I'm not that great either. But enjoy it nevertheless. Sometimes have a good game. Which is always nice.
Thinking about getting back into Chess even though I'm bad at it
Sort:
Feb 18, 2020
0
#23
MSteen wrote:
Just a thought here: There are many aspects of chess that have nothing to do with playing. If you're poor at playing and feel demoralized, then you can study (or just play over) great games from books, chess.com, or chessgames.com. I have spent many pleasant hours just playing over the moves of greats like Morphy and Capablanca. Or you can read the articles about great players and events here on chess.com. Or you can do tactics puzzles here or on chesstempo.com.
I have often been discouraged by poor performance over the board, but I have never given up on the game. There are so many facets to it that you could enjoy it for the rest of your life and never actually play a gem.
(But the advice to play unrated games is excellent. Just have fun with it).
Thanks for sharing, i needed to hear that you can have a passion for the game without having talent or being good at it. I had my doubts about chess since i realized that i probably will never be able to climb beyond 1400 rating level even if i dedicated all my spare time to chess.
Update everyone: I played a rated game (no one ever accepts my unrated challenges for some reason, at least within the timeframe of my patience), and I won. It was a noob game, decided by who caught the other's blunders first, but I enjoyed it, and I felt more at home than when I was seriously trying to analyze, improve, etc. I'm going to play another game, and it is fine if I lose the next one, because honestly I think I am most at home in the sub 800s range. Thank you everyone!
Contact me if you want some help. My inactive FIDE rating is 2250. I could comment on your games or answer questions. Its easier to persevere with chess when you focus on what you find interesting and take it 1 step at a time. Don't worry about results. Find a fun way of learning basic skills. I've lost 1000s of games online! Chess is good for your brain and more fun once you get a solid foundation so you have a good idea of whats going on. Regards, Joe
Feb 18, 2020
0
#26
Chess is better than any game. Everyone starts a beginner. Don't be discouraged if after 100 games you're still U800. It means you have to study... Books, videos, interactive tactics solving, game collections. It doesn't matter if you study 1 hour or 10 hours a week.
bong711 wrote:
Chess is better than any game. Everyone starts a beginner. Don't be discouraged if after 100 games you're still U800. It means you have to study... Books, videos, interactive tactics solving, game collections. It doesn't matter if you study 1 hour or 10 hours a week.
Thanks. I hate to be nitpicky though, but I actually have played over 900 games. I think I broke through to 800 around 600-700 games.
FforEffort wrote:
(Originally posted in General subforum)
Hello all,
I don't know if anyone remembers me, but a while back I sought advice as a not-so good chess player on how to improve my game. A number of awesome people stepped up and helped me get from the 400s to the 800s, but as progress then bogged down and advancing became harder, I found that I no longer enjoyed the game and kind of gave up when I struggled. Part of it is that a lot key skills like planning ahead and visualizing the board mentally are very challenging for me, but I also don't do that whole "perseverance" thing under well and easily crack under adversity.
Now, I find part of me wanting to get back into chess or at least try, but I'm not sure if it is a good idea. One idea that came to mind though is that maybe I could just play without giving a hoot about strategy or trying. Yeah, my rating will probably sink back down to the 500s, but perhaps that is where I would be happiest anyway, feeling free to resign whenever I get too discouraged, and not having to mentally exhaust myself in order to win. Would there be any shame in this? Does this sound like an okay idea?
Or should I just stick to spider solitare and Total War: Rome II?
(PS, if any of the people who helped me months ago are reading this, thank you again for all of the effort you put into me. I'm sorry that I ultimately did not pull through, but I still greatly appreciate everything you did and how you rooted for me when I wavered.)
These links might help you:
https://www.chessonly.com/chess-openings/
https://www.chessonly.com/chess-strategies/
https://www.chessonly.com/advantage-in-chess/
Feb 19, 2020
0
#29
I kinda feel like the OP does. It seemed like a fun game at first, but it's no fun to lose. I kept thinking to myself that I needed a tutor to explain the mistakes I am making, because I get no where just playing games.
When writing computer code, I could go to a message board and find experts at Java, for example. Then I would show how I wrote some code, and the experts would tell me where I could tidy things up a bit, so I would do that and I got better at Java. Does the same type of thing exist in chess?
que nadie habla español??
GoGophers wrote:
... It seemed like a fun game at first, but it's no fun to lose. I kept thinking to myself that I needed a tutor to explain the mistakes I am making, because I get no where just playing games.
When writing computer code, I could go to a message board and find experts at Java, for example. Then I would show how I wrote some code, and the experts would tell me where I could tidy things up a bit, so I would do that and I got better at Java. Does the same type of thing exist in chess?
You can post one of your losses at chess.com, and people may comment on it, but the result may be unpleasant if you have done no apparent work to learn basics.
https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-start-out-in-chess
https://www.chess.com/blog/michechess89/8-tips-to-increase-your-online-rating
https://www.chess.com/news/view/rapid-chess-improvement
https://www.chess.com/news/view/a-new-years-resolution-improve-your-chess-with-new-lessons
https://www.chess.com/article/view/mastery-chess-lessons-are-here
"... In order to maximize the benefits of [theory and practice], these two should be approached in a balanced manner. ... Play as many slow games (60 5 or preferably slower) as possible, ... The other side of improvement is theory. ... This can be reading books, taking lessons, watching videos, doing problems on software, etc. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627084053/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman19.pdf
"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
A COMPLETE CHESS COURSE by Antonio Gude
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/A_Complete_Chess_Course.pdf
Feb 20, 2020
0
#32
GoGophers wrote:
When writing computer code, I could go to a message board and find experts at Java, for example. Then I would show how I wrote some code, and the experts would tell me where I could tidy things up a bit, so I would do that and I got better at Java. Does the same type of thing exist in chess?
Yes, that is getting a chess coach. Play a game, go through it afterwards and write down what went through you head at every move, send it to your coach and he can point out your mistakes and correct your thought process. That's why it is important to first analyse your own games and write comments.
You can post your games in the analysis forum section but the quality of responses you'll get will vary and you won't find many who are willing to coach you for free.
Go for it!
Feb 20, 2020
0
#34
FforEffort wrote:
(Originally posted in General subforum)
Hello all,
I don't know if anyone remembers me, but a while back I sought advice as a not-so good chess player on how to improve my game. A number of awesome people stepped up and helped me get from the 400s to the 800s, but as progress then bogged down and advancing became harder, I found that I no longer enjoyed the game and kind of gave up when I struggled. Part of it is that a lot key skills like planning ahead and visualizing the board mentally are very challenging for me, but I also don't do that whole "perseverance" thing under well and easily crack under adversity.
Now, I find part of me wanting to get back into chess or at least try, but I'm not sure if it is a good idea. One idea that came to mind though is that maybe I could just play without giving a hoot about strategy or trying. Yeah, my rating will probably sink back down to the 500s, but perhaps that is where I would be happiest anyway, feeling free to resign whenever I get too discouraged, and not having to mentally exhaust myself in order to win. Would there be any shame in this? Does this sound like an okay idea?
Or should I just stick to spider solitare and Total War: Rome II?
(PS, if any of the people who helped me months ago are reading this, thank you again for all of the effort you put into me. I'm sorry that I ultimately did not pull through, but I still greatly appreciate everything you did and how you rooted for me when I wavered.)
Do you have better things to do? No, return to chess. There are always players equal or weaker to play with.
I think it's fair
Sorry, my post cut off midway. I was going to say that I think it's a fair assessment to say that everyone goes through periods of discouragement in chess. Key thing is to remember that it's a learning process. Improvements comes by keeping at it, and as many have said already, keeping it fun and at a level you can enjoy. Tactics practice helps a lot.
"Anything worth doing is worth doing badly..."
paraphrasing GK Chesterton...
Just to clarify for everyone, I've lost interest in going out of my way to improve if it isn't fun. I'd rather sink to whatever ELO level I am most comfortable playing in as is, than stress myself out by trying to be better than I intrinsically am.
(I know that people with higher scores sometimes lump all the players below 1000 together, but trust me, games on ~600 ELO tier have a noticeably different feel to them than games on the ~800 ELO tier. Among other things, the latter is less forgiving of blunders, and in the former, basic knowledge of simple tactics like forks provides a *much* bigger advantage since it is less widespread.)
FforEffort wrote:
... I've lost interest in going out of my way to improve if it isn't fun. I'd rather sink to whatever ELO level I am most comfortable playing in as is, than stress myself out by trying to be better than I intrinsically am. ...
It might be worthwhile to consider whether or not you have been given advice that is appropriate for you.
"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
Here are some reading possibilities that I often mention:
Logical Chess: Move by Move by Irving Chernev (1957)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104437/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/logichess.pdf
"... In many ways, [Batsford's new edition of Logical Chess: Move by Move, written in 1957 by Irving Chernev] would [be] a wonderful 'first' book (or first 'serious' book, after the ones which teach the rules and elementary mates, for example), and a nice gift for a young player just taking up chess. …" - IM John Watson (1999)
https://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/assorted-recent-books
Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld (1948)
"... Newer players will be amazed at the assortment and beauty of the many tactical maneuvers available to them, perhaps opening their eyes to some of the wonders of the game for the first time. ..."
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093415/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review919.pdf
Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006)
"... For beginning players, [Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms] will offer an opportunity to start out on the right foot and really get a feel for what is happening on the board. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2006)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf
Feb 23, 2020
0
#40
The common mistakes of U800 is hanging pieces.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/how-do-you-stop-hanging-pieces
just play simple. be a detective and figure out why ur opponent does every move they do. My coach taught me that and it helped a lot.