Took me 5 years since I started to play.
How long did it take you to get an elo of 1000 in chess.
Sort:
Apr 22, 2022
0
#64
@ vivement
I looked at your game vigarism-vivement...the received wisdom is that (normally) you should try to make only 2-3 pawn moves in the opening so that you can develop your pieces quickly...it's not a hard-and-fast rule that a more experienced player than you will always follow but you are likely to see this advice in all beginner books. But you start out with 4 pawn moves in the first 5 moves and you don't gain any tempi (moves) to compensate for these pawn moves. Even worse, you're doing this while playing as black. Better players than vigarism will recognise why your opening moves are poor and be able to punish you by attacking your pawn center and gaining a big lead in development followed by a dangerous attack.
So you're violating opening principles here...in other words you're not doing what the beginners books tell you to do.
I haven’t read any chess books and I am still improving slowly, is that something I should do at my level(1450)? I know how to play pretty much every common endgame, a little bit of theory, and all the major opening and middle game “rules”.
Apr 23, 2022
0
#66
@ hrarry "I haven’t read any chess books"
well I'm 60 and I learnt chess in the pre-internet era so that's how I learned...and I used to really enjoy reading chess books and playing through the games on my little portable chess set...there are lots of good books but also lots of books that you might find unhelpful because they're too advanced for you...I'd say that 4-6 well-chosen books would give you the solid base of knowledge that could help you to develop into a stronger player than me.
There's a guy in Scotland with whom I have a slight aquaintance who did something unusual. He was graded about 1800 when he was 18 and went on to become a grandmaster while working as a maths teacher. His name is John Shaw.
So anybody can improve a lot...it's just that we need the work ethic and motivation...and maybe a bit of guideance so that we use our time productively.
K thanks for your advice senorpetirrojo
Hello
Apr 23, 2022
0
#70
senorpetirrojo wrote:
Are you sure that you're actually doing the things that the books tell you to do?...that's why I'm saying to read the books 3 times...you need to make sure you've absorbed them properly and then you need to concentrate on incorporating these "chess rules" into your own games. I've not really studied chess for 25 years now but back-in-the-day I think I benefitted a lot from re-reading my favorite books.
For example, most players at your grading don't understand the difference between good and bad bishops...so when you read a book on positional chess you should start to understand this concept and make moves that will lead to positions where your bishops are good and your opponents bishops are bad...and there are lots of other concepts that you can study and apply to your games.
So you need to play games on slow time controls and you need to work hard to avoid blunders...that way you play your best chess. Somebody your grading might benefit from the GingerGM...try his "Longer Games" series. John Bartholomew is likely suited to more advanced players.
If you want you can challenge me to an UNGRADED game (3 days per move) and I'll explain my moves afterwards. But this isn't the best way to learn...you need to absorb material from stronger players than me.
senorpettirojo thanks for the reply -
Yes I've systematically twice gone through 'Amateur's Mind', Chernev's Move by Move, once through Stean's 'Simple Chess', not only reading but setting up all examples on a real board, playing through and understanding them. I like to think I now know more about bad/good bishops and other imbalances than my lowly rating suggests. I'm 1700 on chesstempo Mixed tactics (where you get 5 minutes time limit for each problem) and 2000+ tactics on here so I think my tactics are kind of OK. In real games however I think I sometimes struggle with straight out commonsense in the heat of battle.
I found the GingerGM longer games series, looks great, thanks for recommending!
Sure - I'll set up a challenge for a 3 day unrated game, always up for learning more.
Idk but play obvious openings like french, caro kann and etc.
One year playing for me , on chess.com , a couple of games every day , from 600 to 1000, the hardest is to stay focused, chose an opening and keep it till I know how to react by heart really helped me , how to keep a sane pawn structurre as well ..., but I'm damned slow ha ha
cool
congrats on 1300
i started at 800, went down to ~530 bc i kept playing Qpawn openings and then went back to 800 when i stopped doing that
Feb 4, 2023
0
#76
Started playing on January 26, 2022 and hit 1000 on June 30th, 2022. Currently at 1377 (Rapid).
As for reaching and surpassing 1000, the two most helpful concepts are: Opening Principles and Tactics. These two things alone will get you to 1200+. There's no need to study any deep opening theory just yet. That will come later. Just be sure to study not every game but every loss. Learn what your mistakes were and learn from them. Learn from your losses and add to your repertoire as you figure out your natural or preferred openings are. Mine is the Italian Opening as white for example, so I've added things like the Italian - Koltanowski Gambit and the Evans Gambit to my arsenal. I've studied the mainline, a couple of sidelines and the declined variation. I guess what I'm getting at is that you'll realize that improvement in chess is a process of constantly trying to learn something. Always trying to improve. It takes A LOT of study. But if you want it bad enough, nothing will stop you.
Good luck!! You'll get to 1000 in no time.
Took me a month. I learnt new moves because I lost some games but now I am a very strong player
Feb 5, 2023
0
#79
i started out around 1300. But i had played some 15$ otb with a a friend in the year before, and i had looked a bit on chess.com to see that it was more important to get officer in play than moving pawns in the opening.
My first tournament was in October 1977, a Quad held at the Harvard Science Center (I grew up in Cambridge and was in high school at the time--I was not nor have I ever been a Harvard student). My first rating was 1210 after clobbering a 1500 player with some horrible Zukertort Opening that I thought I invented. In the next six months I drifted down to about 1176 and then started my upward climb to the 1930s by 1987, when I went to grad school and all progress stopped.