Omg...look, I just don't like him and I'm not going to detail why extensively. It's not worth it. If you like him and you're benefiting from him, great. I hope that things continue to go well for you. It's really not a big deal.

You're still not properly reading what I'm saying. It has nothing to do in particular with Dan Heisman.

Dude, really - this is over. Go back to whatever it is you were doing. I understand some of you want everyone to feel like a humble little servant but that's simply not the way the world works. I'm entitled to not like Dan Heisman or anyone else without having to extensively justify it. I'm shocked that you've spent this much concern on this. I don't like Dan Heisman. End of story.

On a side note: I see some of you are Dan Heisman fans and yet you haven't even seen his material on ICC. This is where he puts the best of his work, obviously. It's pay material. If you legitimately are a fan of Heisman and his teaching is helping you, you'd be kind of crazy to not at least give the trial of ICC a shot. The video lectures they have up there are by far the best you're going to find on the web.

How would one go about getting into chesscafe's PDF archive without subscribing? I would like to read some of the old columns.

You need to understand what each instructor, book or video brings to the table. They are not equally strong on everything.

Chess has many facets and each bit can fix a certain part of your game. Dan Heisman is really strong on the following parts of the game:

- Thought process
- Time management

This is stuff that is written in his columns, you dont get so much of this in his videos. However Heisman is not the go to guy if you want to understand a position positionally. I think Silman is good for this kinda stuff but I think he fails at teaching students a proper thought process. This is where watching videos of GM like Seirawan and Akobian has helped me.

Even my coach which I critcize gave me a very good advice, you dont need to play the main lines in openings ( I criticize him because he puts too much emphasis on openings on levels where players are not that strong yet but of course I listen to what he has to say with regards to openings).


I got the free trial to watch Heisman lessons but they are not as strong as his columns because when he reviews amateur games his positional analysis is not as strong as the one a GM can make and the stuff in which he is better than GM ( teaching amateurs good thought process) is more accesible on his columns.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140714...s/archives.htm

Cool,thanks for that, Rei!

Rei and WarCrazy, no more ad hominem posts or I will do moderator stuff

You really didn't need to write any of this. You're ALLOWED to like Dan Heisman even if I don't. As said, this is really not a big deal.

You asked why didnt I have his ICC material and I replied.

Considering that, at most, ICC costs $10 a month...I can't really see a justifiable reason to miss all of that material of his considering that he's been so beneficial to you. Of course, I don't see how someone who plays strictly correspondence chess on Chess.com (not you) could even KNOW that Dan's stuff is helping them but that's another issue entirely.

I love Dan Heisman's articles. His videos are unwatchable for the simple reason that it is next to impossible to tell which pieces are white and which pieces are black. Simply ridiculous.

deleting posts is more effort than I want to put into this. PM me and BJJ if you have a problem with a post. Otherwise I'm treating it as finished.

In fairness - I watched one of his videos on ICC yesterday and it wasn't too terrible. Still, he relies on the engine tremendously and spends a lot of time on concepts that are, to anyone who's not a complete novice, pretty elementary. His "Novice Nook" series is designed specifically for adult improvement and as a result has a touch of a spoon feeding vibe to it.

I already gave the reason. His columns are the good ones, the videos not so much.

How do you know if you can't watch them?

I got the free trial.

Fair enough. If you prefer the columns, you clearly prefer the most simple and basic of his material and I'm glad it's been beneficial for you.

What I feel is a useful habit to build in conjunction with harder problems: Never "give up" without choosing a move. If all the tactical ideas you find are duds, try to select a good "practical" move (not just a wild sacrificial idea, either), and consider the exercise a partial success if you can.

"Trap puzzles" like this one illustrate the importance of this habit wrt gaining the most practical benefit from exercises.

I deleted a bunch of posts which do not contribute much to the thread, and gave Rei and WC an official warning. Try just behaving like you do the other 364 days a year where I don't infract anybody.

Sorry.

Wait, this forum has moderators?

Seriously though, from what I just read through it seems RoundTower could easily have been even more heavy handed than he was with the post deletion. I think it's safe to say that we would do well to all agree not to discuss Dan Heisman any further in this thread.