How would you recommend I improve? A GM challenged me and said he would play vs me if i reached 2500. I peaked at 2450 and tanked.
Maybe start by creating your own thread rather than hijacking OPs. This is the beginners forum.
relax, junior mint
Learn exactly how to think in the opening, middlegame and endgame — this is what I teach.
Always blunder-check your moves.
Solve tactics in the right way.
Analyze your games.
Study games of strong players.
Learn how to be more psychologically resilient.
Work on your time management skills.
Get a coach if you can.
Bla Bla Bla
a skill issue is what's going on
This is a Beginner forum, with a title, stuck on 500, what do you expect?
idk theory questions?
tactic stuff?
take your pick
So what's your actual advice?
i dont really have advice besides, don't be stupid, and follow the 3 golden rules.
chomp on hanging pieces
stop ragebaiting bestie
@Rodrigo-Moraes I can help 
You wrote a lot, so I'll break it down into each section I'd like to address. I'll bold what you write for sake of clarity in what I'm responding to.
- "I've been playing for a while now. I have over 1,600 games on this account, and my puzzle rating is over 1,400." That's great! That's a lot of chess. You're rating probably isn't as low as you believe it is. The global average rating is in the 600s. This includes grandmasters and other titled players. This also includes the many people who have been playing chess for many years. Yes, the average is still in the 600s. There's a lot to learn in chess.
- "But here I am, still floating around 500–600. And to be honest, it’s not even that it’s mentally exhausting. It’s that it’s starting to makes me feel stupid." As mentioned, you are right around the average range and that's kind of like you are actually ahead of people, since you are working on improvement and creating this thread! What I can say for sure is that chess can make everyone feel stupid at times; it's frustrating when the post-game analysis shows something "obvious" that you missed under the pressure of the game, or when you don't make the rating progress you are hoping for. It's not you and it's not the game. It has to do with our perceptions. You are NOT stupid for trying to improve. The improvement process takes time and effort.
- "And the worst part? No one seems to take it seriously. On Chess.com and Reddit, you say “I’ve got over 1,500 games and I’m rated 500,” and people assume you’re just terrible or not trying."
Most people are wrong themselves and let us not forget that there's online trolls too. Rating progress is not linear. I know some people who barely try and they cross 1000 rating easily, but then they plateau at some rating slightly higher. I also also know some people who struggled for many years to cross 1000 rating, but then they shoot up in rating later. One chess.com friend of mine literally struggled for about a decade (10 years!) just to cross 1000, then in one year of chess obsession, they crossed 1800 and now they are even higher rated than me. Progress is not a smooth process. Your rating graph shouldn't be a gradual move upwards. It will have ups and downs (feels like more downs than ups sometimes) and look like a seismograph during an earthquake.
- "It used to be that 400 meant not knowing how to move the pieces. Now, 400 players are pulling off tactics and clean openings." Yeah. More people have access to more resources and information now. Centuries ago, you had to be pretty dedicated (and probably wealthy) to own a chess book. Decades ago, players got better as chess magazines became more easily available to more people. Recently, it's even more so with online making learning and improvement so much easier. The newest wave is from amazing content like GothamChess on YouTube and others who have helped spread the game of chess. The game is evolving, but this isn't new; only the ways people learn and think are new. The average player today knows much more than the average player from decades or centuries ago. The good news for you is that you can still gain ground on these people in many ways.
- "Another thing: I run into players all the time with thousands of games played. Some with 5,000, I saw a guy with 55,000 games (YES 55K), still rated under 600. What exactly are we supposed to take from that?" We take that as evidence to show that improvement is not just playing lots of chess. You also have to learn from your mistakes so that you aren't repeating the same errors over and over. We also don't know if that person is trying to improve their chess. There are also some people that don't care to invest the effort into improving. They just enjoy the game at their level (even if they know their understanding of chess is low), so they play speed chess and just enjoy playing.
- "I’ve seen players with 400 rapid but 1,000+ blitz ratings. You can’t seriously expect to beat someone like that fairly." I used to think similarly too, but this shouldn't impact your rating long-term because what happens if you run into lots of people who are higher than their ability? It makes you lose more often and then drop some rating. This makes you then be more likely to play players slightly below your rating. Why? Since they got to that rating without running into stronger players like you did. This makes your rating slightly lower temporarily and because you are paired with players slightly below your rating, then you are slightly more likely to win against them... so that makes you gain rating. It takes time to see this in effect, but it's like a buoy bobbing in the water. It flucutates up and down, but it balances out to where it belongs.
- "Here’s what’s actually happening to me:
I win a few, climb near 600, then get crushed by clearly stronger players.
Drop back to low 500s, sometimes even high 400s.
Get stuck again, but now I’m facing new accounts that play fast and sharp.
And when I lose too many, I end up facing chaotic players with random tactics and weird openings, some easy wins, some frustrating losses." This is the general process for almost all chess players. It's a constant up and down movement. Don't stress about rating numbers that much. Prioritize learning and improvement. If you do this, then you'll understand the game better and be more likely to win. This will get you moving up the rating ladder without focusing on it as much and your rating will be catching up to you!
- "I know what I'm doing isn’t perfect, but it’s not garbage either. And yet I’m stuck." There's many ways to improve. Hiring a chess coach is one option, but there's also many good ways to improve by yourself. You just have to be dedicated to learning and improving and be willing to invest the time and effort to do this. Analyze all of your games with the computer afterwards and especially focus on your losses (as painful as that process is). You should have a specific reason why you lost any game you lose and you should make a mental note of that and try to remember the improvement you should have played. If you rinse and repeat this process, then you'll be learning from your mistakes. Doing this won't make you instantly remember everything you fell for, but you will make it more likely that you'll navigate a better way each time and step by step, you'll eventually improve.
- "So… is anyone else down here seeing the same thing? Or am I just fundamentally misunderstanding something about this range?" Most people severely underestimate the massive rating swings that are normal. Mathmatical variance is a very real thing. You can gain and lose a ton of rating in one sitting and not really be doing anything wrong. Sometimes we just aren't winning much even if we are playing decent. Long-term it does balance out. Keep trying to learn and if you learn from your own games, then you have a recipe for improvement.
@Rodrigo-Moraes I can help
You wrote a lot, so I'll break it down into each section I'd like to address. I'll bold what you write for sake of clarity in what I'm responding to.
- "I've been playing for a while now. I have over 1,600 games on this account, and my puzzle rating is over 1,400." That's great! That's a lot of chess. You're rating probably isn't as low as you believe it is. The global average rating is in the 600s. This includes grandmasters and other titled players. This also includes the many people who have been playing chess for many years. Yes, the average is still in the 600s. There's a lot to learn in chess.
- "But here I am, still floating around 500–600. And to be honest, it’s not even that it’s mentally exhausting. It’s that it’s starting to makes me feel stupid." As mentioned, you are right around the average range and that's kind of like you are actually ahead of people, since you are working on improvement and creating this thread! What I can say for sure is that chess can make everyone feel stupid at times; it's frustrating when the post-game analysis shows something "obvious" that you missed under the pressure of the game, or when you don't make the rating progress you are hoping for. It's not you and it's not the game. It has to do with our perceptions. You are NOT stupid for trying to improve. The improvement process takes time and effort.
- "And the worst part? No one seems to take it seriously. On Chess.com and Reddit, you say “I’ve got over 1,500 games and I’m rated 500,” and people assume you’re just terrible or not trying."
Most people are wrong themselves and let us not forget that there's online trolls too. Rating progress is not linear. I know some people who barely try and they cross 1000 rating easily, but then they plateau at some rating slightly higher. I also also know some people who struggled for many years to cross 1000 rating, but then they shoot up in rating later. One chess.com friend of mine literally struggled for about a decade (10 years!) just to cross 1000, then in one year of chess obsession, they crossed 1800 and now they are even higher rated than me. Progress is not a smooth process. Your rating graph shouldn't be a gradual move upwards. It will have ups and downs (feels like more downs than ups sometimes) and look like a seismograph during an earthquake.
- "It used to be that 400 meant not knowing how to move the pieces. Now, 400 players are pulling off tactics and clean openings." Yeah. More people have access to more resources and information now. Centuries ago, you had to be pretty dedicated (and probably wealthy) to own a chess book. Decades ago, players got better as chess magazines became more easily available to more people. Recently, it's even more so with online making learning and improvement so much easier. The newest wave is from amazing content like GothamChess on YouTube and others who have helped spread the game of chess. The game is evolving, but this isn't new; only the ways people learn and think are new. The average player today knows much more than the average player from decades or centuries ago. The good news for you is that you can still gain ground on these people in many ways.
- "Another thing: I run into players all the time with thousands of games played. Some with 5,000, I saw a guy with 55,000 games (YES 55K), still rated under 600. What exactly are we supposed to take from that?" We take that as evidence to show that improvement is not just playing lots of chess. You also have to learn from your mistakes so that you aren't repeating the same errors over and over. We also don't know if that person is trying to improve their chess. There are also some people that don't care to invest the effort into improving. They just enjoy the game at their level (even if they know their understanding of chess is low), so they play speed chess and just enjoy playing.
- "I’ve seen players with 400 rapid but 1,000+ blitz ratings. You can’t seriously expect to beat someone like that fairly." I used to think similarly too, but this shouldn't impact your rating long-term because what happens if you run into lots of people who are higher than their ability? It makes you lose more often and then drop some rating. This makes you then be more likely to play players slightly below your rating. Why? Since they got to that rating without running into stronger players like you did. This makes your rating slightly lower temporarily and because you are paired with players slightly below your rating, then you are slightly more likely to win against them... so that makes you gain rating. It takes time to see this in effect, but it's like a buoy bobbing in the water. It flucutates up and down, but it balances out to where it belongs.
- "Here’s what’s actually happening to me:
I win a few, climb near 600, then get crushed by clearly stronger players.
Drop back to low 500s, sometimes even high 400s.
Get stuck again, but now I’m facing new accounts that play fast and sharp.
And when I lose too many, I end up facing chaotic players with random tactics and weird openings, some easy wins, some frustrating losses." This is the general process for almost all chess players. It's a constant up and down movement. Don't stress about rating numbers that much. Prioritize learning and improvement. If you do this, then you'll understand the game better and be more likely to win. This will get you moving up the rating ladder without focusing on it as much and your rating will be catching up to you!
- "I know what I'm doing isn’t perfect, but it’s not garbage either. And yet I’m stuck." There's many ways to improve. Hiring a chess coach is one option, but there's also many good ways to improve by yourself. You just have to be dedicated to learning and improving and be willing to invest the time and effort to do this. Analyze all of your games with the computer afterwards and especially focus on your losses (as painful as that process is). You should have a specific reason why you lost any game you lose and you should make a mental note of that and try to remember the improvement you should have played. If you rinse and repeat this process, then you'll be learning from your mistakes. Doing this won't make you instantly remember everything you fell for, but you will make it more likely that you'll navigate a better way each time and step by step, you'll eventually improve.
- "So… is anyone else down here seeing the same thing? Or am I just fundamentally misunderstanding something about this range?" Most people severely underestimate the massive rating swings that are normal. Mathmatical variance is a very real thing. You can gain and lose a ton of rating in one sitting and not really be doing anything wrong. Sometimes we just aren't winning much even if we are playing decent. Long-term it does balance out. Keep trying to learn and if you learn from your own games, then you have a recipe for improvement.
Wow,
Thank you for taking the time to write me such a complete message.
It is truly an honest and realistic response, I can take for this that chess is not an easy journey and that it takes time, and above all: strategic effort.
It is refreshing to read something that is not just validation bias or some kind of “finance guru” advice like “just go get rich, stop wasting money on nonsense, and save more.”
We both know the real path involves consistent choices, study, and sometimes a heavy dose of resilience.
I have been studying violin and viola for many years, and if Violin have ELO, it would be something like an 1800 ELO after 10 years. So I know the road of frustration, and also that turning point when things start to click and make sense.
I have chess books, but for me it's hard to really visualize the notation sequences from paper (youtube are much easier), but I'm working on this, maybe in a few months that will pay off in rating ladder.
Thanks again.
Connection accepted and truly appreciated.
I took the time to review your latest loss. From what i'm seeing your main issue is not using the time given to you. You may have great tactical knowledge or good calculation skills but if you're playing moves as quickly as you did in this game, it will be tough to see said opportunities.
The Solution: Slow down when playing your moves. Feel stuck and don't know what to do? Instead of pushing a pawn in under 5 seconds, can you find a good minor piece move? Is there a threat you need to address? I explain the position in the link but I will elaborate a bit here.
After every move from my opponent the questions I ask myself are the following:
1. Why did my opponent move that piece? what is it threatening? (Fork? A tactic?)
2. Any pieces that couldn't threaten anything before, now can they threaten something because of this move? (discovered attacks)
3. What piece did my opponent stop guarding that was guarded before?
4. Did moving that piece create any weaknesses in the position?
if you can answer all of these questions in under 5 seconds, great! But if not, finding the answers will prove beneficial to your gameplay. To be honest you probably don't need to ask question 3 or 4 a vast majority of the time (at your current elo anyway). Just asking question 1 and 2 to yourself should reduce the amount of blunders you have. If you see no threat you could safely ignore the threat or counterattack. However you can't go horribly wrong adhering to chess principles by developing your minor and major pieces to squares that help them these are generally squares that attack the centre of hold control over it.
The Conclusion: You played a 10 minute rapid and resigned your position at 7:51. You are given that time. You are allowed to use it. If you can't use that time effectively and timeout? That's ok we all had to crawl before we could walk, and walk before we could run. Asking the questions I outlined is essentially a skill that needs to be trained.
If after doing all this and you find yourself not being able to see the reason for your opponents moves and losing despite using your time? It highlights the real issue (not seeing tactics, poor caculation). I think therefore playing slower is a win win for improvement.
Hope this helps.
A lot has been said already. You have to decide whether you are playing for fun or if you want to improve. Playing thousands of 10 0 Blitz games will not do the job - like you won't become strong just by making lots of biceps curls with 0,5 kg dumb bells.
If you want to improve, you might want to consider:
- Playing slow time controls, 45 minutes and slower. Think about every move and analyse your mistakes. It SHOULD be exhausting.
- Doing simple tactical puzzles - like puzzle rush to learn to grab free pieces.
- Read an annotated book for beginners to see moves good players make.
- Stop thinking that the opening has anything to do with your rating.
Doing theory mostly is a diabolical statement
I took the time to review your latest loss. From what i'm seeing your main issue is not using the time given to you. You may have great tactical knowledge or good calculation skills but if you're playing moves as quickly as you did in this game, it will be tough to see said opportunities.
The Solution: Slow down when playing your moves. Feel stuck and don't know what to do? Instead of pushing a pawn in under 5 seconds, can you find a good minor piece move? Is there a threat you need to address? I explain the position in the link but I will elaborate a bit here.
After every move from my opponent the questions I ask myself are the following:
1. Why did my opponent move that piece? what is it threatening? (Fork? A tactic?)
2. Any pieces that couldn't threaten anything before, now can they threaten something because of this move? (discovered attacks)
3. What piece did my opponent stop guarding that was guarded before?
4. Did moving that piece create any weaknesses in the position?
if you can answer all of these questions in under 5 seconds, great! But if not, finding the answers will prove beneficial to your gameplay. To be honest you probably don't need to ask question 3 or 4 a vast majority of the time (at your current elo anyway). Just asking question 1 and 2 to yourself should reduce the amount of blunders you have. If you see no threat you could safely ignore the threat or counterattack. However you can't go horribly wrong adhering to chess principles by developing your minor and major pieces to squares that help them these are generally squares that attack the centre of hold control over it.
The Conclusion: You played a 10 minute rapid and resigned your position at 7:51. You are given that time. You are allowed to use it. If you can't use that time effectively and timeout? That's ok we all had to crawl before we could walk, and walk before we could run. Asking the questions I outlined is essentially a skill that needs to be trained.
If after doing all this and you find yourself not being able to see the reason for your opponents moves and losing despite using your time? It highlights the real issue (not seeing tactics, poor caculation). I think therefore playing slower is a win win for improvement.
Hope this helps.
In the game example you said that 9... g6 was a good move, that loses to 10.Nxg6 i dont kmow what youre talking about
Adult improvement is hard, huh?
I din't know you were on chess.com. I'm the kid from the Stl chess club who played the Jobava against you in a casual blitz match
I took the time to review your latest loss. From what i'm seeing your main issue is not using the time given to you. You may have great tactical knowledge or good calculation skills but if you're playing moves as quickly as you did in this game, it will be tough to see said opportunities.
The Solution: Slow down when playing your moves. Feel stuck and don't know what to do? Instead of pushing a pawn in under 5 seconds, can you find a good minor piece move? Is there a threat you need to address? I explain the position in the link but I will elaborate a bit here.
After every move from my opponent the questions I ask myself are the following:
1. Why did my opponent move that piece? what is it threatening? (Fork? A tactic?)
2. Any pieces that couldn't threaten anything before, now can they threaten something because of this move? (discovered attacks)
3. What piece did my opponent stop guarding that was guarded before?
4. Did moving that piece create any weaknesses in the position?
if you can answer all of these questions in under 5 seconds, great! But if not, finding the answers will prove beneficial to your gameplay. To be honest you probably don't need to ask question 3 or 4 a vast majority of the time (at your current elo anyway). Just asking question 1 and 2 to yourself should reduce the amount of blunders you have. If you see no threat you could safely ignore the threat or counterattack. However you can't go horribly wrong adhering to chess principles by developing your minor and major pieces to squares that help them these are generally squares that attack the centre of hold control over it.
The Conclusion: You played a 10 minute rapid and resigned your position at 7:51. You are given that time. You are allowed to use it. If you can't use that time effectively and timeout? That's ok we all had to crawl before we could walk, and walk before we could run. Asking the questions I outlined is essentially a skill that needs to be trained.
If after doing all this and you find yourself not being able to see the reason for your opponents moves and losing despite using your time? It highlights the real issue (not seeing tactics, poor caculation). I think therefore playing slower is a win win for improvement.
Hope this helps.
Wow, thank you so much it helped A LOT.
I remember this game, and you gave me a complete analysis this makes much more sense now.
Many times I get confused of what is the best square for my pieces, I follow a brazilian GM named Krikor who says he had a coach that says: "Chess is easy if you put your pieces in correct squares"
Time is vital, and I think many times I'm not aware of, tried to spend lots of time when doing puzzles and I already found it useful, when I try to see every possible checks in a given movement.
Thanks for your analysis there, it was lengendary.
I took the time to review your latest loss. From what i'm seeing your main issue is not using the time given to you. You may have great tactical knowledge or good calculation skills but if you're playing moves as quickly as you did in this game, it will be tough to see said opportunities.
The Solution: Slow down when playing your moves. Feel stuck and don't know what to do? Instead of pushing a pawn in under 5 seconds, can you find a good minor piece move? Is there a threat you need to address? I explain the position in the link but I will elaborate a bit here.
After every move from my opponent the questions I ask myself are the following:
1. Why did my opponent move that piece? what is it threatening? (Fork? A tactic?)
2. Any pieces that couldn't threaten anything before, now can they threaten something because of this move? (discovered attacks)
3. What piece did my opponent stop guarding that was guarded before?
4. Did moving that piece create any weaknesses in the position?
if you can answer all of these questions in under 5 seconds, great! But if not, finding the answers will prove beneficial to your gameplay. To be honest you probably don't need to ask question 3 or 4 a vast majority of the time (at your current elo anyway). Just asking question 1 and 2 to yourself should reduce the amount of blunders you have. If you see no threat you could safely ignore the threat or counterattack. However you can't go horribly wrong adhering to chess principles by developing your minor and major pieces to squares that help them these are generally squares that attack the centre of hold control over it.
The Conclusion: You played a 10 minute rapid and resigned your position at 7:51. You are given that time. You are allowed to use it. If you can't use that time effectively and timeout? That's ok we all had to crawl before we could walk, and walk before we could run. Asking the questions I outlined is essentially a skill that needs to be trained.
If after doing all this and you find yourself not being able to see the reason for your opponents moves and losing despite using your time? It highlights the real issue (not seeing tactics, poor caculation). I think therefore playing slower is a win win for improvement.
Hope this helps.
In the game example you said that 9... g6 was a good move, that loses to 10.Nxg6 i dont kmow what youre talking about
Its his only good move? He can't block with queen. Kd8 he gets forked anyway losing 5 points instead of 2. It makes sense to trade unequal pieces than losing them completely.
I looked at your recent losses. You are making very serious mistakes.
You don’t develop all your pieces.
You move pieces twice before all your pieces have been developed
You develop pieces so that they are in the way developing your other pieces
you don’t castle.
You don’t take free material.
You leave your material where it can be taken for free.
There is no reason to suspect that your opponents are sandbagging or cheating. Your play is at about the 500 level—about the level of someone who has learned the moves but has never heard about basic chess principles.
here are some recommendations.
Play slower time controls so you have time to think about your moves.
Read a few basic instruction books that explain how a master thinks and selects his moves. I recommend Reinfeld’s Complete Chess Course and Chernev’s Logical Chess Move by Move.
Dont get bogged down trying to memorize move sequences. Learn and then practice general principles.
Join an OTB club. Watch the stronger players. Listen to their post-game discussions.
A few visits to a club or one week with one of the books I suggested will likely help you more than the 1,500 games you have played against other beginners
How would you recommend I improve? A GM challenged me and said he would play vs me if i reached 2500. I peaked at 2450 and tanked.
Maybe start by creating your own thread rather than hijacking OPs. This is the beginners forum.
whoops i didn't read the thread i came here by link. sry