How to get through this 1200 wall

I just jumped from 1200 to 1300+, for more than trivial amounts of time. I too was STUCK at 1150-1200 for quite awhile!

I used to be one of those tactics,tactics, tactics guys, and thus I studied boatloads of tactics! But it was quite frustrating, as it definitely didn't seem to translate into play, either in blitz or OTB. Yes, I was still losing games to hidden tactics found by the computer analysis, but plenty of games where I didn't miss any big tactic, and just lost, even at 1150 level.

Even more importantly, my opponents were NOT 'out-tacticing' me. Even when they beat me on tactics, their tactics were SO easy to see, literally 2 movers, 3 at most, but I simply couldn't do anything against them, or had such a tough position to play that I'd have to see something very hard to survive. 

The 'breakthrough' for me, was to add just a little bit of positional knowledge to my tactics. There's unfortunately no failsafe, easy or even totally logical way to do this, but what I found worked for me was a combo of watching videos of ChessNetwork play blitz (he's a very positional player), and playing through games in the opening that I use and not just trying to memorize the opening moves (kinda useless), but to see what the main setups are and what the main problems they run into. 

I know, sounds 'mushy', but seriously, after about 2 months of just sprinkling this stuff into my tactical training (and still doing tactics on top), it made all the difference. Games started feeling a lot more balanced and fair, in that I was winning with tactics that didn't feel crazy impossible, and opponents blunder MUCH more because you are putting some positional pressure on them through the whole game (I've had a few of 1400+ players hang queens on me outright when it gets messy.)

Also, what I'm finding that about half the 1300-1500 rated players play significantly weaker than even a 1150 tactically-based player, provided you get them out of openings and middlegames they like. In their preferred openings though, against 1100s, they don't need amazing tactics, as they'll get better structures and give opponents many more chances to blunder as a result.

Chessnetwork's free youtube videos are an excellent example of how he (a national master) beats opponents without tactical genius. In his 5-minute blitz games, it almost never requires that he pull some amazing 5-move+ deep combo to finish off his opponent - he'll take a lot of time setting things up positionally (he explains how he does it for each opening), and by the time the late middlegame rolls around, there are so many looming threats that the opponent either makes a blunder outright that even a 900 player could spot, or requires only a 2-mover that a 1100 player could spot to finish him off. Neat stuff. 

(Dont' get me wrong - chessnetwork is EXTREMELY good at tactics - when needed. Watch him play 1-min blitz and it can be mindboggling how fast he calculates complicated tactics. But truth is that in his typical 5-min games against nonmasters that he puts online, you don't need tactics higher than 1200 level to get the win since he puts so much positional pressure on the opponent. He spends the VAST majority of his time in his blitz games on 'quiet' positions; I don't think I've ever watched a video of his 5-min blitz where I was like "wow that was some crazy hard tactics!" - it's always like "seriously, that's how easy it is to beat a 1900 player?!?! WTF!!)

youll need to analyse middlegame positions in order to break to 1300 or more.

tactics tactics tactics.

from studying tactics alone, you could probably reach 1900.  All I do is study tactics, and I am 1800+ USCF.

(I would recommend reading a few books  to, but focus mainly on tactics until you reach 1600ish IMO)

and remember, never stop loving the game

My opinion on this topic is that until one is about 1500-1600 USCF tactics is king.Most sub-B-class games (perhaps as many as 90%) are decided by relatively simple tactical oversights;a small number  are well played tactically and other factors determine their outcome.When studying tactics the key is studying simple tactics(1-3 ply)ad naseum and studying the same tactical position repeatedly,to the point you can spot the correct move in  under 5 seconds when viewing the same position for the 4th or 5th time.Studying complex tactics( 7+ ply) is largely a waste of time for anyone rated below 1500 -1600,99% of a players tactical errors in that rating range will be 3-5 ply in duration.Get really good at the simple  stuff and the complex will come of its own accord.One player in this thread commented that he could see his opponents tactics but couldn't stop them...or ,stating it another way,he didnt see his opponents tactics until it was too late. A famous chess axiom is "Bad moves come from bad positions"... it is worth committing to memory.It is pure fantasy to believe that a bad position can be rescued by a brillant move,there is no opportunity ;however,good positions give all sorts of tactical options and opportunities.So,in summation to the OP.my advice would be:1) study only simple,1-3 ply tactics ;2) study the same300-500 simple (1-3 ply) tactical positions,repeatedly(seriously!) until you can spot the solution in about 5 seconds.The comments of others on this thread are spot on as well,master the basics of endgames( a won endgame is the payoff for good tactical play) and become competant at a very limited number of openings and defenses.Some good books have been listed here,alaways use a chess set when playing through examples in a chess book,to do otherwise is akin to attending a lecture and not taking notes.Long time limit chess games should always be analyised with an engine...ignore tactical errors  of greater than 7 ply.You can start being concerned about 7 ply errors when you no longer commit 5 ply errors.Good luck!

You are stating that you have read many chess books, read my system (intended for advanced players actually) and do tactics etc. This is all the right thing but what I think is happening is your taking too much information in without haveing a proper base for your chess (I am sorry for the choice of words) if you think about it your a 1190 player studying a book intended for 1900+ players. You can learn a great deal from watching chess video on basic fundamentals so you can understand the harder stuff (don't worry about the rating as that would take care of itself when you learn more) but just so you know if you have exceptional knowledge of basic chess fundamentals that should SKYROCKET you to AT LEAST 1300 or something was done wrong. Here's a free video on chess fundamentals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9cIr7P9gkg

you can find many more on youtube

@bb_gum

HOW do I make more tactic exercises like that? I am rating 1790 on chess tempo and I found those puzzles VERY difficult, I even got one wrong. The other ones took me a few minutes each. I feel very confident that I would make the wrong moves in a real game.

Could you should me how to find or make more tactical exercises like that which are basically just counting puzzles? I found that petroff puzzle very difficult and I can feel that those 7 puzzles alone improved my game.

I reachd 1600 + rating only by analysing my games I was playing. No openings, no tactics...

it is easy to get past 1200. Just take some lessons on chess mentor and you will be there in no time. Seriously

I don't know if it's my play style, but I have almost never reached an end game in my life. At least 90% of my games end in the middle game. I figure that's something that happens at my rating, and why I am only focusing minimally on endgames. So far, all of my games are won or lost in the middle game. I have never, not even once, reached a drawn endgame. At least, drawn materially rather than technique-wise.

Don't worry, at my rating 80% of games are decided by either me or my opponent blundering a piece or pawn, 10% are either one of us ignoring the opponent's impending attack and getting checkmated and then the other 10% is reaching an even endgame cause both of us decide to trade off every piece after 15 moves. So basically I suggest not even bothering to "study" endgames, just make sure you don't blunder pieces and eventually your opponents will blunder themselves

The reason you have to study endgames is that you have to play the middlegame for the endgame, meaning that they go together, and after you know the endgame structures you know what you want and what you don't want during the middle-game. That's why they want you to learn endgames first.

Keep as many pieces on the board as possible, don't exchange queens and go for checkmate.

You can get to 1200 on just studying and focusing on applying fundamentals alone. If you focus on following the fundamentals and cut out the things you don't understand (hypermodern openings and gambits, i saw a few) you should be able to break the 1200 barrier rather quickly. If you see a tactic, use it. If you didn't see a tactic, learn from it and analyse it to prevent failing to see it next time. As a starter though, pick either 1.d4 or 1.e4 as white depending on whether you want open or closed games. Defend by following the fundamentals. I would try to focus on not hanging pieces.

Hey do you know any websites that make these puzzles (some with tactics and some without tactics)? If not, do you know how I can make them?