Stuck at 950-1000 rating - Chess Forums - Page 4

technical_knockout

Jan 14, 2022

0

#61

'do you hear that, mr. anderson?

that is the sound of... inevitability:

it is the sound of your death'.

Habanababananero

Jan 14, 2022

0

#62

A-Primitive-Idiot kirjoitti:

Simply put, if you learn how to do said checkmate, and you have a king/rook and the opponent has nothing but a king, you will always win. There's nothing he can do, but over an entire game, said person always has a chance.

Try playing Stockfish or Leela or AlphaZero. There is NO CHANCE for the opponent if you make no mistakes.

My point was, that it is possible to make a mistake in a Q+K endgame and stalemate it. I know it is an absolutely certain win, if you do not blunder stalemate, but it happens. One has to be very aware of that chance of stalemate at all times in the endgame when the opponent only has the king and/or pawns that can't move.

My point was not that it is not a certain win if one does not make a mistake, but human beings make mistakes. That is why Stockfish for example will crush you, me and Magnus Carlsen every time. EVERY TIME.

korotky_trinity

Jan 14, 2022

0

#63

Well... relax then !

Antoniobcnserra

Jan 14, 2022

0

#64

W1ldg00se ha scritto:

I have been playing chess daily for more than 4 months now. But no matter how hard I try I am still stuck around 950-1000 rating. Sometimes I do manage to go over 1000 but I can't keep up my rating. I play mostly 10minutes rapid games and use Ruy Lopez (exchange variation) and Caro Kann as my openings. I used to practice tactics daily but lately because of rating I feel less and less motivated to play any tactics. Any tips on overcoming this? I just turned 30, so could this be the end of the road?

it takes patience, don't worry

A-Primitive-Idiot

Jan 18, 2022

0

#65

Habanababananero wrote:

A-Primitive-Idiot kirjoitti:

Simply put, if you learn how to do said checkmate, and you have a king/rook and the opponent has nothing but a king, you will always win. There's nothing he can do, but over an entire game, said person always has a chance.

Try playing Stockfish or Leela or AlphaZero. There is NO CHANCE for the opponent if you make no mistakes.

My point was, that it is possible to make a mistake in a Q+K endgame and stalemate it. I know it is an absolutely certain win, if you do not blunder stalemate, but it happens. One has to be very aware of that chance of stalemate at all times in the endgame when the opponent only has the king and/or pawns that can't move.

My point was not that it is not a certain win if one does not make a mistake, but human beings make mistakes. That is why Stockfish for example will crush you, me and Magnus Carlsen every time. EVERY TIME.

Computers are a little different bro, they WONT MAKE MISTAKES. That argument doesn't work for us pathetic humans.

Habanababananero

Jan 18, 2022

0

#66

A-Primitive-Idiot kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

A-Primitive-Idiot kirjoitti:

Simply put, if you learn how to do said checkmate, and you have a king/rook and the opponent has nothing but a king, you will always win. There's nothing he can do, but over an entire game, said person always has a chance.

Try playing Stockfish or Leela or AlphaZero. There is NO CHANCE for the opponent if you make no mistakes.

My point was, that it is possible to make a mistake in a Q+K endgame and stalemate it. I know it is an absolutely certain win, if you do not blunder stalemate, but it happens. One has to be very aware of that chance of stalemate at all times in the endgame when the opponent only has the king and/or pawns that can't move.

My point was not that it is not a certain win if one does not make a mistake, but human beings make mistakes. That is why Stockfish for example will crush you, me and Magnus Carlsen every time. EVERY TIME.

Computers are a little different bro, they WONT MAKE MISTAKES. That argument doesn't work for us pathetic humans.

That is exactly my point. Us humans make mistakes, therefore it is possible to draw a Q+K vs K endgame by stalemating. It won’t stalemate if you don’t make any mistakes or ”do it right” as you yourself put it, but it will if you make a mistake.

theDimensioner

Jan 19, 2022

0

#67

I am in a similar boat to OP and valued some of the suggestions given. One thing I'm currently doing is shifting the balance in "chess time" more towards reading/learning vs playing. For instance, if I can spend 1hr of my day dedicated to chess, I want to make sure a solid portion of that is spent on learning as opposed to playing. To facilitate that, what I'm doing right now is reading Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess. I already feel myself getting "better" though my rating does not yet reflect that. But I'm trying to keep faith that once I finish the book, my foundational skills will be better and eventually my rating will follow naturally and get me over that 1000 milestone. One thing I'm not doing, but will start based on comments made in this thread: spend less time playing quick games (usually play either 3min Blitz or 10min Rapid) and more time playing longer time games. Maybe in a month or so I can hopefully follow up on this thread, and this post can serve as valuable advice for others in similar situations. :)

GeorgeGoodnight

Jan 19, 2022

0

#68

W1ldg00se wrote:

I have been playing chess daily for more than 4 months now. But no matter how hard I try I am still stuck around 950-1000 rating. Sometimes I do manage to go over 1000 but I can't keep up my rating. I play mostly 10minutes rapid games and use Ruy Lopez (exchange variation) and Caro Kann as my openings. I used to practice tactics daily but lately because of rating I feel less and less motivated to play any tactics. Any tips on overcoming this? I just turned 30, so could this be the end of the road?

Take the green tablets before bed and see it all on the ceiling ;o)

DenisP70

Jan 19, 2022

0

#69

Serious question. I am also sub 1000. However I need to play computer levels around 1400-1500 for a good challenge. Is that your experience also? Are computers over rated by 500?

sholom90

Jan 19, 2022

0

#70

theDimensioner wrote:

I am in a similar boat to OP and valued some of the suggestions given. One thing I'm currently doing is shifting the balance in "chess time" more towards reading/learning vs playing. For instance, if I can spend 1hr of my day dedicated to chess, I want to make sure a solid portion of that is spent on learning as opposed to playing. To facilitate that, what I'm doing right now is reading Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess. I already feel myself getting "better" though my rating does not yet reflect that. But I'm trying to keep faith that once I finish the book, my foundational skills will be better and eventually my rating will follow naturally and get me over that 1000 milestone. One thing I'm not doing, but will start based on comments made in this thread: spend less time playing quick games (usually play either 3min Blitz or 10min Rapid) and more time playing longer time games. Maybe in a month or so I can hopefully follow up on this thread, and this post can serve as valuable advice for others in similar situations.

WADR, I disagree with some of your thoughts here. E.g., you wrote: "I'm trying to keep faith that once I finish the book, my foundational skills will be better". I don't think that's right. I think your foundational knowledge will be better, but your skills will need actual practice. (E.g., you can learn all you want about ice skating, but it's out on the ice when you can practice the skills).

For most folks U1400, the problem is losing material by hanging pieces or on tactics. And so, for those folks, those are the skills that need working on. I took a peek at your most recent game: you hung a pawn on move 5 (your opponent didn't see it), then fell for a classic bishop/knight attack on your f2 pawn and lost your rook by move 11. Those are the kinds of things that you should recognize with tactics books and or learn by practicing.

My two cents.

Habanababananero

Jan 19, 2022

0

#71

theDimensioner kirjoitti:

I am in a similar boat to OP and valued some of the suggestions given. One thing I'm currently doing is shifting the balance in "chess time" more towards reading/learning vs playing. For instance, if I can spend 1hr of my day dedicated to chess, I want to make sure a solid portion of that is spent on learning as opposed to playing. To facilitate that, what I'm doing right now is reading Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess. I already feel myself getting "better" though my rating does not yet reflect that. But I'm trying to keep faith that once I finish the book, my foundational skills will be better and eventually my rating will follow naturally and get me over that 1000 milestone. One thing I'm not doing, but will start based on comments made in this thread: spend less time playing quick games (usually play either 3min Blitz or 10min Rapid) and more time playing longer time games. Maybe in a month or so I can hopefully follow up on this thread, and this post can serve as valuable advice for others in similar situations. :)

I just worked through Bobby FIscher Teaches Chess myself and it was a fun book. At least my Puzzles rating went up a little after finishing the book. Haven't played enough games yet to know if it has affected my results there.

It's basically a tactics puzzle book that teaches basic tactics and checkmating patterns. With the exception that there are some puzzles, where there is no mate for example and you have to realize that.

It only takes a couple hours to go through the whole book though, so I don't think any huge improvement can be expected. But then again, I'll take even the small improvement.

I also recommend Kasparov Teaches Chess (A Batsford Chess Book) which is a more complete course on how to play chess. It has chapters on development, space, control of centre etc.

Right now I am reading Aron Nimzowitsch "My System" and "Chess Praxis", (two books in one) and got a couple more books waiting

A-Primitive-Idiot

Jan 22, 2022

0

#72

Habanababananero wrote:

A-Primitive-Idiot kirjoitti:

Habanababananero wrote:

A-Primitive-Idiot kirjoitti:

Simply put, if you learn how to do said checkmate, and you have a king/rook and the opponent has nothing but a king, you will always win. There's nothing he can do, but over an entire game, said person always has a chance.

Try playing Stockfish or Leela or AlphaZero. There is NO CHANCE for the opponent if you make no mistakes.

My point was, that it is possible to make a mistake in a Q+K endgame and stalemate it. I know it is an absolutely certain win, if you do not blunder stalemate, but it happens. One has to be very aware of that chance of stalemate at all times in the endgame when the opponent only has the king and/or pawns that can't move.

My point was not that it is not a certain win if one does not make a mistake, but human beings make mistakes. That is why Stockfish for example will crush you, me and Magnus Carlsen every time. EVERY TIME.

Computers are a little different bro, they WONT MAKE MISTAKES. That argument doesn't work for us pathetic humans.

That is exactly my point. Us humans make mistakes, therefore it is possible to draw a Q+K vs K endgame by stalemating. It won’t stalemate if you don’t make any mistakes or ”do it right” as you yourself put it, but it will if you make a mistake.

It doesn't apply if you master it.

GeorgeGoodnight

Jan 22, 2022

0

#73

im a 1000 and I'd like to progress. I've only been playing at 1000 for a short time. I was stuck at 700 for ages and ages(on another account). Then I started playing completely naked and my rating went up, almost over night. You could play on Lichess, I'm 1400 on there.

I agree focus is key, as others have said. Looking at all the reasons why your opponent made their last move. Don't leave pieces hanging. Learning to see your opponents errors. I find I don't see them sometimes until it's a move too late.

I'm getting some paid coaching, see how that goes.

* Lichess has a different rating system, apparently!