Reviewed by Randy Bauer

Randy’s Rating: 7.5

Many players are looking for books that highlight chess understanding, and CHESS: THE ART OF LOGICAL THINKING does a good (albeit sometimes tedious) job of commenting on the play of both players in 30 games played in the last 25 years.

Grandmaster Neil McDonald seeks to expand and expound on chess concepts by commenting on each move for both players in all 30 games. This method, used successfully in earlier books, including Chernev’s LOGICAL CHESS MOVE BY MOVE and Nunn’s UNDERSTANDING CHESS MOVE BY MOVE, provides a method for understanding the thoughts of both the winner and loser in each game. As McDonald notes, “chess annotations, like history in general, are normally written from the winner’s point of view. The unrealized hopes and dreams of the loser are allowed to vanish forever.  But this is to miss half of the story as a big part of chess success is based on restraint and prevention of the opponent’s plan. Therefore it is vital to consider what didn’t happen as well as what did occur.”

The games are split into chapters based on the opening moves, with “classical chess thinking” represented by 1.e4 e5, “dynamic chess strategy” represented by the Sicilian Defense after 1.e4 c5, “judging the time factor” displayed by diverse ideas after 1.e4, “strategy under the microscope” being games with 1.d4 d5, “the art of the counterattack” demonstrated by 1.d4 Nf6, and “delayed dynamism” devoted to flank openings. Each chapter contains between three and six games, with all having a decisive result. It’s notable that white scores much better than in normal praxis, coming out on top by a score of 21-9.

The games are high-level affairs, and the players appearing in three or more games are Karpov, Korchnoi, Kasparov, Anand, Ivanchuck, Shirov, and Kramnik. It’s probably not surprising that Kasparov, with six games, appears most often. While many of the games are well known, it’s notable that only four are from World Championship matches. Still, there are no real unknowns among the contestants; it appears that all games are among players who currently hold the grandmaster title.

It’s pretty clear that the games are chosen more for the logic of the play than to reflect the typical result of the various openings. For example, all three games after 1.e4 e5 are won by white, which would not be the expected result for world class black practitioners like Karpov, Adams, and Ponomariov. Likewise, all three games with the French Defense are won by white, and the only chapter where black even breaks even deals with the Sicilian Defense.

The author has chosen games with clear ideas and objectives where one side or the other imposes their will pretty much from start to finish. These are games worthy of close study, and McDonald does a good job of highlighting the key learning points along the way. 

At the same time, one can question the one-side nature of the games’ presentation. While the author, in the introduction, suggests that most books are annotated from the winner’s perspective, I had the same feeling of déjà vu as I played through these 30 games. As an example, there are, according to my calculations, 231 exclamation or double exclamation points given to moves by the winning side in the 30 games (with a few exceptions for obvious book moves that the author annotates for teaching purposes). By contrast, only 5 moves merit an exclamation for the losing side. At the same time, there are 18 moves marked as questionable by the losing side, and not a single questionable move is identified in the games by the winning player. By contrast, many closely annotated games collections find questionable moves galore, even on the winning side, and strong moves by the player who ends up losing the game as well.

Of course, often the best teaching examples are games where one side, in dominating fashion, presses home an advantage from the start. While these can be helpful as examples of logical thinking, I’m not sure they fit with the author’s introductory comments that the game should be viewed equally from both sides of the battle. It’s hard to believe that the disparity of strong moves is quite so great.

Even with these caveats, there is much to like about the book. McDonald is a strong player who also writes well – you get a perceptible sense of what the players were thinking from his notes. He also paints interesting pictures with his prose – you can often feel that you’ve been transported to the actual game and board as you read along. Many players will find these games easier to play through because of McDonald’s interesting commentary.

Finally, I must take issue with the need to comment on every move of every game. Here, for example, there are numerous examples with 1.e4. There are, ultimately, only so many useful comments that one can make about this first move, and McDonald runs out about half way through the games. Likewise for other move sequences that are repeated. While it is nice to keep to one’s word to comment on every move of every game, the reader would likely give the author a pass (and free up a few pages for more useful content) if some of these first move had been given a free pass.

In conclusion, CHESS: THE ART OF LOGICAL THINKING provides 30 good examples of modern chess thought, annotated to help the average player understand how players cope with challenges and win. While the games may not be indicative of normal tournament struggles, they should prove instructive for many players.