How Can a Beginner Improve Their Chess Strategy and Mindset?

I’ve just started learning chess, and honestly, it’s harder than I thought. I can see how much planning and pattern-reading goes into every move. Any tips on how beginners can improve faster?

Not playing bullet or blitz is prob the first thing, following opening principles is very important, Not falling for opening traps, try to not hang your queen (The checklist) And No need to spend money on books or courses, just use all the free resources

Don't play Blitz or Bullet games

You're trying to learn & improve and it's way harder to do that when you are under time pressure.

Getting better is more important than getting quicker. And when you get better you'll just naturally start playing quicker anyway.

I'd suggest 20-30 min Rapid games or Daily games. Also, doing puzzles everyday is a good way of training your brain to spot patterns and see tactics etc....

Youre 700, you havent even followed your own advice yet

Yes I have.

I've played over 100 daily games

done loads of puzzles

and mainly played 20-30 min Rapid.

But even if I hadn't, so what? Either what I said above is true or it isn't. It doesn't magically become more/less true if my Rapid rating was 200 or 2000

I just dont get why someone is giving advice when it hasnt in fact helped themselves improve, yk what i mean, i like the example "Would you rather take finance advice from a rich person or a poor person?"

But I have improved.

I've gone from 300 in Jan/Feb (when I first started playing chess) to a high of 830 Rapid & 1200 Daily.

That is an improvement. I'm not claiming to hold any world records but this forum is for beginners isn't it? Well I was recently a "Beginner" and I know what helped me to improve and furthermore, the advice I laid out is precisely the advice I was given when I asked a similar question at the start of the year.

So I ask again what was incorrect in the advice I laid out in my initial reply?

Would you rather take finance advice from a rich or poor person?

A rich person. Well assuming they didn't just inherit their wealth or something.

Do you see what I did there? I answered your question as opposed to dodging it.

Pity you couldn't do the same

So now lets go to chess, would you rather take chess advice from magnus or a 100 elo ?

No, let's go to you doing me the courtesy (that I did for you) of answering my question.

I am currently using questions to disprove your point man

What was incorrect about the advice I gave in my initial reply?

It's a very straightforward question.

Its also a very straightforward question whether youd rather a 100 elod advice or magnus carlsens advice

Magnus Carlsen.

And if Magnus Carlsen reads my initial reply and thinks that anything I said was incorrect then I will obviously defer to his greater chess expertise.

So with that out of the way. I ask again, What was incorrect about anything I said in my initial reply?

BOOM, you just proved my point, its also carlsen, not carlson

So what did I say that was incorrect in my initial reply?

You litteraly disproved your own point by answering Rich person and Magnus, theoretical advice is nice and all, but practical advice is way better

and still he cannot answer a very simple question

I dont need to answer it, i proved my point, you proved my point, i dont need to disprove an argument that you already disproved