Elo is not related to how many games you play. There are no "experience points" in chess. There is no way to "level up." Study hard, play a lot, analyze your games and learn not to repeat your mistakes.
I've improved but my stats don't tell the same story
Sort:
@1
"I'm not playing often enough." ++ Best is to play 1 rapid game 15|10 every day.
"how many games I'd need to play over (for example) 30 days to gain 100 Elo points"
++Depending on your opponent's rating and your RD you gain about 10 per win.
"a negative win rate" ++ A negative win rate say 20% against 2200 opponents is better than a positive win rate say 80% against 500 opponents.
My opponents have a roughly equal ELO. Sometimes their skills are very poor and at times it's far superior.
You're not training correctly. You do alot of puzzles but don't think for them. Before you answer a puzzle you need to calculate every single line. Just guessing what looks good is a waste of time. You need to understand what the puzzle is teaching you.
Stop blundering. I've reviewed your latest game. You blunder a piece away by move 5.
@Chesssblackbelt- What’s a decent puzzle percentage? I’m about 55-57%.
Your Elo needs to catch up to your skill
Aka you need to actually show the improvement in your games and turn it into winning more
The easy part is learning it the hardest part about chess is the performance in your games
You have played more than 400 rapid games, which should be enough to make you play better chess.
Have you analysed any of them yourself, or you just looked at the stats?
Jaybird127 wrote:
@Chesssblackbelt- What’s a decent puzzle percentage? I’m about 55-57%.
I don't think it matters as long as you understand the idea behind it afterwards. Can still learn if you're wrong 
chesssblackbelt wrote:
You're not training correctly. You do alot of puzzles but don't think for them. Before you answer a puzzle you need to calculate every single line. Just guessing what looks good is a waste of time. You need to understand what the puzzle is teaching you.
this is not correct, puzzles teach you patterns that you want to achieve in your games, in most puzzles the responding move is often not the best one, it still gives you the winning positions, but in many puzzles the position is such that if response moves are best moves you still need to be super accurate to convert
Leetsak wrote:
chesssblackbelt wrote:
You're not training correctly. You do alot of puzzles but don't think for them. Before you answer a puzzle you need to calculate every single line. Just guessing what looks good is a waste of time. You need to understand what the puzzle is teaching you.
this is not correct, puzzles teach you patterns that you want to achieve in your games, in most puzzles the responding move is often not the best one, it still gives you the winning positions, but in many puzzles the position is such that if response moves are best moves you still need to be super accurate to convert
You should never be caught by surprise at a responding move in a puzzle. You should of calculated all lines at the start.
If your stats reveal specific weaknesses (e.g., endgames, opening traps), spend extra time practicing these areas.
My rating has gone up significantly, did chess.com inflate the ratings even more?
No why would they maybe you just realized how to beat people ?
I did some review of my game stats and objectively it told me that I'm not winning enough games. It also confirmed my suspicions that I'm not playing often enough.
I thought I could use the stats to reverse math-eneer how many games I'd need to play over (for example) 30 days to gain 100 Elo points, but with a negative win rate, I'm behind the curveball.