Has anybody here encountered or read the book Rapid Chess Improvement by Mr. dela Maza? It's quite controversial, even IM Silman published a review of it on his site.
but, to be honest, i was attracted by the prospect of rapid improvement and got a hold on that book..until i began to think critically of the methods the author proposes..what are your opinions?

De la Maza tells you to neclect other forms of study and focus on tactics, tactics, tactics alone. That is not how you should learn chess. Sure, you can improve a lot by pracicing a lot of tactics, but after some time you will hit a wall because you don't understand what's going on in a game. Tactics don't come out of nowhere, they happen when there is some positional weakness in a position you can exploit. If you focus on tactics alone without learning other aspects of chess, it's like you learn how to fly a plane without learning how to navigate, the electronic and hydraulic systems of a plane or even know how a plane can fly at all. Look for Silman's review on this book: Rapid Chess Improvement: A Study Plan for Adult Players

At last somebody who agrees with me. In my experience, unless you are 6 years old, there isn't any such thing as rapid improvement.

I recently got saw an add on one of the chesspages i frequent, that promised me that if I buy their studying material, I could become a grandmaster in only 2 weeks studying. (Google adds ftw)

Now, Mr Dela Maza (or whatever he's called) didn't promise that you could become a grandmaster, but he's doing the same thing, he is selling an easy solution to a hard problem. It never works, it doesn't work when in diets, it doesn't work in getting rid of depressions, it doesn't work in making money (except for ofcourse, selling easy solutions to hard problems, that's allways a good way of making money.) and it doesn't work for chess.

Spend your time and money on something else, even if the book is a decent tactics books (which I don't know, it might be, it might not be) I still wouldn't spend my money on his book, for the sole reason that he is basicly a hack trying to lure people and their money appart.

Susan Polgars Chess Tactics for Champions coupled with Drazen Marovic´s Understanding Pawn Play and maybe some book on generall ideas in the middle game will probably get you alot further, both in understanding the game, letting you appreciate the beauty of it, and improving your game.

I'll stick up for Mr. de la Maza on this one. While I don't agree with his plan of ignoring everything but tactics, I do agree that tactics should make up at least 50% of the study of amateur players. And I also agree that you'll learn more by studying every day, as he suggests. His method will get you to 1800ish, which would be a good leap for many amateur players. Just be aware that it'll take you another two years to catch up on the knowledge of other areas of the game necessary to make the next leap to 1900.

--Fromper

OK, but would you actually buy his book and apply his method? Personally I wouldn't hit a dog in the butt with it.

I read his article on chesscafe.com. Again, I think it does a good job of emphasizing the importance of tactics, which is something many amateurs underestimate, but that's as far as I'd take it. As for the book, I'm still trying to figure out how he expanded the article to book length (and it's a pretty thin book).

--Fromper

There is no need to buy the book. His 400 points in 400 days articles can be found online and I don't recall anything significant in the book that wasn't in the articles.

I did apply part of his method and I say it was worth at least a class of strength. I went from 1470ish to 1670ish.

I liked his structured study program and followed it in a modified form. Rather than doing groups of 1000 problems I stuck with groups of 300. I did not restrict myself to his program and I did look at other things but this training program had clear benefits for me.

The big thing is that your mileage will vary considerably based on your start point. If you are 1000 or 1100 at the start I'd expect you to make huge gains in a year. Then again from that start point there are many ways to make huge gains so....? And on the other hand I wouldn't expect the average expert to get much out of this sort of training.

I think the one criticism I would make of his articles and his book is that he overlooks the importance of playing serious games. He played a lot in the few years that he was active. I have seen similar ratings gains in other very active players so I think this may have been a factor as well.

There is no Magic Bullet but De La Maza does offer a simple straightforward method to rapid improvement - work. His program takes at least an hour a day and often more of focused work. Do that on any aspect of your chess, in any manner, and I fail to see how you won't get better.

I don't disagree but I don't entirely agree either. At the 1000-1800 level what is the difference between strategy and tactics? De La Maza is all about rapid development and creating threats. This may be in the book and not in the articles and I don't have it in front of me so please bear with me. Now are rapid development and creating threats strictly tactical? In order to play that way you have to put your pieces on good squares where they have good acitivity. Is that not positional play?

On a different note some aspects of endgame play are easier after a healthy dose of training a la De La Maza. Exact calculation is easier and endings that can be tricky like some positions with a queen versus a rook are easier to learn after this sort of work.

Bottom line for me is that his training may be primarily about middlegame tactics but it has benefits on more aspects of your play than just that. There may be a gulf between your tactical strength and other aspects of your game but I'm not convinced that it is as big as your post seems to suggest.

I think De La Maza defines rapid improvement as more than 100 points a year. I'm not sure that this is a relevant measure. It seems to me that improving players quite frequently gain more than 100 points in a year but most players don't improve at all from year to year so is rapid improvement the issue or is it just improvement period?

Bottom line in all of this is that if you want to get better you have to invest a significant amount of time and effort. There is no quick fix.

Recommended reading: "What it takes to be great" by Fortune magazine Secrets of greatness: Practice and hard work bring success - October 30, 2006