I just got this book a couple days ago...
I liked the opening section on endgames. I never knew about opposition... Can anyone recommend a good ending book?
Anyway, Chapter 2, "Imbalances and the Silman Technique', starts of quite promising-- the various types of imbalances make sense to me. Unfortunately, he may have lost me at fantasy positions.
I can see the value in envisioning ideal positions but I don't see how it helped in his example game. In his example, he spends a lot of time explaining the ideal positions for black and white, an exercise I thought was interesting. However, it turns out that neither player reached anything close to resembling the fantasy positions.
I guess the reason is that, since white's plan was faster than black's, that black decided to prevent white from reaching his fantasy postion. Is that the point of the chapter? It seems little strange to present the 'Silman Thinking Technique' and then not really use it.
Comments?
awsome book, havnt read it all but i own it... the fantasy thing is cool, its not a position that could easily be reached, as they only move one piece of the enemy and completly mix his around....its good for trying to get the main structures of the position...kinda hard to explain, i think silman does it good...i like the part about never giving in, and he beats someone down that did an emotional move..
I like his book. It forces me to think in another way when I have a board in front of me.
When the only thing hindering me to mate my opponent would be if his knight would be in an particular position - what about if I lure him away, even if I have to sacrifice something unimportant. This is how far my ability goes following the book of Silman, by evision an ideal postion, not yet reached.
If I had some 300 points above my todays rating - perhaps I would understand the book better...
Originally posted by FabianFnasI just finished a read through without board, and now going back and reading slowly. In a strange way I am playing worse, as I adjust to thinking about imbalances, figuring which section of the board it makes sense to play in, etc. Missing the concrete while thinking about abstract, strategy now, instead of just tactics...
I like his book. It forces me to think in another way when I have a board in front of me.
When the only thing hindering me to mate my opponent would be if his knight would be in an particular position - what about if I lure him away, even if I have to sacrifice something unimportant. This is how far my ability goes following the book of Silman, by evis ...[text shortened]...
If I had some 300 points above my todays rating - perhaps I would understand the book better...
Good book.
Originally posted by violinpatrickI don't think silman himself is visualizing ideal positions in his head, and then trying to find the moves that get there.
I just got this book a couple days ago...
I liked the opening section on endgames. I never knew about opposition... Can anyone recommend a good ending book?
Anyway, Chapter 2, "Imbalances and the Silman Technique', starts of quite promising-- the various types of imbalances make sense to me. Unfortunately, he may have lost me at fantasy positions.
ange to present the 'Silman Thinking Technique' and then not really use it.
Comments?
according to silman, you dream of a position, you try to work your way out there by calculation, and if you can't, then get another dream position, and calculate again. again if you can't get there, calculate again, etc. It's so unrealistic. If any single player uses that technique in an otb game for every move, the result would be too bad.
probably he supposes patzers are so stupid that they cannot make abstract plans, so comes up with an idea that makes the process of planning seemingly concrete.
I think sticking with the analysis of imbalances and trying to figure out the correct (and still abstract) plans is good enough.
by the way, the idea of breaking a position into imbalances is excellent to my opinion. That's what I do in RHP games. Right after the opening, I spend half an hour to write down the imbalances.
However, he skips colour complexes and important diagonals in his imbalances list.
(by abstract plans, I mean ideas like "I got to get my queenside pawns rolling" and "the d file is soon getting open, I should place my rook there in a couple of moves", etc. If you follow Silman, you have to dream of a position where the pawns are already moved, and the d file is open, and the rook is at d1. it's almost funny.)
Originally posted by diskamylWow way to completely miss the point of the book AND come off as a completely arrogant ass. Congratulations... that takes talent.
I don't think silman himself is visualizing ideal positions in his head, and then trying to find the moves that get there.
according to silman, you dream of a position, you try to work your way out there by calculation, and if you can't, then get another dream position, and calculate again. again if you can't get there, calculate again, etc. It's so unr ...[text shortened]... ract plans, so comes up with an idea that makes the process of planning seemingly concrete.
Originally posted by Leaadaswhat's arrogant in that post?
Wow way to completely miss the point of the book AND come off as a completely arrogant ass. Congratulations... that takes talent.
I think the point of the book is to break down a position to its imbalances, and I told in my post that that idea was excellent.
you're being ass yourself by calling people ass.
Originally posted by diskamylI don't know... how about the whole patzer thing? Whether you intended it or not, that comment comes off as you thinking you are better than lower rated people and you are looking down your nose at them.
what's arrogant in that post?
I think the point of the book is to break down a position to its imbalances, and I told in my post that that idea was excellent.
you're being ass yourself by calling people ass.
Originally posted by Leaadasno, actually my intention was the opposite. I consider myself as a patzer, and I think Silman looks down his nose at them. not throughout the whole book of course, (as I said, I like the book and I try to use the techniques in the book in my RHP games), but with the fantasy position advice.
I don't know... how about the whole patzer thing? Whether you intended it or not, that comment comes off as you thinking you are better than lower rated people and you are looking down your nose at them.
one thing I missed though, the fantasy position is more realistic in the endgame and may actually be helpful. but I think it's nowhere near being helpful in in the opening or the middlegame.
Originally posted by Leaadasof course, as a man, he could be the kindest person in the world. I'm not judging his personality, nor the whole book. just the idea behind advising to dream of a fantasy position and trying to achieve it by calculation. I think it's a pedagogical "tactic" to try to make the patzer understand the process of planning. which, could be done by simply advising to think abstractly about the position in sentences. that's why I think he underestimates the abstract thinking capabilities of patzers.
Well you would be wrong. Having met the man I can tell you he doesn't. Or didn't when he wrote the book.
Originally posted by diskamylRemember, Silman thinks himself as a bad player, which is interesting considering his success
no, actually my intention was the opposite. I consider myself as a patzer, and I think Silman looks down his nose at them. not throughout the whole book of course, (as I said, I like the book and I try to use the techniques in the book in my RHP games), but with the fantasy position advice.
one thing I missed though, the fantasy position is more realisti ...[text shortened]... ly be helpful. but I think it's nowhere near being helpful in in the opening or the middlegame.
Originally posted by LeaadasI believe he stopped competing around 2004 but I'm not positive. I have tried the fantasy positions and it is very difficult. What I typically do in a serious game is this:
Does Silman still compete? Or does he just write full time now?
Note imbalances, threats, etc.
Look into any forcing lines and exchanges concretely.
Look to see if I can use any of the imbalances.
Look to see if I can improve any of my pieces.
Note that this isn't practical unless you have at least 1 hour for the entire game.
Originally posted by zebanoI don't find the fantasy position thing that hard really. That said I think one of the big things I did learn about chess from reading hits book was noting the imbalances and trying to improve mine while limiting my oppenants.
I believe he stopped competing around 2004 but I'm not positive. I have tried the fantasy positions and it is very difficult. What I typically do in a serious game is this:
Note imbalances, threats, etc.
Look into any forcing lines and exchanges concretely.
Look to see if I can use any of the imbalances.
Look to see if I can improve any of my pieces.
Note that this isn't practical unless you have at least 1 hour for the entire game.