After much painstaking research, we put together the definitive list of 'must have' chess books.

These books would be pra download?

Endgame books. Fundamental Chess Endings by Karsten Muller and Frank Lamprecht can easily be swapped in favor of the book by Averbach.

Middlegame Books. I would not recommend any of the books recommended by that author. The Middlegame-volumes 1 and 2 by Max Euwe is much better. If that is not your taste then Yermolinsky's Road to Chess Improvement and/or John Watson's Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy and Chess Strategy in Action are clearly superior.

Game collections. These are fine. But it is a good idea to get a game collection from a master or GM whose opennings interest the player. If a player is an king pawn player, John Nunn's books are very useful. If the player likes queen pawn opennings then Shirov or Kasparov are very useful. If the player is more of a strategist then that book on Kramnick can be very useful.

Oh yes, I would not get any of the And Because books. I have them, but I am underwhelmed.

Metabolico... what do you mean by 'pra download'?

Hi Zatiochi... the list was compiled from a group of 1600-2400 players.

I agree with you that an argument can be made for other books, e.g. the Muller / Lamprecht, but don't think you can make the statement that the middlegame books are clearly superior... it's a highly subjective topic.

The games collections were deliberately chosen on the basis of being well annotated, instructional but also accessible and rounded, i.e. that they would help a player develop all aspects of their game.

Please suggest some other 'and because' titles... they are there to help people appreciate the context of the game, rather than just for their quality chess content.

The title of the list is somewhat 'tongue in cheek', with the intention that it would provoke debate, feedback and other great suggestions like yours.

Best regards, Roger

p.s. the Silman book has already been slated by one of the commentators

Finding Bobby Fischer by Dirk Jan Ten Geuzendam gives a more useful broader context of the game. Searching for Bobby Fischer by Fred Waitzkin is a much more nuanced original that one found in the movie adaptation, that gives a view of children's and international chess in the 80s.

Chess Companion by Irving Chernev does give the reader the feel of what chess was like in an earlier age.

But if you really want context. It is hard to beat old chess magazines. They give the reader a flavor and sense as to what it was like to play chess years ago. I remember I got a friend a set of Chess Life bound magazines from the 50s. It was a snapshot in time regarding chess back in the day. I remember going through an old New York Times chess column by I.A. Horowitz from the 40s (Horowitz used to write chess columns every day for the times, until he died in the 70s) It was interesting as it was a point of view of a player who did not pay attention to chess ratings. Ratings were widely instituted in 1960.

Although I cannot give a source, I remember reading that tournaments were largely round robin. For example, the US Open was a series of round robin tournaments before the advent of ratings.

The reason why I did not originally put out a list of books that gave context is that there is no book that talks about what it was like to play chess in clubs, tournments and the like before Waitken's book. You get glimpses, but nothing else.

Hi Zatoichi,

the difference between European chess heritage and US chess heritage is always enlightening. I do agree with you that the old magazines can be intriguing.. in our case it would be the British Chess Magazine, New in Chess or maybe Schach 64 I guess. I do some "chess in the attic" posts on Chess Tales where I blog interesting pages from the old magazines.

Anyway, I've taken on board what you said about the Karsten Muller book, and blogged a short post about it: best endgame guide.

All the best, Roger

I don't know about you guys, but I think that here and here are pretty good lists of books you should have.

"Must have" for whom?

If I were making a list of the "must own" books, I'd probably be focusing on what will help rank novices reach expert/master level, so I'd start with "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Chess", Chernev's "Logical Chess: Move by Move", and 3 or 4 tactical puzzle books, in increasing order of difficulty, followed by an endgame book for beginners. Only after mastering that material should anyone move on to most of the books on your list.

As for your opening suggestions, I have one disagreement there, too. I truly believe that EVERY player with a 4 digit rating should own either MCO or NCO. It shouldn't be read and studied, but use it as a reference when analyzing your own games, to see how you could have played better. Find out exactly where you (or your opponent) got out of book and see what it says you should have done. This is especially true if you don't have a forcing opening repertoire, where books on the specific openings you play are all that you need. I play 1. e4 and usually respond to 1. e4 with e5 as black (unless I feel like playing the French that day). I look up my games in MCO afterwards, so I learn a little bit more about a different king's pawn opening with every game I play.

Just my two pawns worth...

--Fromper

"The 'must have' for whom?" question was defined in the post:

"for aspiring club players"


On openings:

MCO and NCO have long since had their day (are they still in print?)... for that sort of opening reference nowadays, you can flick through the opening book / key in Fritz / Chessbase, or search a database for the novelty in your game.

Well written guides to the concepts, ideas in an opening coupled with a few key games (giving you insight into strategic, positional and even tactical themes in the opening) provide much more value to both novices, club players and masters alike.