So, when something doesn't quite add up according to a computer, the principles behind them are definitely helpful. I checked to see how an engine felt about h3 in that particular position and the engine is like "yeah h3 is best. So poignant game 22, a stonewall defense of playing pawns on first 4 of 5 moves to move the army, leads to a bloodbath of pieces in the center, all protecting pawns that never come into play, then another bloodbath involving the final remaining pieces, after which the side with the passed pawn on the open file simply marches forward to win, leaving a battlefield of only pawns. My instruction has been: this book, the ChessMaster game academy tutorial by Joshua Waitzkin, a lot of youtube videos from Ben Finegold and commentary on games by other players.

I think, without being sure, when I read in my book, Silman-The Amateurs Mind I only move the mainlines, but reading all.A player with a high rating may criticize that the games are too simplistic and old fashioned, but to appreciate the modern theory and its subtleties I imagine you've got to know the classical play first.

Indeed, in later games, Chernev says exactly that, and gives examples of moves he previously criticised, with reasons for why it is different, or forced, or whatever. The author of this book has explained some 33 important games played by master Chess players, with move-by-move commentary on why each move is good or bad, and how important various moves are as the game develops. I generally look at side-variations only if a) the author says straight away this is important, or b) if I'm curious about a particular move and a side-variation covers it.

So, I would like to know what has been your experience with this book if you have read it, or your story and opinion with chess books in general, or commentary about your own experiences on learning the game.