Customer Reviews

Big Book of Combinations (Competitive Chess S)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Eric Schiller once bragged to IM Jeremy Silman that he once wrote a chess book in two days. It's hard to tell which book it could have been -- so many qualify! Schiller is horrendous and any serious chess student, even beginner, should avoid him. His books are filled with typos, inaccuracies, shallow analyses, and embarrassing mistakes. He clearly cranks 'em out for the fast buck. It must be nice to get a book's worth of a paycheck for two days' of work, but he's not doing the rest of us any favors. In a world already overstuffed with chess books, there are plenty of better resources to turn to.

Although it is hard to imagine a totally worthless book on chess combinations, this book comes very close. The author gives no solutions to the combinations, only the first move of each. Space supposedly does not permit the author to give full solutions, but space never stopped other authors of similar books. M. K. Blokh's "The Art of Combination" has more combinations, complete solutions and a lower price than Schiller's book, as can be said for nearly every other book on chess combinations.

The author also fails to categorize the openings by theme; thus the novice student won't learn anything about thematic positions. Some of the key moves are incorrect as well, so there is very little to recommend this book other than its mildly interesting discussion of chess-playing computers.

As Edward Winter notes in his CHESS NOTES column (#2965, also in "Chess Facts and Fables", p. 234-235), Schiller had not actualy written a book of combinations. Rather, he simply copied, without credit, the 1980 book "Encyclopedia of Chess Middlegames". For example, out of 132 positions in Schiller's book covering 1900-1945, all but a half-dozen are in the "Encyclopedia"; so are all 13 positions from 1958, etc.

Schiller gives himself away by the fact that the information he gives about the positions is an exact copy of the one given in the "Encyclopedia"--including the mistakes. When the "Encyclopedia", contrary to what is customary, gives only "USSR" or "USA" as the venue of a game, that is the only information Schiller gives, too. When it WRONGLY says a game took place in the USA instead of Berlin (for example), Schiller--surprise!--also wrongly says the same thing...

That Schiller is a worthless author is well-known, but what he did here is not mere bad writing, it's actual plagiarism.

Little can be added to the insightful review below. The book seems to have been an exercise in computer problem-solving that someone (incorrectly) thought would make a good book. In addition to the book cited by the author below, I recommend Fred Reinfeld's 1001 Brilliant Ways to Checkmate (but read Renaud & Kahn's The Art of the Checkmate first!), 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations (also Reinfeld's), Lazlo Polgar's Chess, and DuMont's The Basis of Combination in Chess. The Renaud & Kahn, Reinfeld, and DuMont books are inexpensive and offer a far greater value than The Big Book of Combinations.

This book is a good collection for study. You cannot rely on the key move solutions provided as some are simply wrong and all are provided as one key move without principal variations. If you have a modern computer chess program you will still benefit from solving the problems if you check your solution with your own computer. In fairness to the author, he recomends exactly this approach to working with the book. I was aware of the incomplete solutions as well as the fact that the computer progarm used in the book preparation was primative by modern standards before I made my purchase, therefore I was not disappointed.

This is my favorite chess book, and I've read a few dozen, but I can see why it might not appeal to anyone. I liked the fact that he only gives you the best move at the end, without analysis. It forced me to think hard about why it was the best move. If you take the time to work this out like I did, you will learn much more than if you simply follow someone's analysis. Many writers do this and copy the mistakes of others. I also liked the fact that the puzzles are not grouped by theme. In a real chess game, you don't know there is knight fork waiting, for example. If you did, it would make it really easy to win games. This book forces you to consider all possible combinations and tactics, not find one relating to a theme. Working through these positions, I learned to develop a sense of strategy in my games. Seeing that there is almost a knight fork, for example, I learned how to create combinations leading up to one. If you love to think on your own, I recommend pondering these positions.

This book of combinations takes real positions for white winning or mating. I still wonder why he did not include great games where the player of the black pieces wins or mates. I disagree with others who say the combination need to be in categories. This makes you think harder and is better than looking for a certain type of combination or move. This is a more realistic approach. This why I say this book is not for the novice. The first move of the solution is given and sometimes it is enough but not all time. When you can't solve the position in reasonable amount of time going over the solution can help improve your skills also.