Any tips in breaking 1700 rapid?

Looking for some advice in improving my rapid, it would be good if someone could comment on some games I lost and find my weaknesses too

Tactics, tactics, tactics. The difference between winning and losing comes down to that. I’m at the 1700 level as well, and I am trying to focus on limiting my blunders and mistakes. Puzzle Rush helps a lot. 

Do you think puzzle rush is better than just solving puzzles? The thing I do not like in puzzle rush is that since you begin with the easiest puzzles (mate in 1) you use a Lot of time doing puzzles that actually do not improve your skills.

play chess ez

#1
The essence is to play and to analyse your lost games.
Tactics puzzles are good too.
Study of annotated grandmaster games is good too.

From my coaching experience, it is important to have a good thinking plan for this level. Knowing the opening, lot's of tactics, and basic strategic ideas usually isn't enough at first. Knowing how to THINK efficiently is one of the most helpful methods I have found. Message me if you would like to know some more!  

Beat other 1700's.

Don't use humor senses to play chess but I experienced that humor senses can improve analyzing tactics and positions.

I looked over a few of your recent games. It kind of looks like you get a little lost out of the opening, and when you do lose, it's often in the middlegame. You get hit with tactics sometimes, but it honestly looks like that's a result of positional play -- you accept backward pawns, sometimes can't find the right squares for your pieces, and sometimes don't spend the time improving your worst-placed piece. If I had to take a stab at what would improve your play most immediately, I'd say that it's positional play. Understanding what weaker and stronger pawn structures look like, how pawn structures affect the way you place your pieces, how to play prophylactically (in a way where you prevent your opponent from improving their pieces), and consistently identifying and looking for ways to improve your worst-placed piece.

That's just my quick take after breezing through a half dozen games. Hope this helps!

Just to give a couple examples from your recent games...

Here, you decided to play 14. f4? The problem is that after 14... exf3, you'll have a backward pawn on the e-file, and you're opening up the e4-square for all of black's pieces (note how both knights are looking at e4, and how black's bishop can now go to f5, looking down the b2-f5 diagonal). It's going to be a pain for you to defend e3 (you don't have any pieces that naturally want to defend e3 here), it's going to be a pain to defend e4 (black can easily bring more pieces to hit e4). It became very difficult for you to find the right moves from there on, and you'll notice that an attack down the b2-f5 diagonal led to a tactical accident (21. Ra2 was necessary but not the most intuitive move, perhaps), which wouldn't have been possible if you hadn't enabled black's e-pawn to leave the e4-square. This is an example of a positional mistake.

Here, you'll notice that you have no f2-pawn, and you've already played g3, so your kingside is kind of weak. You probably should make sure that you can reliably have the a7-g1 diagonal covered, at least until you can exchange black's dark-squared bishop, because otherwise your king might get in trouble along that diagonal. Yet, in the diagrammed position, you played 25. Bxc5?! which isn't exactly a blunder per se, but it is a positional mistake, because now it will be much easier for black to exploit the a7-g1 diagonal with the dark-squared bishop. Later in the game, black plants the dark-squared bishop on d4 and then builds an attack down the f-file, which wouldn't have been so easy if you had retained your dark-squared bishop. Again, an example of a positional mistake.

And in this game, you're doing pretty OK at this position, but you have to find a way to develop your queenside. You decided on 10... N8d7, which wasn't really the best way to develop your queenside, because now it's not clear where you light-squared bishop is supposed to go. You'll have to move your knight again if your bishop is going to get anywhere. And you'll really want to kick white's knight on e5, probably via ...f6, because you'll want to play e5 yourself at some point, freeing the bishop (or else you'll want to think about Bc8-d7-c6, which is somewhat slow, but at least gets the bishop out somehow). But... if you want to play your pawn to f6, obviously your knight can't go to f6 anymore. So... your pieces got a little tangled up. (Notice how, for the rest of the game, your light-squared bishop and your a-rook never move. It's partially because you never solved the problem of how to develop your worst-placed piece -- a positional mistake.)

But these are the types of considerations that you probably should start looking at in your games -- how do I make all my pieces make sense? How do I make sure that I'm not helping my opponent's pieces make even more sense than my own pieces? To work on this, you'll probably want to get a book on positional play -- Ludek Pachman, Dvoretsky and Yusupov, Sakaev and Landa, Markos's Under the Surface, Stean's Simple Chess, Shankland's book on pawn play all come to mind, but some people prefer Silman's material -- or you might look at positional play videos on YouTube and see if those are helpful. But, again, that would probably be my focus if I were you.

18.f4**

Also for me I just went brr to get to 1700

I’m on tilt ok 

hi

Tactics