What do you think?
Rate this book
How to Think Ahead in Chess
How to think ahead in chess
Paperback
First published July 15, 1971
2 people are currently reading
77 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
May 24, 2012
Good but not Great
This was one of the first Chess books I bought to begin to learn how to play advanced chess back in the 1980's. It is a reasonably good book that will give the beginning player some anchors in their journey to becoming more than a recreational chess player.
That having been said, the selection of the Stonewall Attack as an opening for White leaves a lot to be desired. This is one of the most anemic and ineffective openings you can use against an experienced player. It leads to a closed opening which is really more the domain of the advanced player who understands positional and strategic chess. The only real benefit to the Stonewall attack is hoping your opponent won't see a bishop sacrifice and quick mating attack. It is easily defended against. Once it is defended against, White quickly loses the initiative and Black moves on to a strong game.
Better suited for the beginner are King's pawn openings that bring tactics to bear in open games. Once this is understood then there are far better Queen's pawn openings to explore than the Stonewall Opening. Even the Colle System, which is similar and touched upon in this book is more practical than the main line taught here.
That being said, however, the book does benefit the beginner by giving them a repertoire of 3 basic openings to where they can begin to go into their first tournaments or local chess clubs with a plan and some understanding of how to handle an opening. This should be more than enough to give them a leg up against any inexperienced player who has no plan.
Once you've understood and mastered this book, be prepared to set a lot of it aside and relearn some things as you move ahead.
Really, that is the primary criticism. There are plenty of good primers out there that give more practical openings to work on that will lead to something you can better build on later.
So take it or leave it. It was a help to me and I've gone on to be a reasonably strong player, but it's not a book that excites me now that I know enough to look back on it and see what it did for me. Any book by Bruce Pandolfini for the beginning player should be chosen over this one.
This was one of the first Chess books I bought to begin to learn how to play advanced chess back in the 1980's. It is a reasonably good book that will give the beginning player some anchors in their journey to becoming more than a recreational chess player.
That having been said, the selection of the Stonewall Attack as an opening for White leaves a lot to be desired. This is one of the most anemic and ineffective openings you can use against an experienced player. It leads to a closed opening which is really more the domain of the advanced player who understands positional and strategic chess. The only real benefit to the Stonewall attack is hoping your opponent won't see a bishop sacrifice and quick mating attack. It is easily defended against. Once it is defended against, White quickly loses the initiative and Black moves on to a strong game.
Better suited for the beginner are King's pawn openings that bring tactics to bear in open games. Once this is understood then there are far better Queen's pawn openings to explore than the Stonewall Opening. Even the Colle System, which is similar and touched upon in this book is more practical than the main line taught here.
That being said, however, the book does benefit the beginner by giving them a repertoire of 3 basic openings to where they can begin to go into their first tournaments or local chess clubs with a plan and some understanding of how to handle an opening. This should be more than enough to give them a leg up against any inexperienced player who has no plan.
Once you've understood and mastered this book, be prepared to set a lot of it aside and relearn some things as you move ahead.
Really, that is the primary criticism. There are plenty of good primers out there that give more practical openings to work on that will lead to something you can better build on later.
So take it or leave it. It was a help to me and I've gone on to be a reasonably strong player, but it's not a book that excites me now that I know enough to look back on it and see what it did for me. Any book by Bruce Pandolfini for the beginning player should be chosen over this one.
March 3, 2021
Just re-read this book. It's too bad there is no Kindle version.
This is the book that showed me how to finally beat my father in chess after ten years of losing. I knew how to play since I was 7, but never knew about openings, middle or end games until I read this book. I beat my father so easily after reading this that he never played me again.
The criticisms are valid about the stonewall opening not holding up today, but if he was writing it now he would probably use the London system as an opening for white.
Remember the specific opening is not the point of the book (although he does say beginners should stay away from king pawn openings), it's that using the same opening repeatedly gets you so familiar with the position that you know the strengths and weaknesses and can start to think several moves ahead and make a long term strategy for the game you're playing which is how you advance from a beginner to an intermediate player.
This is the book that showed me how to finally beat my father in chess after ten years of losing. I knew how to play since I was 7, but never knew about openings, middle or end games until I read this book. I beat my father so easily after reading this that he never played me again.
The criticisms are valid about the stonewall opening not holding up today, but if he was writing it now he would probably use the London system as an opening for white.
Remember the specific opening is not the point of the book (although he does say beginners should stay away from king pawn openings), it's that using the same opening repeatedly gets you so familiar with the position that you know the strengths and weaknesses and can start to think several moves ahead and make a long term strategy for the game you're playing which is how you advance from a beginner to an intermediate player.
December 9, 2018
I am learning this game so this book was very helpful.
June 13, 2018
I am rating this as it strikes me now; I would have rated it higher (3 stars?) back the first time I wrote is some decades ago. Basically, I think it has not stood the test of time. Still, hoping that some day I can move my own chess play out of the novice level, I can see reason to recommend this work to other novices. This book often references specific pages in Winning Chess: How To See Three Moves Ahead, also co-written with Fred Reinfeld, so consider reading that first or at least having it on hand especially if you are especially new to chess. (the references are for pins, revealed checks, forks, and other strategic arrangements mentioned without explicit definition.)
Now, why I feel it is dated. First, this is a book celebrating the queen pawn opening and the Stonewall Attack. At the time I first read this I was playing often with newer chess software and computer devices. At the time, it seemed such machines could be easily fooled from such an opening. Now, I think modern ones are onto it. Those older chess computers had been vulnerable to the Stonewall because the positions are usually without clear tactical lines. White simply prepares for an assault by bringing pieces to aggressive posts, without making immediate tactical threats. By the time the computer realizes that its king is under attack, it is often too late. This, however, is not the case with newer chess computers. Even in the early '90s when I began to play others online at a site called Achess, others started to explicitly point out the inherent problems of leading with the queen pawn. The downsides to the Stonewall, specifically, are the hole on e4, and the fact that the dark-squared bishop on c1 is completely blocked by its own pawns. If Black defends correctly against White's attack, these strategic deficiencies can become quite serious. Because of this, the Stonewall Attack is almost never seen in master-level chess any more, let alone my own playing.
Still, study of the techniques here are valuable in advancing strategic thinking. For me, I think this has helped me incorporate a fianchetto generally or even "dragon" bishop in my play, this being a necessary response to the Stonewall walling in its own dark-squared bishop.
Another dating of this text is the use of "English" descriptive notation whereas I think anyone reading more modern texts will expect Algebraic chess notation, being more compact than descriptive chess notation and the most widely used method.
Stil being a product of its time and looking back, master-level games are used throughout a chapter for illustration, including some by Morphy (buried not far from my home) and Alexander Alekhine.
Interestingly, the author here places the work at a time when King pawn openings were being eclipsed by the then crafty Queen pawn ones:
Now, why I feel it is dated. First, this is a book celebrating the queen pawn opening and the Stonewall Attack. At the time I first read this I was playing often with newer chess software and computer devices. At the time, it seemed such machines could be easily fooled from such an opening. Now, I think modern ones are onto it. Those older chess computers had been vulnerable to the Stonewall because the positions are usually without clear tactical lines. White simply prepares for an assault by bringing pieces to aggressive posts, without making immediate tactical threats. By the time the computer realizes that its king is under attack, it is often too late. This, however, is not the case with newer chess computers. Even in the early '90s when I began to play others online at a site called Achess, others started to explicitly point out the inherent problems of leading with the queen pawn. The downsides to the Stonewall, specifically, are the hole on e4, and the fact that the dark-squared bishop on c1 is completely blocked by its own pawns. If Black defends correctly against White's attack, these strategic deficiencies can become quite serious. Because of this, the Stonewall Attack is almost never seen in master-level chess any more, let alone my own playing.
Still, study of the techniques here are valuable in advancing strategic thinking. For me, I think this has helped me incorporate a fianchetto generally or even "dragon" bishop in my play, this being a necessary response to the Stonewall walling in its own dark-squared bishop.
Another dating of this text is the use of "English" descriptive notation whereas I think anyone reading more modern texts will expect Algebraic chess notation, being more compact than descriptive chess notation and the most widely used method.
Stil being a product of its time and looking back, master-level games are used throughout a chapter for illustration, including some by Morphy (buried not far from my home) and Alexander Alekhine.
Interestingly, the author here places the work at a time when King pawn openings were being eclipsed by the then crafty Queen pawn ones:
In 1927, when Frank Marshall was preparing to sail for London to play in an international master tournament, he approached friends with the half-comic, half-plaintive query: "What defense shall I play against 1 P--Q4 ... ?" If one of the greatest players in the history of this game felt this way after thirty years, what are we mortals to say?
The fact is that finding a defense against 1 P--Q4 is no laughing matter! Most of us have been brought up on 1 P--K4, and we find something uncongenial in the lines of play which eveolve from 1 P--Q4.
March 9, 2021
If you want to master the finer art of chess planning go no further than this book.
February 25, 2022
Very good book that gives practical advice for chess players who are more than amateurs but definitely not grandmasters
May 23, 2012
Mike's been swotting up too, so I've only beat him once, so far. Game on.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews