Do you have the cd, Martinbeaver? If so, what's your opinion. De la Maza devotes a few pages to books and cd's which he dismisses for one reason or another. Of the Renko cd he says CTARTS is "head and shoulders" above it (and others), without explaining why. I would think it's a great idea to include tactics which win pieces or pawns instead of mating all the time. I would like to know the reason why it doesn't measure up to Renko's cd. Also, why couldn't CTARTS have a little box to check if a mating combination didn't exist? A lot of time when I'm playing I'll have plenty of pieces buzzing around my opponent's king, but the more i study it the more i realize there's no mate. So I have to settle back and (hopefully) start grinding him down to an endgame. My opinion hasn't changed: the closer a series of exercises is to OTB, the more valuable it is for OTB improvement. Makes sense doesn't it?
Originally posted by buddy2According to Jeremy Silman, who is worth a lot more, credibility-wise, De la Maza should be taken with a heavy grain of salt.
De la Maza devotes a few pages to books and cd's which he dismisses for one reason or another. [/b]
http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_js/js_rapid_chess_improv.htm
Originally posted by buddy2Sure makes a lot of sense.I recommend the Tasc Chess CD to you.A 5 step chess tutorial.Includes Chessica for windows(chessplaying engine).Real game situations,lots of tactics,middlegames,endgames.
Do you have the cd, Martinbeaver? If so, what's your opinion. De la Maza devotes a few pages to books and cd's which he dismisses for one reason or another. Of the Renko cd he says CTARTS is "head and shoulders" above it (and others), without explaining why. I would think it's a great idea to include tactics which win pieces or pawns instead of matin ...[text shortened]... s of exercises is to OTB, the more valuable it is for OTB improvement. Makes sense doesn't it?
I'd say a shared 1st place with CT-art.
Great stuff!
Just type Tasc Chess cd in google to check it out.
Sir Lot.
Originally posted by SirLoseALotI'd even say that if you want to learn how to play chess, that Tasc course is superior to CT-Art, as it gradually introduces strategical themes too. The steps seem to be aimed at producing fast results in your play. But CT-Art and the Renko CD are excellent companions to the Tasc course. I'd recommend using them both at the same time to any novice who wishes to improve.
I recommend the Tasc Chess CD to you.A 5 step chess tutorial.Includes Chessica for windows(chessplaying engine).Real game situations,lots of tactics,middlegames,endgames.
I'd say a shared 1st place with CT-art.
Great stuff!
Sir Lot.
David
Originally posted by buddy2I would guess because of the interface. CT-art has an interface that makes it easy to keep track of where you are in the training and what your results are. Renko's intensive course tactics is basically a collection of databases of examples of tactics, sorted by theme. It's a lot easier to set up a drill schedule like de la Maza's with CT-Art then it is with Renko's. That's probably why I use CT-Art far more often too, even though I think Renko's cd has richer content.
Anybody know why de la Maza would say CT art is "head and shoulders" above Renko? This is addressed to those that might have both. Thanks.