SMITH MORRA GAMBIT COLLECTION

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1023165

IM DanielRensch
However, at the beginning to intermediate levels, it makes a lot more sense to simply
search and create a large list of games (perhaps on a specific topic -- ie an Opening,
Pawn Structure, Type of Player, etc) and simply go over as many as you can -- NOT
spending more than 45 secs- 1 and 1/2 minutes on ANY game. In this way, a player
can, over time, begin to improve their intuition and "sub-conscious" approach to the
game...

GM Axel Bachmann:
"The truth about my training method is that looking over a game for just a couple of minutes
can actually be a wonderful investment, if done correctly. The key is searching for repeating patterns;
this takes some practice but is feasible. In my career I have seen close to 100,000 chess games,
including most of the grandmaster-level games played over the past decade. The cumulative
experience from spending a minute or two on each of
these games has allowed me to gain an excellent positional understanding. Staring at a position
for a few seconds is often enough for me to see who is better, which plans will work, which pieces
should be traded, etc.
Acquiring such a level of experience and positional knowledge requires many years. Going
through thousands and thousands of games takes a very long time, even if you only spend a couple
of minutes on each. Most importantly, being able to actually see th e patt erns does not come easily
to everyone.
Addressing these two diffi culties is exactly the purpose of this book."
http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/2/235/chess_structures_-
_a_grandmaster_guide_by_mauricio_flores_rios/ (see the PDF excerpt)

Silman series about HOW TO LEARN FROM MASTER GAMES

https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-point-of-studying-master-games-part-one#comments
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-point-of-studying-master-games-part-two#comments
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-point-of-studying-master-games-pt-3

* Pick a chess hero and go through all his/her games. They can be with or without annotations. If
they have annotations, the whole experience becomes slow and relaxing and, as you look over one
amazing variation after another, intense. If its sans notes, then you can just view it as a movie of a
famous players art and life work.
* Go through lists of the best games of all time and look over all of them.

* Look through whole tournaments (old and new New York 1924, featuring notes by Alekhine,
is a classic example) and enjoy the ebb and flow as some favorites smash the opposition while
others fall on their face.

Silman t trang review ca ng: here

Q: What kind of study program did you use?

A: I mostly looked at endless master games (while simultaneously eating copious amounts of ice
cream), sometimes going over several hundred in a single day (only stopping when I was slaphappy
and drooling). Most young players I talk to dont go over nearly enough master games, but now that
databases are available theres simply no excuse for this.

Q: Who do you think are the top 10 players in history?

A: 1) Fischer, 2) Lasker, 3) Kasparov, 4) Karpov, 5) Alekhine, 6) Capablanca, 7) Anand, 8) Botvinnik,
9) Spassky, 10) Petrosian.

Q: Who are your favorite players?

A: Alekhine, Lasker, Fischer, Larsen, Petrosian, and Karpov.

A: What is the best order to read your books?

Q: The answer depends on your strength. However, lets say you are 1800 or below. In that case
read the 4th edition of How to Reassess Your Chess to page 28,
next read all of The Amateurs Mind,
then go back to How to Reassess Your Chess and read the whole thing cover to cover.

Quick vs Slow
Hi: Silman recommends going over games very quickly to subconsciously absorb patterns. Some
masters agree, others say it's a waste of time and you should go over them slowly to understand
them. Does it really matter, as long as you're going over games somehow?
Tr li:
The answer is both - This was said by Kasparov in his former Kasparov Online Chess University, which does
not exist anymore. Kramnik said the same thing. Their reason is this - go over the game quickly to get an idea
of the patterns and a feel of what evolves from opening to middlegame and then to end game.

Then go over the game slow, deliberately, and study it. Write notes, they don't have to be exhaustive, and then
compare those notes with the games annotations, if they have done it.
You get the benefits of both.
Here are some articles that might interest you:

Can Anyone Be An IM Or GM?

The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly
Dancing With Yourself
Do Aspiring Players Need a Coach/Teacher?
I also wrote a couple articles about older players and if they can (or cant) reach master
level. The answer is YES, they can reach master but only if they work very, very hard (kind of
true about anything).

After that, try and play people (30 minute games or much longer games

Books about opening=look for a book that explains that openings basics: pawn structures,
typical tactics, patterns, and typical plans.