Rating: 
Summary: A strategy for success in chess.
Review: A lot of books emphasize one thing or another in chess. Only a few books get to the heart of what it takes to truly understand what it means to analyse as a titled player would analyse a chess position. You can get a sense of this in New in Chess magazine and some of the best tournament books, only Watson gives you a good overview at the same time. If the reader were to look for a shortcut for success, one can easily do worse by going through this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Useful compilation
Review: A lot of chess is both rule based (positional) and calculation based (tactical). What Watson and others (Purdy, Soltis, Hubner) point out is that at any given position, you can have one or the other element dominate, oftentimes it's the tactical element in a seemingly winning position (i.e. 'defense' in a 'lost' position). The rule of thumb is that the stronger player will find a way to win. The reason computers are so good at chess is that they largely ignore positional understanding for tactics--and it works. This is the basis for anti-positional chess like Steinitz played. So keep a fresh eye.I never like a book that has cult status, like Niemzovitch's or Stilman's book, so I give this useful book 2 stars.
Rating:
Summary: Useful compilation
Review: A lot of chess is both rule based (positional) and calculation based (tactical). What Watson and others (Purdy, Soltis, Hubner) point out is that at any given position, you can have one or the other element dominate, oftentimes it's the tactical element in a seemingly winning position (i.e. 'defense' in a 'lost' position). The rule of thumb is that the stronger player will find a way to win. The reason computers are so good at chess is that they largely ignore positional understanding for tactics--and it works. This is the basis for anti-positional chess like Steinitz played. So keep a fresh eye. I never like a book that has cult status, like Niemzovitch's or Stilman's book, so I give this useful book 2 stars.
Rating:
Summary: Modern Chess Explained
Review: Along with the Dvoretsky series, this is the most important work written on chess strategy since Nimzowitszch's My System. I wouldn't recommend this book for a beginner because Watson's premise is that "there are no rules by which you can understand chess; you have to analyze everything concretely" and he backs this up with terriffic examples and analysis. Of course, we all use rules as shortcuts to help guide us through a position and learn exceptions to the rules as mastery of the game improves. There is a goldmine of information here. The section on Minor Pieces is particularly valuable.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating, perhaps even enlighteneing
Review: First, let say I am not a strong enough player -- probably somewhere around 2000 -- to judge all of the content, nor have I played over all the examples. But I have learned a lot *about* the game anyway, if not necessarily about how to play it better. On the other hand I have felt for some time that i play too classically, and this book has helped see why and how, which can only help.
Rating:
Summary: My "Chess Bible"
Review: I am not a master chess player but I am on my way there.
I started playing at the age of two and developed an early understanding of the game. Unfortunately I didn't have the proper competition as a kid and quickly lost interest in chess due to my domination of weaker players. I picked up the game again at age 23, because of the internet's ability to allow me to play chess-players of a superior level in online gaming.
After being humiliated a few times by advanced players on the internet, I rediscovered my love for this complex game and decided to get studying! After browsing through countless chess books (for advanced players only, I have already studied and am beyond basic chess books) I found this book to be the most comprehensive and challenging one on the market for a player of my level, (advanced-intermediate striving for mastery).
Of course the BEST way to improve your chess is to PLAY, and study your OWN games. But this book serves as my "chess-bible" which I study, play out the games( alot of goodies in here), and go back too when I need to develop my chess understanding with a master's help. Watson reveals his genius to the reader and I, like most chess-players would be more than happy to reach Watson's level of chess comprehension.
Another thing I like about the book is Watson's 'philosophical' view of the game, and his very witty remarks about everything from the old chess masters' games, to extremely abstract views of the essence of chess as a whole.
to sum up in one word -'GENIUS.'
Rating: 
Summary: I don't know too much about chess .........
Review: I am not any good at chess, and I don't pretend to be. I own this book, but a lot of it is over my head. I like Mr. Goldsby's review, I have read several of his reviews, and he makes more sense than just about all the rest on these pages. I play in tournaments quite a bit, but I have never seen Mr. Goldsby play. Does he play any more? (I live in Panama City, FL. I have never seen him at one of our tournaments ... or any in the Southeast ... I just played last month at a tournament in South Florida.)
Rating:
Summary: Dont be intimidated - This book is for everyone (almost)
Review: I am writing this review, because this masterpiece is accessible and the other reviews dont point this out. Clearly this book is aimed at higher level players with a fair grip on essentials, but it is very readable. If you have ever read a chess book, any chess book at all, cover to cover than you will enjoy this book. If you have ever wondered why you lost a game when you played by the rules and your opponent ignored basic sane principle then you will enjoy this book. If you consider yourself an intelligent person, even if you are not yet Class A or expert, then you will enjoy this book. If you play an occasional game against your father on holidays, well, then see my comments above on reading Silman or Nimzowitch once first. I never had a board out while reading this. It is not that kind of book. It is an essay on the magical growth of the game into a wild, unpredictable, and sometimes incomprehensible contest at the highest levels. It will, however, improve your game by pulling back the curtains on "mysterious" Grandmaster play. Don't be surprised when you uncork a "mysterious" brilliancy of your own in your next match.
Rating:
Summary: You won't believe it if you don't read it
Review: I bought that book mainly because it was awarded best book of 1999 by the British Chess Association. After reading first first few chapters I was amazed: there is many great chess books on strategy, but how many have examples from the very recent matches? As John Watson himself says, chess has evolved in last 70 years, so I am not finding books using 20 or 30 years old examples half as useful. Understand Nimzovitsch's My System as "Old Testament", and convert to new one . This is a book I am in love with, now I can sell all my others. Buy it and share beauty of Mr.Watsons brilliant work. I wish I could congratulate him personally.
Rating:
Summary: Revising Nimzowitsch
Review: I'm going to give away the main thesis of this book. It is obvious if you have played chess for any amount of time, but it has never been put into writing, at least as far as I know. Chess is taught to beginners with general principles (i.e. control the center in the opening; put rooks behind passed pawns). But more advanced players know when to throw out the principles. Concrete analysis of the position at hand takes precedence over some vague principle! One such principle is "Knights on the rim [of the board] are grim [or "are dim" or "deserve a trim."]"It's true, knights don't control as many squares on the side of the board as in the center. But if analysis of the position before you shows that the such a knight move is best, you play it! Such "orthodoxy" forms the basis of the "modern" chess that Watson discusses in his book. This book should be read after reading Nimzowitsch's, as it serves as an "update" to his book by examining how Nimzowitsch's theories have fared over the 6 decades since Nimzowitsch's books. Then, in the second part of the book, Watson examines how "rule independence" (the concept I discussed above) plays a role in modern chess, and he examines numerous topics with that as his prism. Highly recommended, but it's not an easy book by any means. However, it could very well change how you think about (and thus, how you play) chess.
| 
