The Method in Chess by Iossif Dorman

I once bought the book mentioned above. And I have to say that I am very disappointed with the book. Only the first part, the theoretical part, of the book can really be used. The majority of the book contains hardly any explanations. The method itself seems okay, but the book is really bad. Therefore I wanted to ask who uses the method and what is the experience with this method. Is the method practical to use? Who can make sound statements about the method?

Of course the Name is Iossif Dorfman!!!

The book is good and the author, twice USSR champion and twice champion of France and former second of Garry Kasparov is a strong player good as well.
The author explains his method and then gives games mostly of his own and also of others to illustrate.

Then you must have read another book!? And also the reviews of others, are not exactly well-disposed towards the book! Besides, I did not ask what you think about the book, but how well the method is applicable in practice.

Well the author obviously found his method applicable in practice, as he twice won the USSR championship.
The applicability is also illustrated by the games he presents as examples.
He was also a valued second of Garry Kasparov and of the French national team.
The main point of his method is the tradeoff between static factors like weak pawns and dynamic factors like piece activity. In that sense it is a modern version of the teachings of Siegbert Tarrasch.
Book reviews are never impartial: some reviewers like a book while other reviewers detract it.
Many people adore "My System" by Aaron Nimzovich and "Zürich 1953 The Chess Struggle in Practice" by David Bronstein, while others detract these.

I had a conversation with a GM second of Magnus Carlsen a few years back and asked about books that changed his understanding of the games and " The Method in Chess" was one of the more important. I managed to get hold of the book and it was truly great. It addressed how to play statically / Dynamically and all the framework guiding the decisions. It also talks about critical moments when the position changes and how this should guide the time management. If you read the book and don't find the information useful then probably you are not ready for it :)
It depends on the level of the player if a player is around 1900 Fide and reads the book and he gets nothing out of it and then maybe revisits the book when he reaches 2200 I think the takeaways would differ a lot.
Regards Richard

aynen

aaa

@Pawnstructures
I don't think it has anything to do with my playing strength that I think the book is bad. He may be an excellent chess player, coach and second of Kasparov, but that says nothing about his quality as a book author. The practical part is simply not well written. Nor do I want to start a fundamental discussion about the book here! That was not the intention of this thread! I would like to know, is the method in itself good and how well can you use the method in your own games.
This also applies to @tpr! It goes without saying that Dorfman likes his method. But what I would like to hear from players who use this method is whether it is good to use and whether you can get real benefit from the method.
@Pawnstructures Have you used the method yourself? If so, tell us a bit about it. Because there's nothing about it in your first post! https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/the-method-in-chess-by-iossif-dorman#6

To me the book was helpful.
Comparing it to "My System" I must admit that My System is better written and that "My System" treats more basic stuff like open files, 7th and 8th rank, pins, elementary KP-K and KRP-KR endings.
Also Iossif Dorfman was Russian, went to live in French and wrote the original in French. A book review in the French Magazine "Europe Echecs" mocked his style of French. Iossif Dorfmann also published the book himself, which lead to some typographic errors. Then it was translated into English. I read the French original, so I do not know if the translator did a good job or not.
Anyway, this is a strong player: twice USSR champion testifies to that: this cannot be luck. This man knows something about chess, otherwise Kasparov would not have engaged him as his second. Some of the examples he presents stem from the Karpov-Kasparov World Championship matches where he acted as the second of Kasparov. Those matches also testify to the value of the subject matter in the book. Karpov was famous for converting seemingly minute advatages to a win. In the match Kasparov on several occasions deliberately accepted static weaknesses like backward pawns for dynamic compensation.
Maybe the book is too advanced for you. Maybe you should study it a second time to get more out of it.
Some people speak highly of books by Jeremy Silman or Dan Heisman, who are mere IM. Here is a book by a top GM.