Thank you for writing that thought provoking article. I found Amateurs mind very helpful when I read it about 30 or so years ago. And I agree that the book’s target audience is 1200-1800 USCF. I think that a lot of the criticism of How to reassess your Chess is due to players not realizing that it’s intended for an audience of 1800 at the low end. I feel like a lot of adult improvers tackle it before they are ready and are disappointed because it’s beyond them.
I also think that it is important to realize that Silman himself thought that the best way to master chess was to review thousands of master games and learn patterns. But he understood that most amateurs couldn’t an/or wouldn’t follow such a regime. So the “imbalances” system was intended as a substitute. A workaround to help amateurs who wanted to enjoy the game and improve but who lacked the time and dedication to do the real heavy lifting. He expressed this many times in his chess .com articles. Al’s he explains it in his review of “Move First Think Later” where addresses Hendricks’s criticisms of his methods. Unfortunately the links on Mr. Silman’s homepage no longer work. But fro the way back machine, you may enjoy this if you haven’t already seen it. I leave you with:
Hi,
Thank you for writing that thought provoking article. I found Amateurs mind very helpful when I read it about 30 or so years ago. And I agree that the book’s target audience is 1200-1800 USCF. I think that a lot of the criticism of How to reassess your Chess is due to players not realizing that it’s intended for an audience of 1800 at the low end. I feel like a lot of adult improvers tackle it before they are ready and are disappointed because it’s beyond them.
I also think that it is important to realize that Silman himself thought that the best way to master chess was to review thousands of master games and learn patterns. But he understood that most amateurs couldn’t an/or wouldn’t follow such a regime. So the “imbalances” system was intended as a substitute. A workaround to help amateurs who wanted to enjoy the game and improve but who lacked the time and dedication to do the real heavy lifting. He expressed this many times in his chess .com articles. Al’s he explains it in his review of “Move First Think Later” where addresses Hendricks’s criticisms of his methods. Unfortunately the links on Mr. Silman’s homepage no longer work. But fro the way back machine, you may enjoy this if you haven’t already seen it. I leave you with:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230719215407/https://www.jeremysilman.com/book-review/move-first-think-later/
https://web.archive.org/web/20230719215407/https://www.jeremysilman.com/book-review/move-first-think-later/
Thanks for unearthing that, William! A very reasonable reply from IM Silman.