What's the fastest way to get better?

I'm wondering what you guys think is the fastest/best way to get better at this game! 

I picked up chess a few months ago and I've gotten to 1500 mostly by watching random Chess videos and the tactics trainer has helped a lot, but I'm plateauing as of the last couple weeks. Do I need to start buying Chess books? If so which ones?  Should just spend a lot more time playing games? I feel like it wouldn't be helpful to play bullet/blitz games unless you analyze each game afterwards, but perhaps playing trains the brain a bit?  And would faster games be better than the 15/10's I usually play? Has anyone improved much with Chess Mentor here?  Should I just be more patient and reduce my sights on an increase in rating?  If there was a quick and organized method to view tons of openings and games played I think that'd be great. The game explorer on here is good for openings, but it's hard to view tons of individual games since it seems you have to play on until like move 19 until you've deviated enough from the masses to get individual games to study. Maybe that's best though. Or perhaps some other Chess sites on the web have been helpful besides youtube?

Just seems like there's a ton of great players on this site and I'm wondering how they got there. Maybe it just takes a long time. I'm always open to tips and suggestions to improve. Thanks!

Play slow games where you concentrate really well, afterwards go through the game and write down why you did everything you did, what were your thoughts. Also discuss the game with the opponent. Then analyze the game to figure out which of your thoughts made sense and which didn't. Try to figure out what to do better next time. Then, play another game...

Seems he's doing a lot of that.  Been playing a few months and has nearly 1000 standard length games (!).  And this guy plays every day.  I'd say it's time to get a book

Thanks for the advise, Kwal! I'm sure I'm like the 10 thousandth player to start a forum like this but I appreciate the input.  I'll have to stop making blunders so I can't blame the loss on the obvious mistake when I might have been losing positionally anyway.  Good to hear longer games are better. 15 minute games give me plenty of time to think, so I'm glad I won't have to resort to bullet games and timeout constantly haha.  I'll start discussing games with my opponents now too if they're up for it. :) 

Woot, book time it is! Any suggestions on what to get?

No, bullet/blitz won't help you improve.

Chessgames.com has more chessgames than you'd want to view in a lifetime.  It has a number of search features and is free.

There's no secret to becomming better... you get out of it what you put into it.  And yes that takes time.  You've done really well in just a few months (I have to wonder how good you were before you started taking chess "seriously").  I read your profile, and seems you'll improve, just a matter of time

I recommend Nunns "Understanding Chess Move by Move."  Sounds like you're interested in playing through games and that's what this book is... except a GM gives some explanation for every move (!).  Also it's pitched at or a little above your level, so should be great in that respect.

But really if you read any book cover to cover it's going to help.  Pachman's book on strategy is excellent and a classic.

I played everyday for 3 years (blitz only though) and gained ~100 points a year.  Finally picked up a chess book and joined a club which really helped. 

I think it was IM Michael Brooks who said when asked about his chess development that he read chess books one after another... years passed and one day he woke up and was an IM.  Tongue in cheek but you get the idea.

Thanks for the suggestions, Waffle.  I'll check out those books and set my sights closer to 100 points a year then. And since you were wondering how good I was a few months ago, let's just say I knew how pieces moved but didn't know what a pin was. :)  Seems like it's a consensus that Chess books are pretty important. Good to know.

100 points per year is conservative if you're putting in a lot of time, but I think it's a very reasonable goal... much more reasonable than all the posts about "can I become a master in 6 months?" 

Didn't know what a pin was huh?  Then you've done great for just a few months, really.

First question is which kind of chess you want to become good at : OTB chess, turn-based chess, blitz... ? They are different.

Second question is : are you looking for maximum speed of improvement, or laying the fundations to become really good ?

if we knew what is the "fastest/best ways to get better at chess" none of us would be here by now, we would be more likely be the tournement by now ! 

you could try this method here....

http://www.chess.com/article/view/study-plan-directory

@hicetnunc: To me, it seems like OTB, turn-based and blitz are all related. Since I don't see any difference between a physical board and an online board, isn't the only difference the time you have to think? I like having enough time to consider my options, and I've been playing live games exclusively, generally 5 or 15 minute games.  Blitz seems like it'll get much easier with experience and a deeper knowledge of book lines so the creative thinking/assessment of threats doesn't have to start so early on and eat up the clock.  But that said, would you give different advice to a person trying to improve their blitz game versus a person trying to improve turn-based play? For question two, wouldn't learning the foundations for getting really good also correlate into faster improvements?  I've heard there aren't 'tricks' to improvement and you get out what you put in, so I'm curious how anyone could get around learning the foundations of being really good and still improving rapidly. 

@Rco: thanks, I'll check out that link. 

@Retguvvie98: a coach could certainly help but I don't think I'm at the level to need individual attention yet.  I kind of view videos on this site from the GMs and IMs and such as suitable coaches for my purposes.  It's true they can't point out my individual flaws in move choices/plans, but they'll help teach the right modes of thinking. Seems like I should be able to find the difference. Plus, I'm pretty cheap, so tutoring will have to take a backseat to books and self-analysis for me! :)

The fastest way to get better is to stop making mistakes.

Seriously, though, you just need to figure out which moves are mistakes, and then learn from them by avoiding them in the future. Mistakes come in roughly three categories:

1. feeding pieces to your opponent;
2. allowing tactics that give a decisive advantage or lead to checkmate;
3. ceding positional advantage.

Each category has a broad range of possible mistakes from obvious to subtle. Novices tend to make mistakes of the first kind, but after getting some kind of routine, these are easily avoided by double-checking your moves. Tactics training and game experience will help with mistakes of the second kind. All it takes is to consider all the possibilities that each of your moves gives your opponent, and to make sure that none of them lead to an advantage. You can hone these skills e.g. by playing correspondence games and using the analysis board on all but the most obvious moves. Over time, you will be able to visualize the analysis board in your head, and these skills should then become transferrable to OTB play.

The last category is the most difficult, and it is here, in my opinion, that reading chess books on openings becomes very important. Getting an edge in the opening becomes paramount, and it is good to know the chess knowledge that has historically been accumulated for each opening. In the midgame, mistakes are usually about making specific squares weak and giving control of certain key squares to your opponent. The more room you have, the easier it is to restrict your opponent.

At your level, you should make sure that you never again make mistakes of the first kind (you might be there already); and you should work on your tactical eye so that you can easily perceive when your opponent makes a game-breaking mistake. Books might help you, but the most important thing is to keep playing games to gain experience, and then go over your games to see if you can find your mistakes. Later on, going over master games is a good way to get a glimpse of the mindset required to avoid third-category mistakes.

To me, it seems like OTB, turn-based and blitz are all related. Since I don't see any difference between a physical board and an online board, isn't the only difference the time you have to think?

True, this is already a very big difference. For example, you can't use the same thought process in long games and in blitz. With 3 mins./move, you can check a lot of options, while with a few seconds, you have to rely a lot on your intuition.

But there are other differences as well : in OTB, you have to deal with the physical presence of your opponent, which may be intimidating, or sometimes may indulge you into overconfidence. You may also have to deal with peer pressure (people gathering around your board and looking at what you're doing). You have to write moves down, push the clock and look at the positions on a 3D board.

Finally, turn-based is completely different, as time is not really a factor, you can use opening databases, and you can't use a continuous thought process like in OTB (meaning what you thought about 2 moves ago can help you in the current position OTB, but probably not as much in turn-based games, as you'll likely 'forget' many things after a few days...)

Would you give different advice to a person trying to improve their blitz game versus a person trying to improve turn-based play?

Certainly, but my specialty is OTB chess, so I'd rather not give advice on turn-based and blitz : there are certainly people who are much more qualified than I am here

For question two, wouldn't learning the foundations for getting really good also correlate into faster improvements?

Not necessarily, as learning fundamentals may be hard and require some effort; but results come later : you can improve more. However, it's a personal choice : for example, studying classical games won't help you as much as solving tactics at first, but in the long term, skipping it will probably narrow your chess perspectives.

a coach could certainly help but I don't think I'm at the level to need individual attention yet.  I kind of view videos on this site from the GMs and IMs and such as suitable coaches for my purposes.  It's true they can't point out my individual flaws in move choices/plans, but they'll help teach the right modes of thinking

Main help you'll get from a coach at U1700 is develop a strong thought process and efficient ways to get rid of your main weaknesses. He would also help you make progress faster. However, it's true that as long as you've found a study regimen that suits you, there's no reason to alter it. You may consider the coaching option if you're stuck at some point in your chess development, which doesn't seem to be the case right now 

To me the best training is playing slow (G/2hr or slower), serious OTB games and then going over the games with your opponent consistently, then analyzing every aspect of the game without a computer, then with either a higher rated player or a computer to double check the results. 

I play one or two such games each week, and usually there's enough there to take up quite a bit of time for the rest of the week!

Thanks guys! There is some really good advice in there to take home.  It looks like the solution is pretty simple: just play perfectly! If I can do that, my rating should go way up :)

@azukikuru: My main focus so far has just been eliminating blunders, working on the first problem area, and that basically increased my rating 200 points.  I definitely need to work on the other two, work on things like developing a plan. I mainly find a pin and exploit it and try to play prophylactically until my opponent makes a mistake. I'm really bad at understanding what to do against different pawn structures or creating plans any deeper than a few moves, for example. I'm sure it would be quite helpful to understand where there should be a pawn break and the thousand other ways to improve.

@hicetnunc: Thanks for the responses. Anyone 2200+ is pretty qualified to give advice to a 1500 in my opinion. You don't need to be Kasparov to give good advice :P

pick an opening and play it

and read books by world champions