This approach is intended to enable the reader to assign himself to one of the player types and find out whether he belongs to the activists or rather to the pragmatists, theorists or reflectors. The result allows to draw conclusions in order to further expand the individual strengths or to develop a more universal playing style overall.

Because even if you usually win thanks to your strengths, it makes sense to work on your own weaknesses as well. Of course, if there is only one move in a position, you should be able to find it. Playstyles are especially important in positions where you have a great choice. However, they also play a role when you choose the type of position, which you should strive for based on your style.

Interestingly, a playstyle can also be imitated, which may even be the appropriate strategy against certain opponents. For example, certain characteristics stand out clearly in activists, and being able to adjust to them as an opponent is of course very valuable. A good example is Kramnik's win over activist Kasparov (at the London 2000 world championship match). Since Kramnik always managed to steer the game in the direction appropriate to his style, his big opponent never had the chance to demonstrate his own strengths in positions with attack and initiative.

While 'The Human Factor' was about a clear distinction of the four playing styles, this book aims to emphasize the universality of each player. After solving the tasks tailored to the four player types, it becomes clear how your own competencies are distributed. Accordingly, GM Vincent Keymer states in his foreword:
"Even if the further development of one's own player personality to a universal player who unites all player types may remain a utopia, it's still worth pursuing."

Twenty years ago, New In Chess magazine started its own Proust Questionnaire, entitled Just Checking. In this back page column, chess players and personalities named their favourites, preferences, moods, life mottos and whatnot. One of the questions has always been: What was the most exciting chess game you ever saw?

Chess greats such as Anand, Shirov and Ivanchuk (and probably any other top player you can think of), authors and commentators such as Jeremy Silman, Jennifer Shahade, and Tania Sachdev nominated memorable games. This anthology presents the 45 most exciting of these most exciting games.

Besides inevitable ‘usual suspects’ like Kasparov-Topalov (Wijk aan Zee 1999) or the ‘Immortal’ Anderssen-Kieseritzky (London 1851), you’ll be treated to a wide variety of lesser-known gems. You’ll see Ding Liren revelling in an all-out attack, Ivan Saric juggling a knight and five pawns versus two rooks, and Sergei Radchenko chasing the white king all over the board.

Every game is a showcase of the richness and resourcefulness of chess.

Steve Giddins edited this selection, a job he immensely enjoyed: ‘I hope that every reader will find games here which bring a smile to their face and a lift to their heart’.