You only want answers that have to do with a lack of skill ... But the truth is only you can set that marker, that goal post. No one from the Internet can set it for you. How skilled do you want to become? Is not being skilled enough enough reason for you to stop playing chess? Then by all means stop. Otherwise just keep playing.
How could a random internet person tell you what to think? We are not in your head.
Do you mean quit paying to play chess? Quit trying to compete with the goal of a professional? Otherwise if not based on enjoyment there will never be any other reason to quit especially based off stats.
I mean to quit playing chess in general. How bad should you be when you should stop just playing chess. Not "should you quit chess if you don't enjoy it anymore?" That's not the question I'm asking.
The question I'm asking is "At what point should you quit chess because you're just bad at it?" That's the question I'm asking, nothing to do with fun or enjoyment but level or lack of skill.
I've been told that alot. I did buy a DGT Centaur board I use to practice with slow games and for the aesthetics and feel of real OTB chess pieces. B I also have 70% of my losses as resignation which is probably something I should not be doing at my level lol. I have to work on my discipline and patience. I'll check out those vids.
Those boards look very cool and from what I understand,you can hook those up to your computer and play here on chess.com with a real chess set against online players. I should probably do that myself. There's surely no OTB chess to be played around here.
Lots of folks say don't ever resign, but I'm not so concerned with that. I say decide on your own if there's something to learn from playing the lost position, or maybe not. I've resigned due to frustration before, and it's just a game so that's my choice. I've also played on from a -13.X evaluation and won. It's always a game time decision. At your rating level, it's probably almost always possible to swindle someone from a horribly lost position, so it's probably instructional to play on most times. I saw a few of your opponents resign when I honestly saw no impending threats. So I'm not sure what's going on there.
Normally I would say this discussion should be moved to a new thread since we're so far off topic. But in this case, there really is no topic so it's all good.
There's loads of good instructional stuff here on chess.com too. All free. Check that out. I spend my spare time on another instructional site which has really helped me. I'm improving a lot for the amount of time I have to invest in it, so I'm happy.
In your options here there's an option for showing threats (not sure exactly where this is but it is for in the analysis screens). Do that, and make sure you look at every game. With that option on, it will show you what the threat is that makes the current "Best move" the best move. You might not be seeing why the engine chooses the move it does, and this helps point it out. It's off by default.
I've been told that alot. I did buy a DGT Centaur board I use to practice with slow games and for the aesthetics and feel of real OTB chess pieces. B I also have 70% of my losses as resignation which is probably something I should not be doing at my level lol. I have to work on my discipline and patience. I'll check out those vids.
Those boards look very cool and from what I understand,you can hook those up to your computer and play here on chess.com with a real chess set against online players. I should probably do that myself. There's surely no OTB chess to be played around here.
Lots of folks say don't ever resign, but I'm not so concerned with that. I say decide on your own if there's something to learn from playing the lost position, or maybe not. I've resigned due to frustration before, and it's just a game so that's my choice. I've also played on from a -13.X evaluation and won. It's always a game time decision. At your rating level, it's probably almost always possible to swindle someone from a horribly lost position, so it's probably instructional to play on most times. I saw a few of your opponents resign when I honestly saw no impending threats. So I'm not sure what's going on there.
Normally I would say this discussion should be moved to a new thread since we're so far off topic. But in this case, there really is no topic so it's all good.
Many times when i was around 1400 elo if I would loose my queen and still play I did win against players under 1250 here it's doable because their tactical skills is not very good!
Of course at 1400 elo against anyone under 1300 here it's possible to win 90% of your game if you are very careful;the main thing is to take the time to carefully think on every move you and your opponent make!
Even at higher level too many play very fast in 25+10 or in 15+10 and they loose because of their lack of thinking carefully.
Thing is though, none of the answers are what I'm looking for.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_in,_garbage_out
Even at higher level too many play very fast in 25+10 or in 15+10 and they loose because of their lack of thinking carefully.
That's my #1 problem is being impatient and moving too quickly. I even do it when playing things like daily chess where there simply is no excuse for it. I don't have many daily games played, but I"m trying to force myself to take time on every move like I should. If I look at the timestamps on my moves, virtually every blunder is a quick move. It seems easy to fix, but it takes mental discipline I obviously don't have yet.
Do you mean quit paying to play chess? Quit trying to compete with the goal of a professional? Otherwise if not based on enjoyment there will never be any other reason to quit especially based off stats.
I mean to quit playing chess in general. How bad should you be when you should stop just playing chess. Not "should you quit chess if you don't enjoy it anymore?" That's not the question I'm asking.
The question I'm asking is "At what point should you quit chess because you're just bad at it?" That's the question I'm asking, nothing to do with fun or enjoyment but level or lack of skill.
You are looking for the wrong answers because you have asked the wrong question. The simple fact is there is no legitimate answer to your question. It would be like asking what size fish should you catch to not quit fishing.
There is no such thing as being "bad" at chess. Either you like it, enjoy the company of others while playing, or you don't.
Most people who play chess play for fun. They have no idea what their rating is. As others have accurately said, you should quit chess when you no longer enjoy it (or it interferes with other more important things).
So for you, in your specific instance, because you are trying to figure out if you should keep playing chess based solely on how good you think you should be, the answer is is probably a rating of about 3600. Anything less and you should quit. Because with anything less, you will be playing for the wrong reasons.
Even at higher level too many play very fast in 25+10 or in 15+10 and they loose because of their lack of thinking carefully.
That's my #1 problem is being impatient and moving too quickly. I even do it when playing things like daily chess where there simply is no excuse for it. I don't have many daily games played, but I"m trying to force myself to take time on every move like I should. If I look at the timestamps on my moves, virtually every blunder is a quick move. It seems easy to fix, but it takes mental discipline I obviously don't have yet.
I know a few chess coach that have the same problem with their students,even with some of their best one.
There is no such thing as being "bad" at chess. Either you like it, enjoy the company of others while playing, or you don't.
Oh, well then I guess everyone is at a grandmaster level, huh? Come on, that's almost as stupid as saying "it doesn't matter if you win or lose it's the taking part that counts".
There is no such thing as being "bad" at chess. Either you like it, enjoy the company of others while playing, or you don't.
Oh, well then I guess everyone is at a grandmaster level, huh? Come on, that's almost as stupid as saying "it doesn't matter if you win or lose it's the taking part that counts".
And that is why you are asking the wrong question. And getting (to you) the wrong answers. When I play chess we often do not finish the game, we just stop playing. No win, no loss, and no draw. It's the taking part that counts.
But you have different priorities. You, apparently, do not play for fun. You play based on what your rating is, or should be. And since you don't know what that is, and are asking us, you shouldn't be surprised that you get answers you don't like.
When I play chess we often do not finish the game, we just stop playing. No win, no loss, and no draw. It's the taking part that counts.
I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. You may as well not even play in the first place.
MJ--it appears you do not have the knowledge, experience and wisdom to understand the answer you seek. Reach out again in a year and let's see where you are.
MJ--it appears you do not have the knowledge, experience and wisdom to understand the answer you seek. Reach out again in a year and let's see where you are.
For win percentage, if you're not around 50% wins and losses then there's a problem.
For elo, 800 seems a bit in my mind. I would say if you're not at 1000 after a few months, or you go down from something higher down to 1000 then you should consider quitting.
I was 1300 two weeks ago, had a few days where I played like garbage and dropped down to 900, now I'm back to 1200.
"When should I stop eating food?"
"When you're full"
"NO! I mean... Exactly how many chips should I eat, how much ketchup should I use...how many chips should a person eat in one sitting??"
"......."
Like it or not, the real answer is when you don't enjoy it anymore. I've seen players stuck at low ratings for years that still get a lot of excitement from each game they play. Why should they quit? Bobby Fischer was world champion but quit anyway because he was too worried he might lose his title and therefore his self-esteem.
If you like playing, keep on. If you don't enjoy it anymore, quit. Maybe you'll miss chess after a while and come back.
When I play chess we often do not finish the game, we just stop playing. No win, no loss, and no draw. It's the taking part that counts.
I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. You may as well not even play in the first place.
You are only saying that because we have never faced each other over the board.
The day I take chess seriously is the day I quit. So, I'm pretty sure that day will never come. If you are having problems figuring out if you should still play maybe take Centermass's advice.
It's unlikely both you and I will ever be good enough to take it seriously. I'm about 1800, which is a complete beginner compared to an actual good player. But rating is just a number. There is no reason a 600 rated player can't enjoy chess just as much as a 2600 player.
Think of it this way, whether you are a 600 player or a 2600 player both will get clobbered by a 3600 computer. So unless you plan on playing other people, professionally or on a serious tournament level, there really is no point in judging your ability by rating. I judge my ability by how many people want to play me again.
The promise of a gold membership as a bait for attention is something extremely pathetic, but the "Ok, no gold membership for you, sorry" as an attempt to invalid someone's answer is something even beyond pathetic.
You already had plenty of reasonable answers, you don't like them? you want to be a little attention seeker a bit longer?
Quit the game and do something else then, I guarantee you nobody cares.
You pretty much nailed it. That's all this was. And, starting a second account here to troll with was part of the deal. Stuff like this works mostly because as a rule, most folks are more than willing to help others improve. Then I suppose the troll gets some twisted satisfaction from seeing people do so, probably not realizing that even if it doesn't help the troll, it's likely to help someone else so they still offer answers. They're not typing in order to get a membership they already have, they're just participating in a discussion.
It's more fun than playing chess
yep, you read my mind