Currently, I have this book for my undergraduate course in Abstract Algebra, and I really really wish that the professor picked another one. The main reason why I don't like this book is the fact that the explanations are very bad and there is like 2 pages max. for each topic and then around 30 problems at the end of each topic. I think that clearly this is not enough of theory and explanation for an undergradute text in Abstract Algebra. There are very very little examples, and if there are any then those would be proof of the theorems and that's it. I just don't feel comfortable with this book, and I had to search for other books in order to get through the class. I really like the contents, and I just wish the author would spend some more time explaining why and not just stating the theorem. That we can all found in Mathematical Handbook.

My first course in abstract algebra was from a pre-publication version of this text. I remember Professor Alexanderson rushing into class at the last minute with the next few pages of the text still damp from the mimeograph machine. I have used the text in my abstract algebra courses ever since the first edition became available. The most distinctive feature of the text is the extensive and well organized sets of problems; the problems are the course. The problems at the end of each section not only give practice which reinforces the material in that section, but also leads into the next. There are many cases throughout the text where the main theorem in Section N has already been discovered at an intuitive level by the class from doing the problems in Section N-1. All that is left to be done in Section N is to give a precise statement and a proof of the theorem. I have found that students who are serious about mathematics thrive on this text. Two groups who find this approach to teaching/learning mathematics to be particularly beneficial are the students who intent to pursue graduate school and those who are preparing for secondary math education. I recommend the text highly to all my fellow mathematics professors who are looking for just the right text for their abstract algebra course.

Here is a collection of interesting chess essays that include chessboard meditation, chess sportsmanship (or lack of), lunacy and chess, ideas in chess, computers and chess, bridge and chess, Jews and chess, memory in chess, etc. Lots of good trivia. Abrahams talks about some of the chess personalities and grandmasters he has known. He has about 20 games, including what is known as the Abrahams defense. Written in 1974. No index. Uses English Descriptive.

This is another fine Dover title. Abrahams covers lots of details useful for the 1200-1800 player. Instead of buying one "Winning With The..." book at $20-25, do yourself a huge favor buy three or four of these great Dover books. These are still around after 30, 40 or 50 years because they still are relavent, unlike opening tomes which go out of print almost immediately. Everyone should have a stack of Dovers in their library. (OBTW, I do not work for Dover!)

Well, surely this book is for young learners. However, the explanations are such a boring text, in the sense that they not provide detailed logical explanations which should be the basis of them. Moreover, the logical thinking is out of date. Do not expect to find new things here.

This book is subtitled, "A First Undergraduate Course", and that's exactly what it is. Don't expect in-depth technical treatment, but it's a decnt introduction to abstract algebra, covering basic properties of the integers, groups, sets & mappings, rings & fields, polynomials, Euclidean constructions, and some additional material on the integers and coding (from the table of contents). We used it in my undergrad course, and it was one of the simpler courses I've seen. All in all, not a bad way to go if you're just looking to dip your toes in abstract algebra. Look elsewhere for a deeper consideration.

This out of print text is pretty bad. I am a professor of mathematics, and teaching out of this text is a drag. The organization is dubious, and the examples are shallow. I recommend Gallian's or Fraleigh's text instead.