Nunn is one of my favourite commentators. Crystal clear to the point.

There is no author more instructive than John Nunn.

@German1184

3 жыл бұрын

I admire John Nunn immensely. If one had just one of his many accomplishments, that someone can die happy.

Thank you, John Nunn. Please keep making videos.

thank you ! very nice! more please :)

Hello. Thank you for uploading these videos. I was wondering, how could I get/buy books in the format you use?

@gambitpublications618

Жыл бұрын

The format is for Gambit's app Chess Studio 2, which is available for Android and iOS devices. The app itself is free, you just pay for any books you buy. A list of available books may be found on our website at www.gambitbooks.com/webapp/appbooks.html

Did Black REALLY "open up the position" in the Kramnik vs Anand game? I don't think Black opened the game at all, since there were many pawns obstructing the center files and diagonals. If anything, I think a better description would be to say that Black "kept the game semi-closed," in fact. This says nothing much about the idea of there being exceptions to the rules... which is true... but speaks volumes to the, perhaps, bad selection of examples in the book -- which Aagaard has time and again criticized so well and so poignantly in this own works ("Excelling at Chess").

@nicoterradas

2 жыл бұрын

Up to Black's 20th move, the game is closed!!! (not open), and then by move 26, one of the White Bishops is exchanged... evaporating the so-called advantage of the Bishop Pair. So, the game is indeed opened up after that by both players (but the point is that Black has no Bishop Pair to be fearful about by then). Again: bad example by Watson to make the point.

@gambitpublications618

2 жыл бұрын

Here are a couple of the things Aagaard says about "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy" in his book "Excelling at Chess": "This book is very well structured and features numerous good examples", "John is a good writer, one of the best in the business, and reading his stuff is always interesting." Sure, Aagaard disagrees with Watson on some matters and why not, since if there were a single absolute truth in chess then the game would not be very interesting. As anyone who has written a chess book knows, finding good real-life examples to illustrate points is not easy, since real games always have some "messiness". It's also easy to pick apart someone else's work by focusing on one or two positions. For example, just a few pages after the comments on Watson's book, on page 61, Aagaard gives the endgame Geller-Dorfman, Lvov 1978 as an example of the superiority of the bishop over the knight in the endgame. However, the given position is dead drawn with any reasonable defense and Aagaard doesn't comment at all on the losing blunder 42...Nf1. Does this invalidate his point? No, of course not. So the same criticism could be made of Aagaard, even though "Excelling at Chess" is an interesting and worthwhile book.

John Watson is the only chess author I can’t gel with.