@@roqsteady5290 I definitely have more than I could ever read! It's like some sick compulsion to just buy them, despite knowing I have neither the time nor the application to read them! 🤣
Vukovic gives equal credit to Capablanca and Alekhine while contrasting their methods of converting the win. Vukovic says Capablanca and Alekhine advanced chess theory in this domain and nobody had advanced it further through the mid 1950s. The modern treatise on attack is Attacking Manual Vols 1-2 by Aagaard, another "Double A" author like Kraai.
The discussion of this book and even the book’s short-comings is interesting, in its own right, particularly the last position where white, rather than pursue a very complicated attack, can just swap of the major pieces & head into a superior endgame. Well done!
I totally agree with both sides of your review. It's just that I weighted the negatives more than the positives. I found myself arguing with Vukovic so often, and finding myself correct according to the engine about half the time, that I lost interest more and more in what Vukovic had to say. Without precision, attacking in chess is useless. I found that Vukovic lacked the necessary precision for me to truly trust his words.
Thanks for the review. I hope you guys consider reviewing/adding to the program the Kasparyan domination studies! It's one of my favorites despite being tough.
Another downside of the book, though unrelated to chess, is that the quality of the printing leaves much to be desired (at least in the copy that was shipped to me). I don't know if it was a one-off printing error, or if all copies are bad, however. Great review, Jesse! And I especially like the discussion about the classics; I too am draw to pre-computer analyses.
King in Jeopardy by Lev Alburt is not as systematized, but it is a lot easier to read. Lev Alburt’s books are the only ones I am aware of that explain 2000 level chess concepts in an easy to read formate with a new diagram every few moves. But note that some of the material that is covered in Art of attack is covered in more depth in Lev Alburt’s other books in the same series. For example, he covers the bishop sacrifices and some more basic attacking tactical motifs and combinations to remove the kings guard in chess tactics for the tournament player. So he does not have another chapter going over those as in-depth in King in Jeopardy. But he does revisit the concepts in the examples just not as thorough. It is also important to note that he covers weak squares and fighting along the diagonal and several other attacking related positional ideas in the next book in the series called chess strategy for the tournament player. So even though those ideas are mentioned in King in Jeopardy he is not as in depth in that book on those concepts if it is an attacking concept that overlaps with the tactics or strategy books. The tactics, attack, and strategy books are 3, 4, and 5 of the series. All three of these books should be read together based on how there structured. But they are all fairly easy reads despite the wealth of knowledge they contain, and they would still take much less time to read all together than the heavy notation vomit dumb style books like Art of attack. Also note Matting patterns are presented in the second book of the comprehensive chess course series. A lot of people skip the first two books as they believe they are only for beginners. The first two of Seven books are the beginner to intermediate chess overview books. After presenting the most common matting patterns at the start of the chapter on matting patterns he then integrates the patterns into examples in a much more creative visual way than art of attack does. For each example he re-shows the two or three of those patterns that a player like alkaline or Tal would have seen as possible variations to strive for in a given example position from a famous game. He then explains how the attacker would execute the attack based on those patterns and how often there would be multiple possible matting threats with some becoming more obvious as the attack would unfold. So Alburt then presents a different pattern based on how the opponent has been defending. So you get to learn how basic combinations, attack, defense, and matting pattern recognition work together as your formulating and adjusting a plan of attack. But if you at least read the three other books mentioned by Alburt you will learn most of the main ideas that’s are in Art of Attack plus tactics and positional chess concepts. And If you own Art of the Attack you can just cut that one chapter on matting patterns out along with some of the pages where concepts are in paragraph form and key points are organized as bullet points. You can then use that 30 to 40 pages of summaries and bullets as a companion to reference when reading king in jeopardy. I would write the chapter and subheading on any pages I tear out and bind them into a little book so they make sense to reference while reading Alburt’s books. I think for busy amateurs not looking to be a GM or IM, but want to at least become a strong amateur this is the more time effective than reading notation vomit heavy books no matter how good the ideas or classic the book.
I liked "Art of Attack". It reminds me of Chernev's "King Side Attack" in "Logical Chess". However, the subject matter suggests to novice players they can impose their type of game - “attacking” - an opponent without meeting the demands of a particular position. Maybe the best thing in a game is to trade down or get a passed pawn etc. One can imagine playing through this book and then OTB deciding to attack the king and say, ignoring an opportunity to get something more tangible and less risky. Yes, there will be times when one can throw the kitchen sink at the opponent, but not all the time. One book I do like that scarcely on anyone radar, is "The Queenside Attack" by Boris Shashin. It explores passed pawns and minority attacks. It, like the non-selling “Girlfriends My Mum And Dad Would Choose For Me” are not well received for some reason or another. Euwe in Strategy And Tactics In Chess, also covers this aspect of the game. Indeed he covers aspects of the kingside attack as well that might be where Chernev got his inspiration for always criticising moving pawns in front of the king. I must admit it took me about 10 years to grow out of Chernev's "law giving" on this one. From the point of book sales, words with "attacking" fulfil a demand for adventurous chess. They don't allow for the demands of anyone position. The same goes for "best games" collections that might show less realistic expectations of how games pan out. The novice might expect that there is the possibility of every game of chess being a brilliancy if viewed purely from "best games" and "attacking chess" publications.
This is a beautiful video, because in it, Jesse tries to explain the value of classical books and the delusion that is dominating the chess world right now about everything needed to be checked with computers. This attempt by Jesse, is easily understood and supported by experienced players, but somehow the new generation doesn't understand this.
I don't mind reading old books. But I'm very skeptical about their accuracy as I have found plenty of errors in the books that I read. These days I try to purchase books written in recent years that are more likely to have gone through rigorous engine analysis. Unless, I'm buying a book about an old master or event I would rather purchase newer books that deal with technical matters.
I'm computer checking an Edmar Mednis book while reading it and, rather than focusing what he was wrong about, I'm finding often 3 times the material to study.
I really love and appreciate this book review. Presentely, i'm working with another old book ... - The art of Sacrifice by Rudolf Spielmann, and yes there is lots of innacuracies here and there and this is the beauty of it because i can argue with Spielmann's evaluation and then come back and look at what stockfish have to say about our arguments ... and this is pure delice and the more time you put in it the more it pays. So yes!!! These old books deserve our respect..
Attack is harder to stop in fast time controls...so in blitz you should always attack. In classic chess you can pretend to be a Karpov or Ulf Andersson or Giri drawing master. Actually engines also showed that defense is key in chess...at the highest level. But in blitz you are not playing at the highest level.
Karpov would be a defensive master...as would Giri. Not necessarily a drawing master like Ulf who apparently tried to draw vs stronger players. Just a clarification. Andy Soltis I think once wrote a book on defense in chess, probably somewhere in my library, as yet unread :)
Maybe referring to a guy who is under investigation for sex trafficking and rape as interesting is not such a good idea. Unless of course the sight of a grown man smoking a cigar, bragging about his wealth and referring to women as chicks is something that appeals to you
