Shifting Focus

{Coincidentally, in an interesting example of parallel evolution, there seem to be many other bloggers that have recently taken self-improvement much more seriously as well. Check out Blunderprone's blog for more info on his ACIS (Adult Chess Improvement Seekers) movement.}

 For the last while I've been content to learn more about chess –endings, opening repertoire, reading some of the classic game collections such as Alekhine's NY 1924 and Nottingham 1936 tournament books, and Botvinnik's 100 Selected Games, etc. However, as I enter my 40^th year of existence, I look at the sidebar of this blog ("hopes to become a B-class player before senility sets in") and the subtitle ("Do as I Say, Not As I Do") and have decided to do more of what I say.

For me, I identified the following areas as needing the most improvement:

Read more »

A Gem of an Endgame Book

Back at my first chess club we had a National Master, originally from Russia, that gave group lessons. He would set up positions for us to play against him, and then we would discuss what was played and what proper play would have been. Many of these lessons were on endgame technique. At least one group member questioned the value of the lessons, along the lines of: "What are the odds that I'll see this position in my own games? Maybe I should just work on my openings." I, however, felt I really "got" what the instructor was doing and why.

I have been working through Chess Endgame Training by Bernd Rosen, and I'm strongly reminded of these group sessions from years ago. This endgame book, while instructive on its own, is actually structured pedagogically so that an instructor can use the material in their own group lessons. The bulk of the book consists of the positions and their analysis, with the final section of the book giving advice on how to teach the material.

I am about halfway through this book, and I am completely enthralled by it. This review from Chesscafe.com struck me as being relatively accurate, but lukewarm. In particular, this book is not intended to be the first endgame book you ever read. However, I would say that players class C and above that have already spent time covering endgame basics can get a lot out of this book.

First, let's look at the breakdown of chapters:

• 6 chapters on pawn endgames
• 1 chapter each on knight, bishop, and bishop vs. knight endgames
• 4 chapters on rook endgames
• 2 chapters on queen endings
• 1 chapter to test your knowledge

plus the final chapter on Advice for Teachers. This may seem heavily weighed towards pawn and rook endgames, but I think that this is justified. Pawn endgames serve as a foundation for other endgames (for example, you always have to consider possible transitions from an unclear piece endgame to a concrete pawn endgame). I also think that pawn endgames are more coachable than the others, and that they are good tools for practicing visualization and the calculation of variations. Rook endgames are the most common endgame in practice, and are technically demanding, so emphasis there is warranted.

Each chapter contains roughly 8 easier problems and 8 tougher problems. What makes this book special for me is how the more advanced problems are related to the easier. The author is making connections between the classic endgame positions that you may have seen time and again to more complex positions that resemble actual games. Someone casually flipping through the book in a book store may think that this is old material. For example, many of the positions in the first two pawn chapters are old chestnuts. However, dig deeper and you'll see the author bringing in fresh material (fresh to me, at least) that extrapolate from these basic concepts.

The end result is an endgame book that, in a relatively concise manner, manages to both cover the essential basics of endgames and provide examples to challenge good endgame players. I would estimate that players from Class C to Class A can benefit from this book. Weaker endgame players will find many of the endings difficult, and stronger ones will find much of the beginner material obvious, but there is a lot of middle ground here. The easier positions demonstrate standard endgame techniques, but many of the harder positions demonstrate that sometimes there's no substitute for brute-force calculation.

I'm going to share a handful of the many endgames from Chess Endgame Training that, to me, shone like jewels. I've struggled with what to include here, since there is so much to enjoy. The following are taken from the first four chapters. I'm going to show a basic endgame, followed by a more advanced endgame of the same theme. In some cases I've truncated the analysis--in part for brevity, and in part because I want to encourage people to check out Rosen's book themselves. I've also added my own comments and analysis in places. Once again, I'm trying to cleave closely to the Nunn Convention for annotating endgames, so you will see a lot of "!"...there's not much room for error in these endgames.

Chapter 1 covers the square of the pawn, the opposition, waiting moves, and key squares. For this introductory chapter, all of the examples look like standard positions you'd find in endgame manuals, so I've selected a pair that demonstrate the opposition.

1.6
Black to move

This is a standard position on opposition. Its position in the chapter (1.6) places it on the more difficult side of the "easy" half. I think that this is a good test to see if Rosen's book may be for you. If this position elicits a "yeah, yeah, I know how this position is played, with either side to move, and can do it in my sleep", then you're ready for this book.

(The solution is 1...Kd8! taking the distant opposition, e.g. 2.Kd5 Kd7! 3.Ke5 Ke7!).

1.13
Kranki-W. Lange, Bad Oeynhausen 1940
Black to move

Although this position looks like a study, it's taken from an actual game. This is a great example of how the opposition is used to invade and capture your opponent's pawns. It's pretty obvious that Black needs to seize the opposition, but less obvious to see how they can penetrate. If you still don't have a feel for how to use the opposition, this could be a good position to play against the computer.

1... Kg2! seizes the opposition 2. Kc3 (2. Kc1 was played by Fritz vs. me: ...Kf3! 3. Kd2 Kf2! 4. Kc2 Ke2! 5. Kc3 Kd1! 6. Kd3 Kc1! 7. Kc3 Kb1! 8. Kd3 Kb2! 9. Kd2 Kxb3!) 2... Kf1! the only move that doesn't cede the opposition 3. Kd2 (3. Kd3 Ke1! 4. Ke3 Kd1!
5. Kd3 Kc1! 6. Kc3 Kb1! Note the theme of "scraping off" the opponent's king on a barrier such as a pawn or an attacked square, causing them to lose the opposition) 3... Kf2! 4. Kd3 Ke1! 5. Ke4 Kd2 6. Kd5 Kc3 7. Kc6 Kxb3! 0-1

The next three positions from Chapter 2 demonstrate body-checks and the opposition. The first is a standard position you'll find in many books:

2.5
Schlage-Ahues, Berlin 1921
White to move

1. Ke6! Kc3 2. Kd5! the body-check (in the actual game, 2. Kd6? led to an instructive draw: Kd4! 3. Kc6 Ke5! 4. Kb7 Kd6! 5. Kxa7 Kc7!= A standard technique in K+RP vs. K endgames) 2... Kb4 3. Kc6! Ka5 4. Kb7! Kb5 5. Kxa7! Kc6 6. Kb8!+-

However, the next two are far from obvious:

2.10
White to move

Seizing the opposition with 1.Kd5? draws, as does 1.Ke5? and 1.f4?. However, 1.Kd4! wins by force (see Rosen for details, or play this against a chess engine).

2.11
White to move

A common theme in pawn endgames is defending from the rear. For example, 1. Kc3? Kg4 2. Kd4 Kf4! 3. Kxd5 Ke3!=. White has to take a more coy approach to winning the pawn:
1. Kb4! Kg4 2. Kc5! Kf4 3. Kd4!+-

I feel these last two endgames demonstrate a point: sometimes there's no substitute for calculation. Some people prefer books that help them "understand the ideas" behind endgames, openings and whatnot, and certainly there are standard endgame positions where such commentary is helpful. On the other hand, there are endgames where rules of thumb and pattern recognition are actually detrimental. For example, in 2.10 using intuition and taking the opposition is wrong.

The next two examples from Chapter 3 cover the protected passed pawn:

3.2
White to move

1. h6! Kf8 2. g5! creates a protected passer 2...Kg8 (2... f5 3. gxf6! Kf7 4. h7!+-) 3. Kd2! (3. Kc2? The king cannot dilly-dally; the passed pawn doesn't win on its own: 3...Kh7! 4. Kd3 f6=) 3... Kh7 4. Ke3! f6 5. gxf6! Kxh6 6. Kf4! g5+ 7. Kf5 Kh7 (7... g4 8. Ke6! g3 9. f7! g2
10. f8=Q+!+-) 8. Kxg5 Kh8 9. Kh6 +-

3.14
White to play

1. b4! creates a passed pawn (1. Ke2? Ke7 2. Kf3 Ke6 3. Kxf4 Kd5=) In the pawn race that follows, both sides queen but White can win by force. However, this is not something that I would care to have to play over the board! 1... Ke7! (1... axb4 2.
a5 +-) 2. b5! Kd6 and the main line, stripped of Rosen's analysis, runs 3. Ke2 Ke6 4. Kf3 Ke5 5. Kg4 Ke4 6. b6 f3 7. Kg3 Ke3 8. b7 f2 9. b8=Q f1=Q 10. Qe5+ Kd2 11. Qxa5+ Kd1 12. Qd5+ Kc1 13. Qc5+ Kd1 14. Qd4+ Kc2 15. Qf2+ +-

One of the most useful chapters for me dealt with separated, isolated, passed pawns. Rosen did an excellent job presenting rules for determining whether such positions are a draw or not.

4.2
Black to play

Rosen's rules indicate that here the pawns cannot defend themselves on their own: 1... Kh5! threatens to capture on h4 and still remain in the square of the e4 pawn 2. e5 now 2...Kxh4? would be a mistake, but 2...Kg6! switches the attack to the lead pawn: 3. Kg2 Kf5! 4. h5 Kxe5!=

Here again, Rosen takes basic endgame examples (here: separated, isolated passed pawns) and extrapolates to more complicated scenarios:

4.16
White to move

The first stage is a Reti-style manoeuvre (pursuing two objectives at once): 1. Kg3! a5 2. Kf4! a4 3. Ke5! White's king couldn't get into the square of the a-pawn, but by threatening to it got close enough to its own passed pawns. 3...Kg7 (3... a3 4. Kf6! a2 5. g7+! Kxh7 6.Kf7! a1=Q 7. g8=Q+! Kh6 8. Qg6#) 4. Kd4! d5 5. Kc3! +- White can now capture both pawns in the same manner as the previous example.

I hope these examples have whetted your appetite for more. This book is chock-full of positions whose solutions made me think, "whoa, cool!"

In a nutshell, this book impresses me because:

• it relates basic endgame positions and concepts to more complicated and realistic scenarios
• it provides rules and guidelines, yet ultimately reinforces the need to think concretely and analyze accurately
• the careful selection of examples, combined with the chapter "Advice for Teachers", makes this a very good resource for trainers

I highly recommended this book to students that have already studied elementary endgames, and to trainers looking for lecture material.

Important Addition to Marin's A Spanish Repertoire for Black

I think that Marin's two-volume opening repertoire based on 1.e4 e5 (Beating the Open Games and A Spanish Repertoire for Black) is amazing, and packed full of chess knowledge. However, the two books are targeted towards either more-advanced players (particularly the latter), or the ambitious student. They're also directed towards main-line players rather than offbeat-variation players. This means that the reader has to plug a lot of holes themselves, as they find that the opponents they encounter at their level frequently play a line not covered.

I just checked qualitychessbooks.com, and found that a 25-page addendum to ASRFB is available for download in .pdf format. It covers, among other gaps, my biggest problem with that book: no discussion of the departure from the Chigorin mainline with 12.d5 (instead of 12.Nbd2). I see the former more than the latter in my online games, and it's the #2 line by statistics (74 out of 1051 Grandmaster games, according to my home-made opening book; 478 out of 6050 games total).

In other news, it appears that the first volume (BTOG) is about to be reissued as a second edition. When I bought it, it contained a 4-page insert covering two omitted lines. It sounds like a combination of popular demand and reader critique has prompted an upgrade. According to the publisher, it should be out very soon (Spring 2008).

It's annoying when you just buy a book and a new edition comes out shortly after. When the second edition of Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual came out, I decided that I didn't need to worry about the second edition until I completed the first (which is still a loooooong way off). Also, I've heard the quality of print for the second edition of Dvoretsky wasn't as good. However, Marin's BTOG has become indispensable for me, so I'm looking forward to seeing what's been added in the second edition.

Real chess players will roll their eyes because I've held Dvoretsky on the back burner while salivating over an upgrade to an opening book. Well, like the banner says: Do as I Say, Not as I Do.

How to Prepare an Opening, Part One

I am going to demonstrate a thought process that would result in choosing the main line (closed) Spanish (a.k.a. Ruy Lopez) for both white and black. The Spanish is a good choice for this demonstration, because the main line for both sides up to move 9 or so is fairly clear. It also happens to coincide (mostly) with what I play myself, so I can pretend to speak with some authority. Finally, I suspect most amateurs have at least some familiarity with the opening. This is good, because I want people to focus on the thought process behind constructing the repertoire, rather than the opening itself.

Part One is just an introduction to the process. I imagine many people reading this won't find the first 5 moves of the Spanish too mysterious. The next post in the series will be more advanced, and show how you can, with a little research, come up with your own pet lines to surprise your opponents. After that, I hope to show a real-world example of opening preparation, where an opponent's odd treatment of the Nimzo-Indian demonstrates how opening books can lead you into a dead end. Even people that have played the Nimzo for years may learn something there. So, if this post strikes you as "baby talk", bear with me. I'm hoping by the end of the series that most readers have learned a thing or two.

Let's consider the first move for White. From general opening principles, you want to control the center and open lines for your pieces to come out. To me, the most natural moves are 1.d4 and 1.e4. Other moves such as 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 are perfectly acceptable, but they don't have the clear idea behind them that 1.d4 and 1.e4 do. From my own experience, and from the opinions of many chess trainers, I would say 1.e4 is the best choice for developing players. Just consider this advice (and other opinions that follow) as a "tie-breaker". If you did choose 1.d4, the only warning I'd have is not to play some system like the Colle or Stonewall that lead to stereotyped play. In the short term they may save you time by avoiding theory, but in the long term I feel they'll hold back your chess progression.

Similar logic applies to choosing 1...e5 as black. You may find that you like other moves better. Just be sure you understand the reason behind your favorite move. For example, the Scandinavian (1...d5) may be an acceptable opening but it's not intuitively a good opening move. It violates basic opening principles, because after 2.exd5 Qxd5 your queen will be chased around, and with 2...Nf6 you are down a pawn. I now know that the Caro-Kann (1...c6) and French (1...e6) tend to result in a limited number of pawn structures that trap your pieces behind light-squared pawns, so I would steer away from those (my cautionary tale can be found in this post). However, if you understand those moves and like them, go for it.

To me, 1...e5 feels the best. It's good for the same reasons 1.e4 was: it contests the center, and opens lines for the development of the king's bishop (which will get you closer to castling) and the queen. Finally, it discourages an immediate 2.d4 by White. In any opening, if White gets two pawns at d4 and e4 without some serious concession it suggests Black was too passive.

I suspect a lot of readers are already familiar with this principle. After 1.e4, White wants to achieve 1.d4 to dominate the center, and Black wants to prevent it; after 1.d4, White wants to get 1.e4 in. Black would also like to achieve this, but it's less likely. Yet if you go over your games, I'm sure you'll find examples where after weak opening play these basic ideas are forgotten. I'm going to assume an understanding of the importance of the center in this post.

(Aside: At the time I write this, I am about two thirds the way through Marin's Beating the Open Games, which is a repertoire for Black after 1.e4 e5 and handles White's systems that avoid the Spanish before 4...a6 Ba4. This is hands-down the most instructive repertoire book I've ever encountered. It's so well written, and so objective, you could go a long way towards choosing your white repertoire by looking at what Marin considers the more difficult lines. My attitude towards some of these White options has changed from "boring", or "inferior but annoying", to "I wouldn't mind giving that a shot!" I'm looking forward to his sequel, which will handle the main-line Spanish portion of the repertoire. )

After 1.e4 e5, 2.d4 would produce the classic d4/e4 center, but it would be immediately destroyed, e.g. 2...exd4 3.Qxd4 Nc6, and so would be suspicious based on basic opening principles. So, what moves feel good here? At this point, you could see what the most popular moves at this point are to help guide you. For this demonstration I'll use Chessbase to see what the most popular moves are. References such as this, or your chess program's opening book, a one-volume book such as Nunn's Chess Openings (NCO), or whatever, are only being used as a guideline...they'll either confirm that your choice is playable, or serve as a warning that it might not be such a good idea. I made an opening book from the games of players rated 2400 or higher, to see what the "big boys" like to play. Here's the number of occurrences of the top 5 choices for White's second move:

Nf3 34110
Bc4 1054
Nc3 780
f4 565
d4 156

Again, realizing 2.Nf3 is the most popular continuation here is not earth-shattering in itself. Determining what's "popular" will be used for a couple reasons in my tutorial. Here, it's a tip-off as to what the "best" moves are and helping us to feel good about our choice. We're also going to use popularity to determine what the main lines are for our opponent so that we know which lines to learn first.

One notable exception from the above list is 2.c3. It's logical to think, "OK, I'm going to prepare d2-d4 by playing c2-c3 first". It makes sense. It can lead to a Ponziani-type opening, and was played by Morphy, but no GMs seem to play it. Let's say this was your favorite move at this point. You can either decide to make it your repertoire move, or you can try to understand why it's not popular. First, it moves another pawn instead of developing a piece, so on general principles that may not feel as good. Second, it now makes 2...d5 a decent move for Black, because after 3.exd5 Qxd5 the queen can't be harassed by 4.Nc3. In other words, c3 took away a natural developing square for the b1 N. So, you're letting Black get feisty in the center. If, after that explanation, you still like c3, then go for it...it was good enough for Morphy. If you progress to the point where your opponents are punishing you in the opening, you may decide that c3 isn't your favorite move after all.

Going through the other main moves: 2.f4 loses a pawn to 2...exd4. The King's Gambit is a real opening, but it's tactically complex and not a "common sense" opening. Odds are, if you were looking at the chessboard and knew nothing about openings, you'd consider 2.f4 a blunder (drops a pawn, exposes your king, and doesn't develop a piece). 2.Nc3 doesn't help you play d4, and doesn't get you any closer to kingside castling. Bc4 violates the guideline of developing knights before bishops. Of course, this isn't a guideline to be adhered to slavishly, but it's one that makes sense. Usually, it's clearer where you want to put your knights than your bishops, so it makes sense to delay it for a bit. Do I want to play the bishop to c4? b5? Let's see what Black does first. So, that brings us to 2.Nf3, the clear favorite. It develops a N, gets you closer to kingside castling, and supports d4.

Even if you're using a repertoire book for guidance, follow this thought process so that, at the very least, you've justified their move choice. If you think about the move for a bit, you're helping to transfer this move from short-term to long-term memory. I strongly recommend using an actual chess board, because I find it assists with this transfer.

This same technique of finding the move you like and checking it against the "book" moves is repeated until you've determined what your personal main line will be. For example, for Black we will see that by asking "if my opponent makes the most popular move, what do I want to respond with?" you can arrive at the Spanish main line of 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3 O-O 9. h3 Bb7. I haven't actually settled on move 9 yet for my own repertoire, but Bb7 completes development (apart from moving the queen off the back rank) and is a good stopping point for these tutorials. This variation, if chosen, would be your foundation, your bedrock, your home turf, the trunk of the tree of variations. This is where you waggle your sword and proclaim, "NONE SHALL PASS!"


Just remember that it's sometimes appropriate to accept a draw as Black:



Back to our exercise in opening preparation:

2...Nc6 protects the pawn and develops a piece at the same time.

Now, if I were creating my own repertoire from scratch again, 3.d4 makes sense here. On basic principles, if pushing d4 is allowed it should be good. If Black exchanges the pawn on d4, a common pawn structure that results is called the "little center" by King and Ponzetto in their book on the Spanish, and is an example of what Kmoch calls a "jump formation":



This good for White because of the space advantage...White is less cramped and has a bit of an easier time than Black. This e4 vs. d5 center is a common feature of 1.e4 e5 openings in general, and explains White's advantage in many of the variations.

It is almost amazing how much of the theory of the Open Games can be figured out by just thinking about the center and the moves e4, d4, ...e5 and ...d5. In this case, following the basic idea of "if I can get away with d2-d4, play it!" results in the perfectly respectable Scotch opening. If you like the logic of 3.d4, and you like the pawn structures that typically arise in the Scotch, then go for it!

Back to White to play for their third move. 3.c3 would be the Ponziani opening. Theory would warn you that it's not the best choice, but it's playable. Here's a case where the guiding hand of theory might lead you to something "stronger", but if you absolutely loved it you could play it.

3.Bc4 develops the bishop to a nice diagonal and prepares castling, but it's less obvious how it addresses the center. It's not helping d2-d4, but it does help thwart d7-d5 and it also targets the sensitive f7 square. I choose 3.Bb5 because it develops the bishop and also weakens Black's control of e5. The latent threat is Bxc6 and Nxe5. This isn't possible right now (for example, 3...a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.Nxe5 Qd4!), but the motif is there.

Black has many, many choices right now. Probably the most intuitive is 3...Nf6, which develops a piece, gets Black closer to castling, and attacks the e4 pawn. 3...d6 protects the e5 pawn and lets the queen bishop out. 3...Bc5 develops the bishop to a good diagonal before it can be imprisoned with d7-d6, and so on. My choice of 3...a6 is not the most intuitive, but it's the most popular. Here, rather than automatically play the "main" move, I've thought about it and have chosen it for my repertoire...I haven't had it chosen for me.

Here, challenging the bishop with ...a6 doesn't cause Black to fall behind in development (you can work this out for yourself). If White captures on c6, Black has gained the two bishops, and if White backs up (e.g. 4.Ba4) Black has turbocharged his queenside advance (...b5 will come soon). In this regard it has some resemblance to the Sicilian Najdorf. Often, wasting time in an opening by pushing a rook's pawn for no good reason is a waste of time (i.e. costs a "tempo"). Here, there are good reasons for pushing the rook's pawn. I am consciously violating a rule of thumb because there are concrete reasons to do so.

As White, I used to play the Exchange with 4.Bxc6 here. You give up the bishop pair but cripple Black's queenside majority. As someone who enjoys endgames,this sounded like a great idea, in theory... limit Black's choices, avoid theory, play positionally. Over time I found that I didn't like how my pieces coordinated, I didn't get endgames as much as I hoped, and most importantly I was missing out on the experience of playing against a variety of pawn structures. I prefer 4.Ba4 now. In both cases, I've said "this is the move that I like to play in this position", not "I don't like that book anymore, so I'm going to play something from this other book because I liked the blurb the publisher put on the back".

At this point, the main move is 4...Nf6, developing a piece, hitting the e4 pawn, and preparing to castle. I like that, so I play it. By the way, if you asked here or on the last move "is ...d5 possible?" the answer would be "not really", but you'll have to figure that out for yourself. Piket actually won a game with 4...d5 here against an IM, so it's not completely wacky, but you've been warned.

After 4...Nf6, White's e-pawn seems like it's in danger of being captured. As white, I currently play 5.Qe2 here to protect it. This is not the main move in this position, but the move makes sense (protects e4, develops the queen, vacates d1 for the king's rook) , and it's the move used in my current repertoire book. Remember: if you splurge on a repertoire book, treat them as menus of suggestions, not orders to follow. I may choose a move that the author recommends, or I may play something I like better. For example, I've gotten a lot of use out of Kaufman's repertoire book (there are very few books that provide white and black repertoires all in one volume) but I've rejected a lot of it for my own repertoire.

The standard move here is 5.0-0, and we'll see that 5.d4 is also possible. At this point there are a lot of move-order issues and unusual sidelines. In Part 2 I'll talk about how to navigate the maze that follows, and possibly help you come up with your own pet weapons to surprise an opponent.

Prelude: Preparing an Opening Repertoire

Part of me is loathe to discuss openings yet again, but I see people tie themselves up in knots over this. I have had a monster tutorial on how to go about opening preparation rolling around my head for some time now, so I'm going to try and spit it out over the next few postings. I wanted to emphasize a few things right off the bat.

The idea is to decide for yourself what you like to play in a position, and keep track of those decisions. Unless you have a photographic memory, this means you need to maintain a record of some sort. If you're "old school", this could even be notebooks or index cards, but if you're reading this it's likely you own a computer, so I'll focus on using one to manage your repertoire.

Programs such as Bookup or the free download Chess Position Trainer allow you to move back and forth through the variations, and will spot transpositions. For example, let's say after you enter 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.Nxe4 you write a note about the Rubinstein variation of the French. If you then enter 3.Nd2 (the Tarrasch variation of the french) dxe4 4.Nxe4 you'll see your previous note and realize that you just transposed out of the Tarrasch and into the Rubinstein. There are other fancy things you can do with such opening databases, like automatically import your internet games for analysis if you want. Bookup has recently been revamped as the Chess Opening Wizard. I'm not ready to plop down money on it when I have the free CPT plus ChessBase 9 at my disposal (as well as the old Bookup Express).

Alternatively you can use software like Fritz, Chessbase (which has a new, free CB Light version) or whatever. I'm sure there's even free software out there that will do the job as well. With these, you would have to save your repertoire as separate lines and variations, so you have to spot transpositions between openings yourself. There's a tutorial here on one method of constructing a repertoire database in this fashion.

The ideal repertoire, in my opinion, consists largely of moves that follow good opening principles, that you consider the best in the position (or that you have come to understand are the best). Theory can help steer you towards more reliable lines, but what's most important is that you like and understand the moves you make. If you do this, memorization is less of an issue. Also, if you're consistently playing the moves you've decided yourself that you like, then there is no need to waffle and hop from opening to opening. If you really think 1.e4 makes more sense than 1.Nf3, then why play the latter? If you think 1...d5 in response to 1.d4 makes more sense than 1...Nf6, then why not play it?.

As I've mentioned in my previous opening guidelines, I would strongly encourage you to choose systems that tend to follow classic opening principles: play just enough pawn moves to get your pieces out, develop your minor pieces (knights before bishops, unless you know what you're doing), castle and connect your rooks. Do so in a manner that gives you a say in what happens in the center. If the "book" opening move violates any of these principles, understand why or play something else. (btw: if you still don't have a good feel for what good opening play is, Emms' Discovering Chess Openings is a terrific book).

Where opening theory is helpful is in guiding you towards good choices and away from bad ones. This way, you don't paint yourself into a corner. If you look at the ground and follow the most attractive path, you may find yourself looking over a cliff. For example, perhaps you may like the Ponziani opening, but theory pooh-poohs it. If you can understand, and agree with, that assessment, you may find that you agree more with the Scotch, Italian or Spanish than the Ponz. On the other hand, if the Ponz move sequence makes sense to you, and you can't understand why they're dissing your opening, then play it. Play your favorite move until you realize and understand that it's inferior. The goal here is to consistently play "your" moves instead of hopping from opening to opening.

Here's a better example of what I mean. I am in the early stages of figuring out what I want to play against the Sicilian. I currently lean towards systems with Bc4 (although I also like the feel of systems based on Be2, Be3 and f4). Here is a standard Sicilian position that arose in an ICC game:


If you crack open a theory book, 7.Bb3 is the overwhelming favorite here, with barely a mention of 7.0-0 except to say that it usually transposes after 7...b5 8.Bb3. So, if I were a lemming theory monkey (hmm... maybe I should avoid metaphors with multiple species) I would move the bishop twice in the opening, play Bb3, and perhaps not even try to find out why the move is played. I would be relying on my memory at this point. In contrast, 7. 0-0 is completely playable, and is the natural developing move. It's not quite that simple...there's actually a lot of interesting material surrounding these two move options that I'm sweeping under the rug, and certain black responses can be met with a rude shock. The point is: 7.0-0 is good, it's natural, the move order subtlety is overlooked in a lot of books and by playing "my move" I have a possibility of surprising my opponent if they play bookish moves robotically. I may have to play Bb3 next move anyway, but I've looked the lines over and decided I'll move it when I have to and no sooner.

I very much like the approach to opening preparation mentioned in Johnsen and Johannessen's book on a Spanish repertoire for black. Study the main line of the opening system you've chosen and try to get a mastery of that line. "Your attitude should be something like this: I may not be a grandmaster in chess, but on this particular branch of the game, I want to be an authority!" For the club player, I'd temper that as "I understand this entire branch up to the end of the opening (pieces out, castled, rooks connected...move 8-12ish) and have an idea about how the middlegame goes from there". As you encounter deviations in your games, determine what you'd play the next time you encountered it and follow the main line from there. One nice thing about Chessbase is that the database statistics can help you find out what the "main" line is.

In the short term, playing simple systems allows you to concentrate on other things such as tactics. However, if you approach opening study the way I recommend, you won't spend much more time studying a main line opening than your pet system. Basically, after you play a game (even internet blitz), look at the opening, see where it leaves theory, and determine what you would like to play the next time you encounter it. Also, make sure you're familiar with the main line itself. Make a record of this line. There, you're done! This automatically keeps your opening study down to the appropriate level. If you play the Spanish as White, for example, you may find that the "minor" 3rd-move deviations such as the Steinitz, Classical and Cozio occur more frequently than the main-line closed Spanish. If you routinely do an opening checkup after each game, you'll consequently be studying the lines that occur in your games the most.

In the long run playing main lines (in my opinion) will be the best for developing your chess. I have read several masters that have said "I would be a better player if I had started playing main lines (the Spanish is a common one that comes up in this context) at a younger age." If your intent is to progress in chess as far as you can, I say choose a repertoire that will grow with you. It's often said that chess masters can play any position well. I think choosing a repertoire that exposes you to many different kinds of pawn structures, while initially intimidating, ultimately helps you to become a better player. I think the more pawn structures out of Kmoch that you see in your own games, the better.

Finally Finished Zurich 1953, and My Reading List

I have another article on opening study queued up, but I hate having so many posts on a topic that club players already spend too much time on. Instead, I'll just say that I finally finished Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953 by Bronstein. It was my "carry with you and play through on a pocket set" book for quite a while now. I've replaced it with Chess: The Art of Logical Thinking by McDonald.

It'd be tempting to count the book's contents towards my "2000+ annotated master games" collection, but somehow it seems like cheating since they were spread out over months. After polishing off a couple half-read collections, I think I'm going to go through my collection roughly by the copyright date of the original publication. That way, if the same game comes up multiple times I can add the more modern analysis to the older annotations. Also, I expect the older books to have more general positional assessments and fewer variations, and the newer material to have more "exceptions to the rules", plus more and longer variations.

I'm planning on going through the following pre-1980 books in this order. The first few aren't in chronological order because I'm already in the process of reading them. Books I've previously read cover-to-cover are marked in red.

- Self-Taught Chess for Beginners and Intermediates by Milton Finkelstein (again, I don't actually recommend this book to others...this is just a sentimental favorite)
-the instructive games section of My System by Nimzowitsch
-Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur by Euwe and Kramer
-a block of Alekhine: the tournament books for NY 1924 and Nottingham 1937 (Dover editions), plus I'm counting Nunn's algebraic translation of Alekhine's Best Games as 1937-ish.
-One Hundred Selected Games by Botvinnik
-Zurich International Chess Tournament 1953 (yes, again.)
-Logical Chess move by Move by Move and The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Chernev.
-My 60 Memorable Games by Fischer
-Tal-Botvinnik 1960 and The Life and Games of Mikhail Tal, by Tal
-The Art of Positional Play by Reshevsky
-Capablanca's Best Chess Endings by Chernev

Not counting doubles, that's 1166 games right there.

Unfortunately, most of these old books are in descriptive notation, which is a bit of a headache. Only Alekhine's Best Games, Zurich '53, Tal's books and Capablanca's Best Chess Endings are in Algebraic. I realize some of the others have algebraic editions, but I'm not going to drop the money on them.

I Think I Finally Appreciate the Center

I'm still going through My System, among other things. I think I've finally achieved one breakthrough -- a better appreciation of the center.

Everybody reading this blog has probably heard this drum beaten again and again: control the center. Yet how many readers are constantly thinking about the center during their games? When you play a "book" move out of an opening repertoire that doesn't address central control, do you understand why it's good? Central control always seemed like a mundane, pedestrian topic that I didn't need to dwell on too much.

However, I had been noticing some common themes in my games. I didn't often think about central control directly, except with respect to tactics (dropping the e4 pawn in a Sicilian, for example) or general positional considerations (e.g. space advantage). It was also staggering to see in my Blitz games how often the best move that I missed was a simple push of a central pawn. This year, in order to improve my understanding, I finally put the French aside, and started playing 1...e5 as Black. I also abandoned the Spanish Exchange for something more main-line. This was a big deal...I played those lines exclusively for the last 13 years.

At some point, I am going to write a major blog entry about some of my discoveries, but I'll pass this along for now: it is surprising how much "opening theory" you can figure out yourself by just thinking about the center. Starting to play 1...e5 was uncomfortable because, if your opponent plays older stuff like the Four Knights, Vienna or Giuoco Piannisimo, transpositions abound and the maze of variations can get confusing. However, beginner's rules can guide you through the morass. For example, in the 1.e4 e5 openings:

• if White gets to push a pawn to d4 without concessions, they typically will have at least the slight edge White is "supposed" to get with correct play.
• if Black can get away with ...d5, they probably equalize or get the advantage.
• both sides try to retain their e-pawns
  

Similarly, a lot of 1.d4 theory boils down to: White tries to push a pawn to e4, and Black tries to prevent it. Black often tries to maintain a pawn at d5 as a strong point, in which case White often tries to assail it.

Further, if White attains a classic d4/e4 (or d5/e5, for Black) center, its mobility should be considered. Another weakness I've found in my games is a reluctance to push pawns because it changes the pawn structure. Sometimes the most powerful moves on the board involve throwing mobile pawns forward. My System's chapter on the Center was a great refresher, and really drove in the points of occupation of the center, and using a mobile center as a weapon.

Instinctively, I rebelled against the notion that the four central squares are more magical than other squares like c5 or f6, and thought "oh yeah, that's all well and good, but you always have to consider other factors like tactics and development". Which is true. But I was finding in my own games that I was too often passing over moves such as P-Q4 as candidates. I've already seen in my Blitz games that my handling of unfamiliar openings has improved because of this.(I may, at some point, provide specific examples). For example, as Black I'll ask: "White's last move seemed weak. Can I push my pawn to d5 safely? Do I like the looks of the resulting position? OK, I'll play it!" Later, I'll check with Fritz and, sure enough, it was Fritz's favorite move by a good margin.

I've also found such thinking helpful in choosing between possible repertoire moves...if it's a natural move that addresses the center, play it. That also fits in with my philosophy that it's better to play a move you're happy with than some move recommended by theory but mysterious to you. If the bulk of your repertoire moves are natural to you and follow basic principles of development and central control, you avoid both the chore and the trap of memorization. Concentrate on the exceptions, where the best move in a position is unnatural to you, and try to understand why the counter-intuitive move is best.

A few additional points:

1. You need to be aware of the Center Fork Trick, which is essentially a mechanism to force an advantageous d4 or ...d5. Currently I'm finding that I still miss these too often...they're often the key to finding the best move in some of these Old School openings. If you're not familiar with it, an example is here.

2. A lot of other features of these "old school" openings are covered in older books like My System and Pawn Power in Chess. Many instructors recommend that beginners start out playing 1.e4 e5 to get practice with basic chess knowledge, and my experience so far is that this is very, very good advice.

3. This post may seem to fly in the face of my advice not to dwell on studying openings. What I'm trying to show here is that studying general principles will greatly reduce the need to study opening theory. In other words, a grasp of chess basics allows you to be the master of your openings, and not a slave. I am not intentionally studying theory that is helping me play 1.e4 e5 better. I have chosen to play 1.e4 e5 because the games that result will be guided by general chess principles and will help me to understand basic chess concepts.

Re-reading My System and Surprisingly Enjoying It

I'm currently re-reading Nimzowitsch's My System, which I read maybe 12 years or so ago. I am amazed how often now, as I study other chess material, I keep getting hit by deja vu: "Hey, I was just reading about that in My System!". It's hard to put into words, but it's like flashbulbs going off in your head. The revelations aren't as concrete and mundane as "here's a good versus a bad bishop; here's a space advantage" but more abstract ideas about central control, exchanges and tempi, endgame coordination, etc. And I"m only a third the way through (I'm taking time to digest the material).

It's strange, since before re-reading it I thought that I was pretty much familiar with all his concepts. I was expecting more of a "yeah, yeah, rooks like open files and the 7th rank, the center is important, blah blah blah" eat-your-broccoli-it's-good-for-you experience the second time around, but instead it's been quite an eye-opener. I can see many weaknesses in my game addressed here. Also, since I've been playing main line, open games lately, a lot of the material is particularly relevant to 1.e4 e5 setups.

I think that the reason for the impact must be the selection of examples. A lot of them aren't clear cut, or seem unusual; others are superficially "boring" positions like Four Knights or Giuoco Pianissimo old-school stuff but are used to highlight fundamental concepts.

Some of the analysis no longer stands up to Fritz, but are still enlightening. I may point out some of these flaws in a future post. Sometimes the ugly truth gets in the way of a good narrative or instructive example....I've seen this with Chernev's books as well. One thing I found with Kasparov's Predecessors books is that, in the quest for chess truth, the books become dense to the point of being unreadable. It sort of reflects the modern trend of concrete analysis trumping generations of accepted wisdom.

If you're D-class and above, and either haven't read My System or haven't read it in a long time, I'd really encourage you to take another crack at it. I'll probably be doing the same with Kmoch's Pawn Power in Chess when I'm done with it... another old, less-readable book loaded with important, fundamental, revelatory material.

In other news, I'm also close to the end of Bronstein's Zurich 1953, which has been a long project of mine (I have a horrid tendency to bounce between books and not finish a whole one).

Leslie Ault: Most Under-Rated Chess Author?

{This is just a quick post...I've been pretty busy lately with getting the house ready for sale. I'm going to be out of town for about a week and I've been preparing my reading list (I never leave home without a gajillion books), which has prompted this topic.}

I've never understood why Leslie Ault's two books (three, if you count Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess--see below) never became better known.

When I was just a kid, The Chess Tutor: Elements of Combinations came out, and it was the first book I read that explained chess tactics systematically. I've owned two copies since...one fell apart and got lost, and the other I bought for 5$ used and gave to a friend. I thought I'd find another copy and never did. Now, I see that it sells used online for about $50, so maybe it's stature has grown a bit. I think this is a great first chess book, and prefer it to Chernev and Reinfeld's "how to see three moves ahead" book. I mentioned this book earlier here.

About 18 years (!) pass, and out comes The Genesis of Power Chess. Similar approach, but different material. This is a unique book that is hard to explain. In general, it's about positional chess, but the first several chapters have the theme of converting advantages to a win. Both books are a series of positions where typically you're asked to play for one side, and often asked what the outcome will be (e.g. in the endgames chapter, you have to figure out whether it's a win or a draw for the attacker). The chapters break down to:

1. basic mates
2. selected basic endgames
3. "Cashing In at the End"-forcing a pawn promotion
4. "More Fun at the Cashier's Window" continues this theme
5. "The Care and Feeding of Pawns"- a terrific chapter on how to use your pawns, e.g. creating weaknesses or avoiding them
6. "Piece and Harmony"-piece coordination, minor piece imbalances such as N vs. B, and so on.
7. "The Endangered King"-king safety issues in the middlegame
8. "No Holds Barred", where a series of positions from one game are given as quizzes.

The overall story of the book is how to gradually accumulate advantages and win. Arguably, this book more than any other I've encountered has given a clearer impression of how "real" chess is played.

Today, as I was researching for this post, I came across something interesting: Ault apparently was a pretty key figure behind "Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess". From the book's acknowledgments:

Leslie H. Ault (a former U.S. Intercollegiate Champion) ...assisted with the original development of the programmed sequence and...served as general editor during the preparation for publication

The question of how much of BFTC was actually Ault's work was raised here. In the foreword to The Genesis of Power Chess, Ault mentions his involvement with the publication of the book. His description of the extent of his involvement came across as a "tidying of loose ends" when his actual contribution may have been much greater.

Secrets of Practical Chess (Embiggened Edition)

I had heard that Nunn's book was out in a "New Enlarged Edition". I remember thumbing through the first edition years ago in the bookstores, gleaning a few nuggets of information from it but not committing to buying it. I hadn't planned on picking this second edition up, but I succumbed on the strength of the computer section alone.

Even though I've doing many of the tricks Nunn mentions when using Chessbase and Fritz products, there were many revelations here. In particular, I want to get back on track and be more religious in using the Repertoire Database feature in Chessbase.

For people like me that historically have had a weakness to repertoire opening books, Chessbase is a great solution. The weakness of opening books is that it is unlikely that you will like, or even be comfortable with, all of the author's suggested lines, which means that you will be left plugging the holes yourself. I think a better approach to the openings is to ask yourself at each juncture: "What move do I personally like best in this position?". You can then check that move against a large database of games and with a chess engine, and if you still like the move, presto: your own repertoire move. I'm going to experiment with coming up with repertoires for a few of my openings by playing by general opening principles, and checking the lines I like as Nunn describes.

I think one advantage of this approach is that, if you're like me and don't have the greatest memory, you'll be playing moves that you like and arrived at yourself. I always tell my students that if they take the extra effort to understand a topic, it reduces the need to rely on memorization. For example, in the French advance Watson recommends the move ...Nh6 in some lines. I know it's the repertoire move, I understand roughly the point to it, and it still makes me uncomfortable. I can either spend extra time to convince myself how great that move is, or I can make my own repertoire and play a more "natural" move of my own choosing.

Another new section of the book deals with chess literature. I was amused to see that he uses both Silman and de la Maza as examples of flaws to watch out for. Nunn likes How to Reassess Your Chess but thinks that some of Silman's examples don't quite match the general principles they're supposed to demonstrate.

Silman's book is quite well-known and can be recommended as a good general guide for club players. My only real concern is that Silman's treatment is strongly tilted towards the 'covering up messy details' end of the spectrum, which can be deceptive since real-life games very rarely follow the smooth progression Silman describes.

He then goes through the example J. Sipaila--J.Silman, Reno 1993. He says that Silman's evaluation is correct but doesn't agree with the lines Silman gives to demonstrate that assessment.

In contrast, Nunn treats de la Maza's Rapid Chess Improvement far more harshly. Although he concedes:

There is a limited amount of truth in de la Maza's ideas. Tactics are certainly extremely important in chess, and are probably more so at the under-1800 level.

but then proceeds to essentially tear de la Maza a new one. It's tempting to quote, but I'll just direct the curious to their local book store.

(Aside: Personally, I believe that the most important thing under-1800 people can spend time on is making sure they play what Heisman calls "real chess" (rather than "hope chess") reliably on every move they play. I feel that this is the weakest link for most people, and I've been intending to write about this for a while. Studying tactics and improving your calculation helps in this regard, but the biggest boost in your chess strength will come from eliminating glaring oversights. Unfortunately, you can't really pick up a book entitled Don't be a Dumbass! and fix this problem...you have to actually work at rewiring your brain to a better way of thinking.)

I may comment more on the rest of the content in the future. Many of the examples and suggestions are targeted towards more advanced players, but a lot of the content can be applied by players of any strength {for example: the acronyms DAUT (Don't Analyse Unnecessary Tactics) and LPDO (Loose Pieces Drop Off)}.

I would definitely recommend people flip through this book at the book store and evaluate how much they feel this book will help them. If you use Chessbase products, the chapter on computers alone may be worth the money.

The Bare Essentials

Yesterday, at the pet store, a little girl was bawling her eyes out. "I want a guinea piiiiiggggg!"

The mother patiently explained, "You can't have a guinea pig. Besides, you have one at home and you never play with it."

The girl wailed, "I want another one!!!!!"

My wife thinks this not much different than my chess book habit. We have a truce: I get to buy chess books, and she gets to buy clothes.

My "intended audience" for this blog are people that already play tournament chess or rated chess games online. They already know the rules, the values of the different pieces, how to read chess notation, and most likely use a computer to help them analyze and store their games.

However, maybe you're a scholastic player that just started playing, but you're getting beaten badly at the club. Maybe you're like me, and later in life something triggered a desire to learn more about the game. I want to make a few suggestions to those just starting out in chess, to help "bring them up to speed."

You can spend an awful lot of money on chess books, software and equipment. However, you don't have to. Some people just "have" to get the latest version of their favorite chess program, or just "have" to get that book on some opening they never play but that got rave reviews. I haven't been involved directly with scholastic players, but I'm willing to bet that parents often fall into two traps: getting books or equipment that their child doesn't use, or buying whatever book or program their child "has" to have.

I'm going to suggest a list of "bare essentials" that will provide the most bang for their buck. Some of the specific recommendations are a matter of taste, but if you stick with the general strategy you shouldn't go wrong.

1. The first things you need to know are the rules (including castling kingside and queenside, en passant capturing, and stalemate), and how to read and write chess notation. I'm assuming most readers of this are well beyond this. However, if one of the above terms was unfamiliar to you or your child, you probably want to tackle this before plunking down money on more advanced material.

2. Next, you need to know basic tactics...forks, pins, skewers ("X-ray attacks"), removal of the guard, deflection, and so on. I am going to argue on this blog, very strongly, that tactics is by far the most important thing you can spend time on. There is a lot to choose from in this category, but in general any book that explains the value of the pieces and the basic tactics mentioned above will be a good place to start. You can start with one or two of the books below, and add more challenging ones as you progress.

My two personal recommendations are out of print, but you may be able to find them online or in a used book store:

• The Chess Tutor: Elements of Combinations by Leslie Ault. My first copy that I obtained as a kid was lost when I moved. I found another used copy and foolishly sold it to a friend. This book should have become a classic, in my opinion.

• Winning Chess: How to See Three Moves Ahead by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld. This is a better known book, but hard to find.

Unfortunately, if a book is good and out of print, it's probably expensive when you find it. For books in print, check out a book such as Sierawan's Winning Chess Tactics. I have not personally viewed a copy of Chess Tactics for Kids by Murray Chandler, but I've looked over his previous book How to Beat your Dad at Chess, and was impressed. The latter book is devoted to mating combinations, so those two books together would probably be an excellent place to start. If you're an adult learner, don't let the books titles, cover art, and your pride stand in the way.

One free resource for practicing chess tactics is the Chess Tactics Server, which I've just started using. One downside is that your performance rating is related to how quickly you solve the problem, so it encourages superficial thinking. Think of it as more of a drill to practice your ability to recognize tactical patterns quickly.

I could make many, many suggestions for studying chess tactics. I'll just say that time spent solving tactical problems is never wasted.

3. Test your newly-acquired chess kung-fu by joining a chess club and playing rated games. In the United States, this means joining the USCF and finding a local club. You can also play rated games online, for free (e.g. the Free Internet Chess Server) or by paid subscription (e.g. the Internet Chess Club, which is where I play most of my games). The point of playing rated games is that you can be matched against players of roughly the same playing strength. No one likes losing all the time, and beating much weaker players isn't going to help you improve your chess. Also, the rating gives an indication of how much progress you're making as a player, and gives an incentive to try your hardest each and every game.

Nowadays, playing chess online is the easy option, but there are many disadvantages. One is that most games are played at fast speeds, so bad habits tend to get reinforced. This is one of the problems I'm currently battling. Also, stronger players at your chess club will be able to go over your games and point out your mistakes. You may even find a local master willing to give lessons.

4. Now that you've played several games against other people, get software that allows you to store your old games and analyze them. I now use the Chessbase products Fritz 9 and Chessbase 9 , but there are cheaper options for people just starting out. The main thing is that you want to be able to:

• store your games for future reference
• analyze your games for tactical errors
• read databases of games obtained from the internet or elsewhere

When I started out, I found a cheap program called Extreme Chess that was essentially a very old version of Fritz (I believe using the engines of Fritz 3 and 4). If you don't want to shell out the money for the latest Fritz, any older version will do. At the time I'm writing this, I see Extreme Chess for sale online for less than $3. Chessbase also has a free version of their older database software called "Chessbase Lite". It took some trial and error to figure out how to use it, but it worked well enough.

The most valuable ability of a program like Fritz or Chessmaster is that it can analyze your own games and find your mistakes. They're great at pointing out "you missed a mate in 3" or "you could have won a pawn here". Programs like Fritz and the Chessmaster series allow you to play against the computer as well. I think that training with the computer is a good way to correct yourself of bad habits, because computers will mercilessly punish your mistakes. The computers are so strong these days that it takes some fiddling around to get a program like Fritz to play almost as bad as you do (my understanding is that Chessmaster is a bit easier to use in this regard).

Whereas a program like Fritz is a computer opponent and analyzer with some database features, Chessbase itself is a chess database with some analysis features. Chessbase will not analyze your game while you sleep, or play a game with you, but it will analyze the current position if you tell it to. Chessbase is useful in finding things like:

• here is where your game becomes different from all other games in its huge database of games
• in this opening at move 12, the following 9 moves have been played by masters, and 12.d4 has the highest win percentage for white
• you have played the Ruy Lopez opening as white 451 times in the last 7 years, and your opponent has responded with the Steinitz Defense 23% of the time.
• here are all the games with players rated above 2400 with and endgame of same-coloured bishops and with pawns on g2, f3 and h4 vs. pawns on g6 and h5

You get the idea. Fun stuff, useful stuff, but is it worth the $168 for the Chessbase 9 starter package? Not if you're just starting out.

There's oodles of software out there, for both mac and PC, both commercial and free. I like the Chessbase products because they not only read the standard .pgn database files, but they also read their own .cbh and .cbf-format chessbases that allow for extra commentary like drawing arrows or key squares, or inserting diagrams that will appear when the game is printed out.

5. If you're still having fun and eager to learn at this point, get one basic book on endgames, and a book or two on strategy. My recommendation for endgames is Pandolfini's Endgame Course, although it has some typos. Just the Facts! by Lev Alburt and Nikolay Krogius is similar, but with fewer positions and more discussion. I could mention others, but pick one and read it cover to cover for starters.

I strongly recommend Best Lessons of a Chess Coach by Sunil Weeramantry and Ed Eusebi, and How To Reassess Your Chess by Jeremy Silman. However, if you're a new player or a young child you may want to look through a copy of each and make sure it's not too advanced. These are the two books I stumbled upon as a young adult that opened my eyes to what "real chess" was. The first book, in particular, was revelation after revelation after revelation. I have a terrible memory for master games, but the first game in that book demonstrated how a knight on a safe, advanced square (or "outpost") could be a terrible, terrible thing, and I have often used that idea in my own games. The latter book is close to being the bible of positional chess, and will teach you how to analyze a chess position and choose good moves.

I don't think beginners need to study a lot of chess strategy (tactics is far more important), but they need to be introduced to basic elements of strategy. Understanding positional chess helps you to choose good moves (or avoid bad ones, like weakening pawn moves) when there are no clear tactical shots.

6. Don't worry about openings at this point. I didn't forget to include suggested books on openings...I deliberately am not suggesting one at this point. I intend to write about openings soon, but at this point all you need to know is that you should get your pieces out as quickly as you can. If your chess program has a built-in opening book (and most do), you can compare what you play to what the "book" moves are and decide what you yourself like to play. You will go through an awkward phase where your pieces seem to get tangled up, or you realize your knight works better on d7 in a certain opening rather than c6, or you get punished for not castling soon enough, but you'll learn from your mistakes. At your level, actually learning "opening theory" is largely a waste of time because your opponents will also be playing lousy moves not found in any of the books. Getting your army mobilized faster than your opponent, and having a sharp eye for tactics, will be far more important.

To summarize:

• learn the basic rules and tactics
• play rated games against people, both face-to-face and over the internet if you can
• use software to store your games and analyze them for errors
• learn the basics of endgames and chess strategy

All of that can be done with free (or cheap) software, 3-5 books, and membership dues to your chess federation. In return you get hours (years, hopefully) of entertainment, and you get to meet and play other people that share your interest. I think that's a pretty good return on investment.