Peaking At 660?

Is it possible that I've just peaked? I did eat a lot of losses for a bit and after a break, completely turned my luck around and ascended up to the 650s again. Everytime I do though, I find thats where I hit my limit and start to fall again. Is it possible that I'm just peaked at 660? 

I'm not asking for advice mind you. I've taken a lot of it and do see improvement in my play. I'm taking breaks when I take losses and analyzing my games and afterword I start to do well again, even recouping a loss with wins shortly after usually, but I'm finding that even as I improve and advance, I just can't get past that 650 threshold. 

So my question is, have I peaked as a chess player? Will I get better? I've been in this state for months now and based on the other users around here, I should've been at 800 by now at least, but I think this is just my peak limit. 

@1
"Is it possible that I'm just peaked at 660?"
++ No, you can reach much more.

First of all to reflect on this part:

--------------------------------------------------------
I've been in this state for months now and based on the other users around here, I should've been at 800 by now at least, but I think this is just my peak limit. 
--------------------------------------------------------

This statement is false. You are here since Jul 16, 2022.

This is not even a month and a half. On top of it, it doesn't mean anything, rating wise. There are people that join and are 1 500 or more at the start because they are pretty good at the beginning and not true beginners.

On the other hand, you have people that join the site and can't get to 300 within the first month and a half.

There are always those who play better, and those who play worse, so I don't know how did you draw a conclusion that you have to be x rating after a month and a half.

As long as you are this fixed on your rating, I am not sure you will enjoy chess that much, and if that is the case improvement is unimportant anyway. Now to get to your actual questions.

Have you peaked and will you get better are 2 completely different questions. Let me explain.

Have you peaked, as in reached your definitive potential in such a way that no further improvement is possible?

Almost certainly not. Why do I say this? Unless you have some underlying problem (which I will not take into account because this is most likely not the case), there is no reason why you can't potentially get beyond 2 000 here even. Bear in mind that this is just rough estimation, and it is certainly not set in stone. The actual number could be even higher than this, but it will do as you are 600 rated.

You might be shocked by this, but hang on a minute so I can explain. In order to truly reach your full potential, you need to put in a tremendous effort (and to do many things in the right way as well), an effort that in most cases isn't worth the time for a casual player because there are other things to be done in your life.

To truly reach your full potential, you have to put in let's say 8 hours a day for chess at least. This includes playing and studying. You need to go over dozens and dozens of books, to have a coach in order for him to guide you and fine tune your improvement. You need to have a will to do all of this, time and money for let's say at least 7-8 years of your life. After that, even if you haven't reach your full potential, you are very close to it.

So talking about chess peak (as in reaching your full potential) after a month and a half can't be a serious conversation.

Now for the other question.

Will you get better?

I don't know. It depends on your will to improve, your finances, time on your hands... For instance one person might be doing many things in a right way without a coach and can get far on his own. Some people can get to 2 000 just by playing games and analyzing them.

Others need help from coaches, and will not progress too much because they don't know how. So they might put in the effort, but it might be a wasted effort if they do things in the wrong way. They will think they have reached their peak as well, when in truth they might be doing some obviously wrong things that will hinder their improvement.

It depends on what you are doing to get better?

Are you drilling tactics, solving positions and improving your pattern recognition?
Are you aware of all of the basic checkmates (King + Queen vs King, King + Rook vs King, etc) and checkmate patterns (Back Rank Mate, Blind Swine Mate, Hook Mate, Anastasias Mate, Arabian Mate, etc).
Have you studied basic endgames (King + Pawn vs King, King + Pawn + Rook vs King + Rook, etc)
Do you meaningfully analyse your games afterwards to review all mistakes and try to understand the suggested improved lines and why they were better and why yours failed?
Have you reviewed any strategy? (I wouldn't even recommend this to an 800 at this stage, I'd rather you spend your hours on tactical puzzles, checkmates, etc - Do this first anyway).
Have you reviewed openings? (Again, would not recommend yet)

The point is, unless you can say you have "completed" the above - you know you can't have peaked, as there is still so much to learn. Which means there is still plenty of opportunity!

There is no rush to get better, enjoy playing and if you have a passion for improvement, study the above areas and your rating gain will follow.

54 is not a reason to peak at chess....if you were 70 that would be a reason.You do not have lost a lot of memory etc at 54....

To get around 1200 here you need a few hours ( 3) of study of the basic end game and tactics (+10hours) and to learn one opening that you really feel comfortable with ( for me it was d4).

And hundreds of games.....maybe 500.

You should get around 1200 in a few months...(around 6)

But you must think very carefully on every move from you and your opponent.

I did look at your last game and your opening with white is very wild..chaotic...not solid...you do not seem to be in any control or comfortable with your opening?

No.

At one point I was studying hard trying to improve. I was also solving tactics and analyzing my games. I seemed to be stuck for many months and it was discouraging... then things started to click together, and my rating went up. Everyone has plateaus, and it happens over and over as you improve.

No, 650 is not your final peak. If you continue playing and analysing games you will definitely be rated above 1000. Keep in mind that it took Michelle Khare, a famous youtuber, 6 months in order to reach 1000 rating and she had all the help she could imagine with various titled players teaching her chess. You have been on the site for only 2 months. And also don't forget that you started at 400. You have already progressed 200 points. People who say that you should be 800 probably assume that you started at 600. At some point, chess will just click for you. I have heard a player here who was stuck  for 5 years below 1000 rating and now he is rated 2300 on this website. You have only been playing on this website for less than 2 months. It is completely ok that your highest rating so far was 650. Also, It is normal to have rating fluctuations. Don't worry, 650 is not your final peak.

BTW I analysed 2 more games for you in a recent thread 

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/for-beginners/will-i-ever-see-1000?page=4

Is it possible?  Of course it is possible - I am the living proof it is possible.  660 is where I will likely stay.

Completely agree with #14. People need to stop pedalling this total lie that "Anyone can reach 1500, you just have to stop blundering.", in the real world people have limits on money, time and patience that prevent progress. I'm obviously not allowed to mention names, but they know exactly who they are.

You don't need any money, it is irrelevant how much time you have as you should count how many games you have played before you reached a certain rating, not how much time it took you to reach it. Yes, everyone can reach the strength equivalent of today's 1400 strength on chess.com. In fact, as #4 says, everyone can probably reach the strength equivalent of today's 2000 rated player on chess.com

That is a total lie. Even the brightest minds won't reach that level without books, subscriptions, lessons or coaching.

I have reached 1900 rapid on chess.com without any books, subscriptions, nor coaching. The only lessons that I have watched were Ben Finegold lessons on youtube. In another forum a player talks about how he reached 2200 on chess.com just by playing games and analysing them afterwards with an engine.

You started a5 1900. Your argument is completely irrelevant if you start that high.

I have played 464 rapid games on this website and I am still rated 1900. I started at 1600 and then I won a couple of games and I was immediately rated 1800-1900. Even if you believe that first 5 or so games were flukes, you can't explain how I am still rated 1900 after 400 games by believing that I am not 1900 strength. If my strength wasn't actually 1900, I wouldn't be rated 1900 after 400 games. I had started playing chess before I made an account on chess.com that's why I was immediately rated much higher than beginners, because I played on lichess before I played on chess.com and I improved my chess by playing on lichess.