come out.
Rating: 
Summary: Instant Classic ... or just a lot of "hoop-la?"
Review: First I should let you know that I am a chess master ... and that I have made my income mostly from chess for over 10 years now. I also have one of the world's biggest and best private (chess) web sites. (Many of my long reviews are posted there.) This is a widely acclaimed book, it has generated a lot of fervor in the press. I have had the book now for almost a month; it is no exaggeration to say that I could not put it down for the first two weeks or so. I should inform you that it is an unfortunate fact of life that most of the (chess) books coming out of the old/former Soviet Union are "ghost-written" by minor players, trainers, etc. And if you check the dust-jacket, you will see that D. Plisetsky (and friends?) had a large hand in writing this book. And we are never really sure how much of the writing here is actually Garry Kasparov's work. I hate to say it, but this book is positively riddled with errors. Kingston, Winter, and others have already pointed out numerous errors in their book reviews on the Internet - there is no need for me to delve into them here. (Except for the fact that Morphy did NOT "settle" in New York, as the authors here claim.) There are also MANY analytical errors, I found some in nearly every game that I examined!! For example: Take the game Pillsbury - Lasker; Cambridge Springs, 1904. After the move 21...Qc5!; we find the note: "But not 21...Rc8; 22.Qd4, Bc6; 23.Rxf6+!" The move ...Rc8; is one of the main tries here for Black. But 22.Qd4? is probably the SECOND or THIRD best move here. And 22...Bc6?? is simply a terrible move, it changes the computer's evaluations - FOR THE WORSE - by at least 5-to-10 points! (Forced was 22...Qd5; or even 22...Rxc4.) In fact the analysis of this encounter is SO bad, I only have to assume that the computer was not used ... or was turned off! (The publisher's website tells us every single move was meticulously computer checked, Kasparov himself affirms this in the intro/forward of this book.) There are many other problems with this book as well. I would have expected to see all the best games of the four World Champions examined in detail - but this is not the case. Many of their losses are examined as well. In some cases you could say that the author was simply trying to be fair and that we are trying to get a balanced look at these players strengths and weaknesses. But in other cases, (Tchigorin - Gunsberg); I can find no relevant rationale for the inclusion of these games ... except that in many cases, these are famous games, and the author simply wanted to take a whack at them! (A definite lack of focus in a volume of this size.) Another major gaffe in a book of this size is NO bibliography. We may only scratch our heads and wonder at the author's sources. There are also ... TOO MANY QUESTION MARKS!!! I often wondered if Garry is even capable of being fair and objective - especially as concerns these older games. (How many of these new moves would have been discovered at all - except for the invention of the computer?) By now, you might be thinking I hated this book. I actually liked it a lot. But I am just not sure if I can recommend this book to the average chess player, with the number of flaws that I know it contains. It is a real pity too, as with a little more work and some careful editing, this could have been a real landmark of chess literature.
Rating:
Summary: Kasparov scores KO
Review: I have all of the "My Great Predecessors" books and I love them. I am an 1800 rated player and have studied Morphy, Capablanca, Tal, and Fischer in detail. I think it's important to study the World Champions to improve. To have the greatest chess player of all time review the styles and achievements of the past champions is a real treat. It's interesting to see how chess developed over time and to see how the champions improved the skill levels of all players. There has been alot of drama concerning some of Kasparovs analysis. He used a computer to check his own brain. The endgame analysis is very creative and it's clear that Kasparov is untouchable here. He gives many ideas and always gives his strongest continuation. The positions in the middle game are very sharp and I believe Gary enjoys the challenge as he weeds through the complications with great detail. Some of his solutions are very surprising and I always wonder what the World Champions of the time would have thought. It takes alot of courage to even attempt what Garry has done but I am grateful that he gave it an honest shot. In chess books there are always some errors. These come out over time and people like to throw daggers at the author. I believe when all is said and done the series "My Great Predcessors" will stand as a Great achievement by the Greatest of all time. I highly recommend this series be added to any serious chess players library. It's almost as good as "My best games of chess" by Mikhail Tal. A book I read so much it fell apart!
Rating:
Summary: Are You a Chess Fan?
Review: I haven't penetrated very far into this book, but I'm enjoying it immensely. I've been a chess fan for sixty years (Elo rating of about 1700), and never tire of reading "inside stories" of the great players of the past -- their lives and their games.
There's lots of background and "stuff" about Steinetz, Lasker, Capa, and Alekhine. There's lots on their contemporaries, giving me an excellent feeling for the chess world of those days. Did Garry actually write every word? I don't know, but the answer isn't as important to me as the fact that the detailed accounts and quotes are fascinating.
There are many many annotated games and positions by the 4 champions, their contemporaries, and other great players. The annotations are extensive and typographically clear. Are they all absolutely correct? Are there any glaring errors? I don't know and I don't really care. I'm not using this book to prepare for a grandmaster match. In fact, I'm not using this book to prepare for anything! I'm reading and playing over the games just for fun. I own a library of hundreds of chess books, and this is a great book for having fun. Buy it and enjoy it! And if your thing is searching for errors in the third note to move 47, I guess you can do that too.
Rating: 
Summary: Very Good
Review: I just finished volume 1. I found this to be a great book. The selection of games is excellent; Kasparov's idea for the book of paralleling the history of the championship with the ongoing development of the game itself is a good one. This is a highly entertaining as well as educational chess book. It is important to note that the errors in analysis are NOWHERE near as numerous or egregious as other reviews would lead you to believe. I have studied the annotations in detail, many of them with my computer, and found only a small number of (for the most part inconsequential) oversights. The only minus is the insistent psychobabble of placing each champion "in the context of his times," which is just a bunch meaningless nonsense. (Anybody who thinks they found 20 analysis errors in one game has made at least 19 blunders.)
Rating:
Summary: Cant anyone produce a good chess book anymore?
Review: I regret purchasing this book- I hesitated at first- I didnt want to buy it- I suspected the analysis was superficial and flawed- I bought the book anyway only to realize my fears were correct- the book is riddled with errors in the analysis of the games. I have placed my copy back on my shelf rather than continue to read this book. The good point about the book is that it presents a seamless history of chess from 1850-1940, with the games of slightly lesser players chronologically mixed in with the games of the world champions. But the game analysis is useless- I cant trust Kasparov's annotations and thats why I shelved the book. John Nunn's Secrets of Grandmaster Play (Batsford 1987) is ten times better than Kasparov's new book. Kasparov has reached the level of a hack writer, to join the ranks of such superficial analysis as most American writers. I dont trust much of the published chess analysis these days anyway, as much of it is meant to deceive future opponents of the author- a practicing Grandmaster is not going to reveal ANY chess secrets in some mass-produced publicly available chess book.
Rating:
Summary: A magnificent book not to be missed.
Review: I'm not usually given to writing rave reviews, and of course this book has its "errors and omissions," but what great book or piece of artwork does not? I have had this book for about a week now and find it very hard to put down. The story is gripping and the game annotations are brilliantly insightful. If you ever wonder why you waste so much time on chess when you are never going to be a professional, read this book. It is a timeless work of art. The time you have spent developing your ability to understand and appreciate both the artistry and sporting element of chess is rewarded with a book like this. It is also a far better book for "club players" than yet another "author's best games" collection full of complex modern games that most of us can't hope to really comprehend and get much out of. Though if Kasparov annotates his games in the future volumes in the same manner as the game annotations in this volume, we will be in for something very special. I have also read some of the nit-picking criticisms (including those of Kingston and Winter) posted on the web and, in my opinion, they completely miss the forest for the trees. Who really cares whether Capa's wife was actually at his bedside or outside the hospital when he died (other than his wife of course!)? It certainly wouldn't change the main thread of the story one iota. Nothing I saw in their criticisms would have made much if any difference to the book. They treat the book as an academic history, but it is not. It is a book for chess players and chess fans, not academics, and on that front it succeeds brilliantly. A little poetic license seems justified in making a story about chess players playing chess so gripping! The same can be said of the criticisms of the annotations. The witty, opinionated, personal insights of Kasparov are, in my mind, of far more value than anything anyone else can come up with, even if they run Fritz until doomsday. The only problems I have with the book are: 1) I don't have GK's personal signature on my copy (!), and 2) I can't wait to get my paws on parts 2, 3 ... Compare this book with Euwe's book on The Development of Chess Style and you will understand what a great book this is. If I were stranded on a desert island, Kasparov's book is the one I would want with me.
Rating:
Summary: Kasparov is still Champ!
Review: I'm on page 175 and I've caught only 2 mistakes in analysis, using a fritz engine. This is amazingly good for such a large book, I love Kasparov's insights and interpretations. If you play chess, you must own this book, no exceptions.
Rating:
Summary: Different recommendations for different audiences
Review: If you are very serious and/or accomplished in your chess, say, rated 2000 (US) or above, stop reading this review and buy every book in the Great Predecessors series.
If you rated between , say, 1400 and 1999, you will have difficulty plugging through the analysis (Kasparov is sparse in giving explanation; rather focusing on giving additional analysis instead of explaining the analysis he already gave) , especially if you expect Kasparov to lead you by the hand through his analysis. He doesn't do that. But even studying the main lines of the games is instructive. Only examining the lines with minimal variations and/or paragraph explanations would also be indicated.
If you are rated between 0 and 1399, or are a casual player, the annotations in this book will be beyond you. Even still, playing over the games, examining only textual annotation (omit all variations, unless very short; 2 or 3 moves) , will be helpful.
As a review of chess history, this is a delightful read for all ages and abilities.
Kasparov's series of books is essentially the history of chess, given through the lives, careers, and games of its greatest players (the world champions) and the best players of the various eras never to have won the world championship. (Tarrasch, Nimzowitsch, Chigorin in this book, for example.)
As chess books go, this is an expensive book. This should be mentioned, and I don't think many other reviewers have mentioned that.
Rating:
Summary: Chess history
Review: In-depth analysis of the best games of Morphy, Steinitz, Lasker, Rubinstein, Nimzovitsch, Capablanca, Alekhine, Chigorin and Tarrasch! About 120 complete games and a couple dozen game fragments. Wow!
|
