Is this game good for a 1000 elo rated player?

Do you think this game is good? For a 1000 elo rated player? I appreciate any feedback or criticism, to help me improve my games.

If you want the game review thing go to https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/84783184877?tab=review

Nice

You already did the game report review, so you don't really need us to point out which moves could have been improved. As for your forum thread question, my answer is "yes, this is a good game for a 1000 rated player."

Even though your opponent fell into an opening theory trap, you still played good moves overall after that. If I didn't know the ratings and I had to guess, then I might even think this was around 1200 or 1300 chess.com rapid rating as my estimate. It is tough to tell someone's chess rating just by one game though.

Yeah, game review told me that i was 1350 as well, and that my opponent was 800, but thanks anyway!

and, right in the next game, I got 1750 estimated rating!

It's a pretty good game, but there are definitely some things you could work on:

* Tactical sharpness. For example, you missed 9. Bxc6. After he recaptures with the pawn your queen takes the pawn and you've won a pawn and shredded his pawn structure. Do a lot of tactics puzzles and Puzzle Rush, and that will help you spot tactics like this in future - both tactics for you and tactical threats from your opponent that you need to defend against.

* You didn't develop your queen-side pieces. After 10 moves, you have a queen and a bishop out, plus a knight that you've traded off. Now, some of that was due to sharp tactical sequences in the opening, but in general you need to get all your pieces out. Fight with your whole army. There are specific lines where the queen comes out early (this is one of them), but most of the time the queen doesn't even come out until the minor pieces are developed.

* You normally don't want to move the same piece twice in the opening. Obviously that's not a firm rule you should never break - there are sometimes tactical reasons to override that, and to an extent that was the case in this game. But in your first 11 moves, you moved the queen four times, while your queen-side knight and bishop were still undeveloped.

In the opening, you need to focus on bringing your whole army to the fight. Get all your pieces out. Fight for control of the center of the board. In most lines, don't bring the queen out too early. Get castled to connect the rooks, and try to put them on open files - putting them on open files across from your opponent's king or queen can sometimes make good things happen later.

Also, while there were definitely things you could improve in this game, you can usually learn even more from your losses. Find your mistakes and learn from them. Cut out those mistakes and you'll start to win more of those games.

You played brilliantly in the opening. So I would say 1400 or 1300

Thanks a lot, McGleason! This means very much to me

Hard to say when your opponent blundered on move 5. All you had to do was convert a win from a totally winning position. I would suggest only analyzing games close before you inevitably won or lost, rather than straightforward conversion up a lot of material. Not a good game, although, you played fairly well if that's what you wanted to know...

Well, it's a fairly common line, and it's not a blunder to play 5. ... Nxd5

You should work on your opening lines because as you come to higher levels they can easily refute that beginner trap. And also, im not trying to be rude but, the estimation rating is usually inflated by your opponents playing extremely bad, and you just playing the most obvious moves. In the first game you wasted too much time moving your queen around instead of developing your pieces for an attack. In the second game, your opponent just played terribly in the opening. I dont really like 12. c3 because it blocks off the c3 square from the knight and it's kind of a waste of time, instead of c3 probably O-O and if Bxd2 then Rd1. 18. Bb2 you put your bishop there, but never used it, so it wasted a move. I dont think Bb2 is a bad move but if you're going to play Bb2 you should follow up with c4, opening the bishop diagonal. So main point i'd say is look for the most useful and most important move in the position to play. How to do this, i'd say look for threats that your opponent has against you, and look for useful moves that can prevent their threat and do something else. Also please please please work on your openings, the fried liver is not going to cut it. I suggest looking into some more solid openings, such as the Ruy Lopez, or maybe just play the Giuoco Piano.

I agree, DFALT17, it's easier to analyze games that you won, but analyzing games that you lost will be much more help in the form of learning from your mistakes.

I know the feeling you get when you crush someone with a fried liver, and its fine to be happy about it. Yes, it was a good game by you. However i would say it probably wasnt the best choice of a game to estimate your rating on since you had a winning position pretty much the entire time. I agree with Chess Pro 247 that its always better to analyze losses even though its a lot less fun. Of course, that would be difficult if you dont have premium, but you can just use the analysis and look at the top engine lines after each move. Nevertheless it was still a game to be proud of and if you keep that up along with all the information these people are giving you, you should improve fast.

lichess is also good, just not as many features

That was a nice game, but you need to work on openings. As you improve, don't play the Fried Liver. You're gonna get obliterated. Telling this from loads of experience.

At 1000, you don't really need to work on openings much. All you need from openings at this level is to reach a playable middlegame. You don't need a +0.3 advantage out of the opening. You just need to get your pieces developed and not fall into a trap.

Opening principles is more important than memorising lines until you get much closer to 2000.

But, if you want to learn openings, don't memorise a lot of lines. Your opponent will diverge from your prepared lines and you'll have no idea what to do. Instead, learn the idea behind the openings and the plans you should follow. The basic plan will still generally be sound even if your opponent diverges from the specific moves.

When you get up around 2000, you may want to start memorising specific lines. Until then, you don't really need to do that.

I rely more on opening principles than the actual openings themselves. I obviously play my favoured openings, but if my opponent doesn't want to play that, I've learned to simply play according to the idea I have and what the position seems to allow (tho I sometimes make costly judgements).

I think you did well. That's definitely 1000 Elo play.

For a 1000 Elo player, this is great!