Your accuracy scores in your 2 most recent games were 7.6% and 6.4%. I think your recent losses have very little to do with the strength of your opponent. I'll bet if you review your games you'll see a lot of unforced errors. Also, as a beginner, how do you know how good a 700 rated player is supposed to be or not supposed to be?
I feel like there's a conspiracy. Opponents seems suspiciously good (not cheaters).
Sort:
Mar 4, 2021
0
#3
mrizzo14 wrote:
Your accuracy scores in your 2 most recent games were 7.6% and 6.4%. I think your recent losses have very little to do with the strength of your opponent. I'll bet if you review your games you'll see a lot of unforced errors. Also, as a beginner, how do you know how good a 700 rated player is supposed to be or not supposed to be?
Yeah, I'm sure I made a lot of bad moves. Although I do feel like it was partly because my opponent created a bad situation for me, not just purely my unforced blunders.
I wouldn't ever claim to have a great knowledge of what a 700 "should" be. I'm just saying everyone I've played lately feels a lot better than the similarly rated people I played last month. The way I've heard strong players describe the below 800 level also seems a little at odds with what I experience. I heard one youtube IM say, for example, that below 800 players don't really play with specific openings or know how to play against them. In my experience, most of my opponents know basic openings for white and black.
Happened to me last month. Steadily climbing then like something changed. I lost like 10 in a row.
I just kept learning new openings and new tactics then I'm back to where I was in no time.
Just keep learning
Mar 5, 2021
0
#5
Another point is that when a player joins the site, they have to select a starting rating. If they've never been rated before, they might choose a rating quite far above or below their actual playing strength... not on purpose, but just because they don't yet know how their own play translates to a chess.com rating.
So when your own rating approaches one of the user-selectable entry ratings (such as 800) you might end up playing people who are much stronger or much weaker than their published rating... since they are new to the site and haven't yet had time for their rating to equilibriate to its "natural" level.
Blakethesnakeroberts wrote:
but suddenly my opponents feel rock solid.
I just checked the last game that you lost. Your opponent started by hanging an exchange, then failed to take a hanging piece, then failed to checkmate in 3, then hung his queen, etc etc. Rock solid.
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/8651788013?tab=analysis
Just be relaxed and patient. Enjoy playing the game. Even GM's have "loosing streaks". Don't get too analytical until you can read the board "automatically" and see the "obvious" things. Then get analytical as much as you feel (or don't). One way to improve at a low level is to keep playing against weaker opponents. You'll see their mistakes and learn by them.
Mar 5, 2021
0
#8
don't play when your not in the right frame of mind, calm, relaxed, lots of time, no distractions...:and you will play better. but yes, there are better players with low rankings. trying out new opening or defenses, playing aggressively instead of normal conservatively, etc. their ranking may plummet for a while , or they may start another profile for that.
Mar 5, 2021
0
#9
there are also players that resign as soon as they get down a piece or 2 from error. that may be a fair assessment at high level play, but at beginner level.....half the games they give up could be stalemated
Mar 5, 2021
0
#11
I have lost 10 games in a row bcs i wasn't playing good. But sometimes you'll feel like your opponents are suddenly playing better. I added some of those opponents as friend. And truly i have seen them advancing very rapidly on the rating graph. What i feel like every now and then after playing at certain level for some days you get better and push more that 100 rating points at once. So i guess this is the definition of what 'being in form' means.
Mar 5, 2021
0
#12
Alexander_Clamilton wrote:
I thought I would pick some of your mistakes and explain them here. Not to say all these are necessary to be avoided at your elo but I figured why not. I am by no means certified/entitled to coach anyone but what I shared below is what helped me, with some coaching, to really step my game up.
This game:
1) You played 3. d4 completely blocking your bishop, that you only got out on move 17. You do not necessarily need to follow the 'develop all pieces right away' rule, as in some games that just wont be possible, but try to get into the habit of doing that where you are sure that developing the said piece causes no harm.
2) 14. Nh5 is a blunder - it happens on all ELOs so that's fine, but try to always look whether there is a danger, either direct or potential, to the piece you just moved. You were losing by (+22.7) on move 19.
3) for few consecutive moves you left your queen hanging, being attacked by a pawn, to then blunder it anyways. The Queen is the most powerful piece, especially the less pieces there are on the board, and so making sure that it is not threatened at any point in the game is a good habit.
This game:
1) On Move 5 you developed 5. ... Bg7 - very good, as often players do not notice the long diagonal. That's exactly what happened on the next move and your opponent blundered a Knight, but you did not notice. Always try to remember what role your pieces have. If you control a whole diagonal (or whatever square, file etc.), try to always monitor whether there are any hanging pieces. The knight remained there isolated until move 15 - always look for chances to punish hanging pieces.
2) Your opponents often rely on the point above more than you do, as you often leave your pieces (from what I noticed it's often rooks) hanging. I.e. move 13. Bxa8 in this game. You nicely punished your opponent on move 17. ... Bxa1. Again, monitoring what can be captured is always good, the more you do it the more material you win. Whether the move was good or not (since the engine doesn't like it) is less important at this stage as it did not blunder any of your pieces outright, you saw a hanging rook and you took it - the more you find captures like these the more you win.
3) In the end you had a nice idea for an attack. Finding an attack is often very difficult and I see that you even went as far as sacrificing some pieces. That's good and really helps you understand what it takes for an attack to be successful. However, you are not playing the game alone and your opponent will often do the same. You need to look at what your opponent is doing or trying to do, as only racing to checkmate without considering your opponent will not get you very far. Always monitor possible checkmates/checks, then captures, and then attacks.
Thank you for this! It's a huge help to have someone analyze what mistakes I'm making. I've just been learning from trial and error and youtube, so the direct advice is definitely appreciated.
Blakethesnakeroberts wrote:
What is happening? I started playing chess a few months ago and my rating has steadily increased. I knew literally nothing about the game when I started, not even how the pieces moved, and began at 200.
By last month, I had gradually gotten my rating up to 760. Then, about a week ago, I started getting crushed. My rating has now dipped all the way back to 636. I don't feel like I'm playing much worse but suddenly my opponents feel rock solid.
This is a bit of a vent, but I guess my question is, is it possible some of these players are indeed stronger than their ratings suggest? I wonder if some of them have a habit of abandoning games or something like that that leads to a lower rating than their skill would indicate.
I know how you feel to be honest, but your claims are a little preposterous. I mean that with respect. I started with chess.com and knew how to play. And started with a rating of 1200; and got destroyed. Which was demoralizing to put it simply. Hahaha. The reality is, once you’ve played about 100 games, you are at a rating that fits your skill level. It’s a hard truth but the real truth. I saw a lot of comments reviewing your play. At the end of a game, look at the quick analysis and I bet you probably have over 3 blunders, and that will likely lead to a loss. I recommend analyzing your losses and seeing what the opponent is doing. Like any sport or competition, or even just a simple life reality, understanding your mistakes is key for growth. Go through the lessons. You will start to see the board in a different way.
Sep 2, 2023
0
#15
Maybe not a conspiracy, but I wonder if people are using resources while they play. When I play friends or bots or even some pairings here it feels fair. I'm brand new also, so who knows.
Sep 2, 2023
0
#16
Yes, it can be a conspiracy. In the old days, old servers. Suspected cheaters are paired with suspected cheaters. If you beat the engines, that is when you are confirmed as cheater; and get banned. If you get beaten badly; That is when you are paired with non-suspicious players again. You can feel the difference of the level of play. That is why I do not like the sportsmanship and report cheating buttons. Anyone can give you bad feedbacks and get thrown into the sea of cheaters and trolls.
What is happening? I started playing chess a few months ago and my rating has steadily increased. I knew literally nothing about the game when I started, not even how the pieces moved, and began at 200.
By last month, I had gradually gotten my rating up to 760. Then, about a week ago, I started getting crushed. My rating has now dipped all the way back to 636. I don't feel like I'm playing much worse but suddenly my opponents feel rock solid.
This is a bit of a vent, but I guess my question is, is it possible some of these players are indeed stronger than their ratings suggest? I wonder if some of them have a habit of abandoning games or something like that that leads to a lower rating than their skill would indicate.