My coach does not like Jeremy Silman...

DragonSavage---I looked at your blog & I have some advice.  First, don't set a limit on your improvement.  It may take a little time, but 1800-2000 is not too high to aim for.  Next, pick a hero to study.  At ChessGames.com you can find all of their games.  I'd suggest starting with Paul Morphy (learning the open game & how to attack) & then going to Dr. Siegbert Tarrasch (learning how to plan & play solidly).  So far you have not spent a dime.  I would suggest a few books:  The Game of Chess by Tarrasch,  Tarrasch's Best Chess of Chess by Reinfeld & How To Play Chess Endings by Znosko-Borovsky.  Any opening knowledge is available thru free databases on-line.  Thousands of tactic problems free on-line.  And finally.....play serious games and go over them with friends or a coach if you choose.  I believe within two years you'll be looking at an 1800+ rating. 

To OP. It's either you follow your coach's instruction or seek another coach. If you want to stay with your present coach and still read Silman's books, just don't tell him. You can read Silman's books in your PRIVATE time and place.

IMO Silman is a great author, its just that he simplifies things a little bit too much sometimes, especially in the Amateurs Mind, but sometimes this can be an excellent thing, such as in his Endgame Course book, but if your coach thinks that Silman spoon feeds amateur players then tell him to read How to Reassess your Chess! 

I disagree about the over simplification. Restricting your opponents knights, finding advanced posts for your knights, positions bishops are good in, positions they are bad in, what strategic positions rooks do their best in, having purpose behind your moves, these are all things he teaches in the Amateurs Mind. For those who could play a game where they get to the middlegame and ask themselves "now what am I supposed to do?" this book is extremely excellent. Like I said that strategic information about the best ways to improve your pieces, and the common mistakes amateur players make in games, helped boost my rating from 1300 uscf to 1650 uscf. So clearly it wasn't "that he simplifies things to much". Maybe in your opinion he does, but maybe you just didn't put in the work to get everything out of the book.

I assume that almost everyone likes Silman. He's a funny guy, very unconventional and he has the ability to explain very well.

Nevertheless, I can understand if somebody don' t like his books:

His system to imbalances (which is not new) he apply constantly and always, it reminds me of Alexander Bangiev with his strategy Square.

This one-sided view as pushes some people from.

In his endgame book that doesn' t matter and thats why many people buy it nevertheless.

Although technically speaking imbalances are just differences in your position and your opponents. You should ALWAYS be aware of these differences, whether they are minor pieces, pawn structures, space, activity, etc, and what they mean for your strategic goals and your opponents. Of course there is more to chess than just that, and more to it than what he teaches in his intermediate level books, but I think all weaker players should look to understand the differences in their position and their opponents and what it actually means.

Also players should look to understand how to maximize their pieces, and restrict their opponents. It is a very important principle that a lot of players don't apply to their own games. Silman takes amateur games, and shows how and when these principles should be applied. This practical experience is very good, rather than an incomprehensible book showing 2 masters or gm's applying these principles in games a player can't even understand, being explained in languages or variations a player requires a strong coach to even begin to make sense of.

A lot of the positional principles he explains in his book LEAD to tactical opportunities, something a lot of people don't realize. After all good tactics come from good positions. If you're being dominated positionally there likely wont be any legitimate tactics you can develop, all you can do is wait for your opponent to blunder and then call it tactics when you take advantage of his mistake.

I wonder what would TheGambitKing have to say?

And how did you like these books (compared to the Silman stuff)?

>Silman is world famous and rich<

That's not a recommendation for anything. Silman has a lot of good reasons to read him. That he is "rich and famous" are not them. 

Per previous question, yes, I was referring to Watson's 4-volume opening series. It's excellent, and geared to the Great Middle (1200-1700). 

Only buy quality chess books that you really enjoy reading and draw you back to them again and again and again and teach you new things every time you read them like Nimzovitches My System and Chess Praxis.

I have one piece of advice for you...........

Never study Chess like it's medical or law school you'll only end up hating the game and become bored and frustrated. Love of the game and passion for Chess should always be #1 thing in your heart and mind the hard work everything else will follow.

>all you can do is wait for your opponent to blunder and then call it tactics when you take advantage of his mistake<

Excellent comment. Too often the canard of "study tactics" overlooks the fact that most of the Great Middle (1200-1700) find tactics through opponent blunders. That's great, but it's not what books filled with hundreds of tactical puzzles are referencing. 

I maintain that you are better off studying your favorite openings, the positions that result from them, and using something like Silman's imbalances theory to formulate a plan. 90% of your wins will come through better positional play and a good plan, as well as solid endgame technique. Only rarely will you win "by tactics," and like Phelon said, most of those will be from opponent blunders. 

>he may feel his own livelihood is threatened <

Or he may just be a jerk. The chess world is filled with them :)

Now, I like Silman. I have several of his books. I like his over-the-top kind of style. I enjoy reading his articles. But for some reason, his material just doesn't seem to resonate with me. I seem to get more from Soltis and Nieman. I think you just need to find someone that "fits." That being said--Silman is definitely on my list. I plan to go back to How to Reassess Your Chess (4th edition) after I finish reading Pawn Power in Chess by Kmoch.

I completely agree with your coach. Silmans books are aimed to keep readers happy, and thus sell well.

The apparently did not help you, but I gained at least 200 points from reading Silman. Yes, that made me happy.

DragonSavage.  I've issued a challenge on chess.com for a unrated game at one day permove.  I'll try and help you improve your game.  Let's play......

Thanks malibumike. I need all the help I can get from stronger players.

DragonSavage.  I've issued a challenge on chess.com for a unrated game at one day permove.  I'll try and help you improve your game.  Let's play......

I'd recommend Dvoretsky over Silman because he emphasizes active learning.  Start with School of Chess Excellence or Future Chess Champions.  Read his Endgame Manual only after finishing and seriously studying less advanced endgame books.

Okay I disagree with you about the opening study, I think that that's a trap a lot of weaker players, such as myself when I was lower rated, fall into before they are equipped to understand openings. If you can't understand openings, dont memorize variations, simply don't study them until you're stronger. Also I think you really should study puzzle books about tactics, they can even be easy puzzles, but study them hard. Study them to the point where they are ingrained in your brain and you know every answer by heart. Once you do this you will have amazing tactical vision, and can see many possibilities and tricks others can't.

I agree with you completely on the "90% of your wins will come through better positional play and a good plan", however the final culmination of  great positional play throughout a game is usually a beautiful tactic to finish off the game. That is what I mean by real tactics, and not capitalizing on blunders. Also sometimes your tactical brilliance will just net you a lowly pawn, and you need to use your endgame skills to convert the advantage like you mentioned. So all in all I mostly agree with you, just not about the tactics and openings.