I Feel Like Such A Garbage Player

I checked some of your recent lost game, a couple of which were 60 min games where you hung a peice and resigned with 59 mins and 58 mins left of your clock. Try the " sitting on your hands" meathod. I just got back from an otb touney and almost every game lasted over 3-1/2 hours with 39-65 moves played. Time in chess is like currency your not going to put $100 in the trash can, so its the same as losing a game with 59 mins on the clock and opponent wins the game with 4 mins on their clock. Whoever spends more time thinking during the game is probably going to win given both players are equal streangth.

A suggestion as others did, make a lot of problems. It will help you a lot.

To recognize some situations sometimes, and to identify some tricky trades sometimes too.

I wanted to create a topic for this move, and ask some questions about the problem's score. I found some answers and I saw your topic.

So I post it here, because I believe my "problem training" found this move for me.

I'm a beginner, 881 in rapid, and 474 in blitz, but I play less in blitz (maybe it could be a suggestion but I see Blitz like a training room, for now. I don't care about my elo and I go there just to improve fast development. I just try to do my best without thinking. I keep the "serious" in 15-10 games)

I started by the scandinavian option. I always play it. I don't study many openings, only that one, and how to counter it. I won't play it very well all the time, but I have 40 win/28 loss with blacks.

Then there is basic development until the 7th move for whites with knight g5, and you can pause just here if you want to find it. My first reaction was a little panic, I was wondering how that threat came so fast. I could castled but he would take that pawn on f7, I felt lost during few seconds, it's maybe not that dangerous, I'm not even sure, but it's unpleasant. And I see this move.

No matter the rest of this game. It's only for this move. And I really think it's only solving problems that help me seeing this move. Computer said brilliant !

Actually took my time with each move for this one. Tried following opening principles and playing defensively and I'm still getting rocked. Analysis even said I didn't blunder any either. Is it possible I'm just unlucky?

When the opponent fianchettoes their Bishop and castles on that side like in the game in comment #24, you might want to consider trading the Bishop off. The Bishop is pretty strong and an important defender of the King. In that game the Bishop ended up taking your Rook.

You can often trade the Bishop off by making a Bishop + Queen battery. Then you put your Bishop on what would have been the h6 square in the above game. If they take your Bishop you take back with your Queen, if they don't take, you take the Bishop.

Another option is to try to castle Queenside and launch a pawn storm on the Kingside.

I might also add that when you play against opponents whose rating is multiple hundreds of points higher than yours, it is expected that you will lose.

A couple of the last games in your profile you have played against players that are around 1000 or even 1200 rated. That is a pretty big gap compared to your own rating at the moment.

It is going to be very helpful for your improvement when you play stronger players like that, but you don't need to feel bad when you lose in a situation like that, for it is to be expected.

In fact you do not need to feel bad about losing at chess at all, but this is easier said than done, I know.

@Habanababananero It's not the higher ranked ones that get to me. It's the fact that I'm getting beaten easily by people in the 400s-600s.

Yes but at the moment 650 is 200 points higher than your rating. That is already a large gap.

You have only played very little games against players of the same rating you are at as far as I can see and you seem to have won and drawn many of those. So I don't fully understand why you think the 400s beat you easily when you win them quite often.

Just give it time, improvement will come.

Remember to also do tactics puzzles, analyse the games, read a couple books aimed at beginners, watch youtube videos targeted for beginners etc. It will help you imrpove faster.

QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ

15. Ne2 is a serious mistake. You lose a central pawn for nothing, and it was really difficult afterwards. On top of that, the plan to exchange knights wasn't good in the first place. Nxe4 pretty much sealed the deal. The opponent gains a strong pawn center and it was all downhill, because it is like you are playing the rest of the game on hard mode, and the opponent plays the game on easy. 

You followed opening principles and at least you weren't lost after a few opening moves. Play more games like that, and you are bound to win some, because in some of them the opponents will be the ones making more mistakes.

Best of luck.

If you have only ever played chess in the real world, your board vision when you play online may be much worse than your board vision when you play in the real world. You probably play better in real life than online. Another thing is that it is hard to improve at chess if you only play beginners and you don't watch instructional videos or read chess books, if you never see the explanations of how to play chess well. Before I started playing chess online I played a little bit of chess as a kid. Then, a couple of years ago I started watching chess youtubers who are all IMs and GMs. By watching them beat beginners I thought that chess was an easy game and that immediately when I start playing chess I would be rated 1500-1600 or so. In reality, my rating was similar to yours when I started playing chess online. I watched Ben Finegold's lessons, I bing watched Hikaru Nakamura's speedrun videos and I reached 1000 rating after about 3 months. It took me about a year to reach the 1500-1600 rating, the rating that I thought I would reach immediately after I start to play chess. Had Naroditsky made his speedrun videos before I started to play chess, I would have probably thought that beating 2000 rated players was easy and that I would be rated above 2000 immediately when I start to play chess. 

Your opponent played this game way better than 600s usually play tbh. You didn't play badly at all for somebody rated below 1000, maybe your opponent was smurfing or cheating in that game.

On move 7. playing Qf6 I don't like, f6 is a nice square for the knight, I would have played Nf6 or Bg7 instead of Qf6 (most of the time when you push the g pawn you should fianchetto the bishop). 
On move 8 you played Nb4 which doesn't do anything, you are not even threatening a fork on c2 since white's knight on a3 is defending c2 square. Nb4 is a move which doesn't accomplish anything, you should have developed your pieces instead (Bg7, Bd7, Be6 are some of the moves which look much better).
On move 17 you played Rd7 which blunders a rook in 1 move. 

The opening was played ok, on move 13 you played Qf6, I would have played either Bg7 continuing development, adding another defender to the center and to the e5 square (so that you don't get doubled pawns) and connecting the rooks, or I would have played exd4 and then Bg7 after the exchanges, that way Bg7 comes with tempo (attacking white's queen or rook on d4). Bg7 is a harmonious move whether you play it immediately or after taking on d4. You have never played Bg7. 
On the next move (move 14) you gave up a knight in one move. That was the biggest mistake which costed you the game. If you stop making mistakes like that you will improve a lot.
You don't want to trade queens if you are down a piece (unless your king is in such trouble that you absolutely have to exchange queens), so you should have moved your queen back after blundering your knight.
On move 17 you played Bc5, practically forcing your opponents hand to exchange queens.
On move 19 you blundered a bishop in 1 move, these are the type of mistakes which don't allow you to progress and reach a better rating. 

2. Bc4 is not a move against the Sicilian defense. At your level this is irrelevant though. However, knowledge like this may serve you later. And this is the problem with only playing lower rated players, your opponent played d5 way too late, he didn't punish you for the fact that you played Bc4. One of the best ways to get better at chess is to play opponents that punish your mistakes. Your opponent played Nf6 and then Nd4, moving his knight twice instead of playing d5. On move 6 finally d5 appears on the board, but since black played Nd4, now d5 is a blunder because white can play Nxd4 opening up the queen's vision to the h5 forking square.

On move 8 we reach the actually important stuff for your level. On move 8 you played Nxd5 blundering the knight. Tethnically that move is not a blunder, but that's because you can play Nxd4 and then Qh5+  which forks the king and the knight on d5, if you didn't see that, then your move Nxd5 is a blunder. When taking stuff, you need to count how many times you are attacking a certain square and how many times your opponent is defending that square. You need one more attacker then the opponent has defenders. 
You shouldn't be frustrated that you didn't see the tactic with Nxd4 followed by Qh5+ and Qxd5 (even your 1300 rated opponent missed that), for the time being you need to pay attention when capturing pieces whether you have more attackers than defenders.

On move 13 you have a tactic similar to the previous one, Qa4+ would fork your opponent's king and knight if it weren't for your bishop on c4, so you play Bxd5 and then Qa4+ winning the knight on d4. This is "beyond your paygrade" as we say in chess, since even your 1300 rated opponent missed that tactic (otherwise he wouldn't have allowed it). 

On move 15 you had a way to punish the fact that you castled and your opponent didn't by playing Bb5+, Ke7 is forced and then Re1+, the opponent's king is in the open (this fact that you have castled and that your opponent hasn't castled yet should raise alarms in your head that you may have an attack). If you play a slow game where you have 1 hour on the clock then you must look at all the checks and captures that you and your opponents have. That's how you see moves like Bb5+. 

On move 17 you blundered a bishop in 1 move, because you didn't see that he was attacking your bishop twice, so in the next move you blundered your queen. You need to make sure you don't make these types of mistakes. Look at all the captures that your opponent has. You are playing a 1 hour game, I promise you that you can avoid mistakes like this.

You played fine for your level in that game.  Your opponent ... Let's just say when a 600-rated player has 2 perfect games of more than 20 moves in his last 10 games, something fishy is going on.

My exact thoughts, while going through that game I was like well, I don't think I would have played better that game than his opponent did, and I am rated 1800 on this website.

He had another game about 8 games prior that was similar in a completely different line (0 inaccuracies, 0 mistakes, 0 blunders, about 30 moves).  I just roll my eyes when I see that kind of nonsense.  He followed it up with several games where literally every other move was a mistake or blunder.

In his last 8 rapid games he won 3 times with an accuracy above 90%, which is beyond exceptional for a 600 rated player. 
Just to be sure I looked at these games in detail. Many of the moves appear to be natural moves to me, though it's unlikely a 600 rated player will play them 20-30 moves in a row.

Some moves were indeed very great finds, played in 5-20 seconds each. That convinced me they were cheating. I reported the player.

If you don't go for the plan of exchanging the knights, the knight will stay on d4 and be very annoying, maybe you propose the plan of eventually playing c3 kicking the knight? Black probably first had to save his light square bishop since after 14.. Qc7 black is threatening to trap it. The only square for the bishop is on e2 really, and Be2 probably isn't bad because it stops Ng4 and it makes Nh5 suspicious). After that the black has a plan of launching an attack on the kingside and he already has a phenomenal knight on d4. I think white needs to play precisely there or he will be blown off the board. 
When it comes to how this game went, sure, white blundered a central pawn, but he is 600, games between 600s are not decided by somebody blundering a pawn. 12..c6 was a high level move by black. Black (who is also rated 600) didn't make a single bad move the entire game, he punished white for all of his mistakes, he played 16..a6 at the right moment to kick the bishop either to now passive (but probably correct) e2 or to d3 where bishop is a target after Nf6 preparing e4 with tempo and attacking d5 pawn. On move 19 not grabbing the pawn immediately, but first playing the more precise e4 not allowing white's bishop to go to e4, killing activity of white pieces and grabbing more space. On move 22. his opponent played the ultra precise Nc3 instead of the obvious Bxa1. This is a model game by black. I don't know what happened in that game, but I am pretty sure that game wasn't played by a 600 for black, maybe an older brother, a friend, maybe he was smurfing, or maybe he was straight up cheating.

What is OTB? Anyone know