<Comment deleted by user>
Advice from a FIDE Master & National Master & other people:
lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/im-cant-get-2000-blitz-rating?page=1
lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/im-cant-get-2000-blitz-rating?page=1
I say this to all new people. At 1700 Elo and below (classical on lichess), it's mostly going to be a matter of board vision. You shouldn't worry about complex strategy, openings, endgames, or deep calculations, because all of those will need good board vision to have any effect, so you might as well develop board vision first. By "board vision", I mean that you should always know exactly which squares every single piece on the board can move to. If you ever have a situation where your opponent captures a piece you didn't know they could capture, your board vision isn't good enough (No one actually has perfect board vision. Even Kramnik missed mate in one once. However, your board vision should be reliable enough that this doesn't happen on a regular basis). A good exercise is to, whenever you see a board, whether it's in puzzles, studies, or your games, spot out every single legal capture available.
If you like to learn through videos, I'd recommend GM Ben Finegold. He's pretty good at teaching beginners these sort of fundamental skills.
After you've mastered board vision, your path to improvement will become more subjective, and there will be no catch-all advice just based on your rating. You'll have to start analyzing your games for different motifs.
I looked at your 2 most recent games, and the flaws I spotted were: failing to take free pawns (board vision issue) and trading off pieces in a way that didn't help you (it's generally best to just leave tension there if capturing doesn't improve your position. That way, that makes it more likely that in the future, your opponent will make a mistake that you can exploit through a forcing capture).
If you like to learn through videos, I'd recommend GM Ben Finegold. He's pretty good at teaching beginners these sort of fundamental skills.
After you've mastered board vision, your path to improvement will become more subjective, and there will be no catch-all advice just based on your rating. You'll have to start analyzing your games for different motifs.
I looked at your 2 most recent games, and the flaws I spotted were: failing to take free pawns (board vision issue) and trading off pieces in a way that didn't help you (it's generally best to just leave tension there if capturing doesn't improve your position. That way, that makes it more likely that in the future, your opponent will make a mistake that you can exploit through a forcing capture).
I mostly got here by playing a whole lot of chess. Been playing for thirty years now; I was 1500 for about ten years; then I started playing five minute games on a site that didn't have ratings, and when I came back five or ten years later I was 1800. Then I started watching Titled players talk about games and strategies (back when Rybka was the supercomputer), and I've been 2100 for about ten years.
I feel like most people are interested in much faster improvement, but... it's a game, not a job. Enhoy the ups and downs.
I feel like most people are interested in much faster improvement, but... it's a game, not a job. Enhoy the ups and downs.
@Wodjul
> What I am after is how much and what types of training, puzzles, playing and analysing you regularly did week by week, month by month, even year by year and how this was proportioned and structured.
Well, first off, I'd categorize myself as a casual chess player (quite decent), with an inconsistent playing schedule and no formal training to speak of.
And here's my take on the following factors you've mentioned — • Training • Puzzles • Playing • Analyzing.
I believe all four of these are interconnected, if not the same. While 'playing' and 'analyzing' go hand in hand, I believe that chess is a 'puzzle' in and of itself, right from the beginning phase to the endgame. And each game you play can effectively be used as a 'training' session.
And when it comes to improving one's game, I believe some level of interest in the game and a willingness to learn are essential. In other words, you'll need an open mind.
In my opinion, one of the best ways to understand chess is through regular play, which helps to gradually familiarize you with various concepts and strategies. However, it's worth noting that the pace at which you reach these understandings can greatly vary depending on the individual.
The key to improvement, in my view, lies in adaptability. Objectively speaking, the ability to respond effectively to the ever-changing circumstances on the board is a skill that can significantly enhance your gameplay.
And somewhere along the way to mastery, you should realize that, like many other competitive sports, winning at chess ultimately boils down to doing exactly what your opponent allows. Hence, you can only be as strong as your opponent's weaknesses, so to speak.
Cheers.
> What I am after is how much and what types of training, puzzles, playing and analysing you regularly did week by week, month by month, even year by year and how this was proportioned and structured.
Well, first off, I'd categorize myself as a casual chess player (quite decent), with an inconsistent playing schedule and no formal training to speak of.
And here's my take on the following factors you've mentioned — • Training • Puzzles • Playing • Analyzing.
I believe all four of these are interconnected, if not the same. While 'playing' and 'analyzing' go hand in hand, I believe that chess is a 'puzzle' in and of itself, right from the beginning phase to the endgame. And each game you play can effectively be used as a 'training' session.
And when it comes to improving one's game, I believe some level of interest in the game and a willingness to learn are essential. In other words, you'll need an open mind.
In my opinion, one of the best ways to understand chess is through regular play, which helps to gradually familiarize you with various concepts and strategies. However, it's worth noting that the pace at which you reach these understandings can greatly vary depending on the individual.
The key to improvement, in my view, lies in adaptability. Objectively speaking, the ability to respond effectively to the ever-changing circumstances on the board is a skill that can significantly enhance your gameplay.
And somewhere along the way to mastery, you should realize that, like many other competitive sports, winning at chess ultimately boils down to doing exactly what your opponent allows. Hence, you can only be as strong as your opponent's weaknesses, so to speak.
Cheers.
<Comment deleted by user>
Repetition sets of low level tactics. The same tactics repeated! (As previously mentioned.)
Blitz chess + analysis of errors.
Simple Chess by Michael Stean.
Playing over good quality annotated game collections.
These four things in order of most useful.
Blitz chess + analysis of errors.
Simple Chess by Michael Stean.
Playing over good quality annotated game collections.
These four things in order of most useful.
<Comment deleted by user>
I looked at the 15+10 game (~2 months ago): httpscolon//lichessperiodorg/U0Yc3ECQ
lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/whats-going-wrong?page=3
For the first 24 moves, Wodjul averaged ~45.4 seconds per move (resulting in a positional evaluation of approximately 1.7 in favor of Scheurer1500). Then Wodjul's reserve of time was down to less than a minute, and, for the next 17 moves, Wodjul played at an average of ~10.5 seconds per move (resulting in the smaller advantage of ~0.6 for Scheurer1500). Then, with Wodjul's reserve of time down to ~41.6 seconds, there was the disaster at move 42 (played after less than 12 seconds).
Another 15+10 game (~2 dayss ago): httpscolon//lichessperiodorg/cV6ttNbM
For the first 28 moves, Wodjul averaged ~41.1 seconds per move (resulting in a positional evaluation of ~1.8 in favor of sarikasanil). Then, with Wodjul's reserve of time down to ~29.5 seconds, there was the disaster at move 29 (played after ~11 seconds).
lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/whats-going-wrong?page=3
For the first 24 moves, Wodjul averaged ~45.4 seconds per move (resulting in a positional evaluation of approximately 1.7 in favor of Scheurer1500). Then Wodjul's reserve of time was down to less than a minute, and, for the next 17 moves, Wodjul played at an average of ~10.5 seconds per move (resulting in the smaller advantage of ~0.6 for Scheurer1500). Then, with Wodjul's reserve of time down to ~41.6 seconds, there was the disaster at move 42 (played after less than 12 seconds).
Another 15+10 game (~2 dayss ago): httpscolon//lichessperiodorg/cV6ttNbM
For the first 28 moves, Wodjul averaged ~41.1 seconds per move (resulting in a positional evaluation of ~1.8 in favor of sarikasanil). Then, with Wodjul's reserve of time down to ~29.5 seconds, there was the disaster at move 29 (played after ~11 seconds).
You catch the bug and can't shake it.
Read, play, analyze, repeat.
Read, play, analyze, repeat.