I am a kid
1800+ rapid without studying? My impressions
Sort:
1 day ago
0
#23
200291d wrote:
Hey everyone,
My first time posting on these forums. So lately I've been playing a lot of chess. And it seems kind of ridiculous to me that I'm nearing 1800. I've never studied chess besides knowing which way each piece moves. Hell, I still get confused with the en-passant rule at times. I did play chess growing up - with friends and family for laughs though and never professionally.
I personally never imagined I'd go past 1500. But lately, playing with a bunch of random 1750+ folks on here - it's starting to seem more and more apparent to me that there are plenty of highly rated users who blunder often and suffer from tunnelvision (me included) - way more than I imagined. I always thought every 1800 player plays the perfect move (at least the first 10-15 moves anyway), but I guess not. This makes me feel like I could go higher up the ranks without needing to study. I don't know. So my question is : how far can someone who's never learnt chess make it to on chess.com in rapid? No opening knowledge, no theories, etc. Is 2000 doable or been done? I'm curious to know.
It's possible to reach 2000 without any intensive theoretical study, but not much farther without some serious talent. I'm curious, when did you start playing chess?
1 day ago
0
#24
Learning/practice meanings anything outside of playing a chess game, that you engaged in, with the intent of improving your chess play.
200291d hat geschrieben:
Hey everyone,
My first time posting on these forums. So lately I've been playing a lot of chess. And it seems kind of ridiculous to me that I'm nearing 1800. I've never studied chess besides knowing which way each piece moves. Hell, I still get confused with the en-passant rule at times. I did play chess growing up - with friends and family for laughs though and never professionally.
I personally never imagined I'd go past 1500. But lately, playing with a bunch of random 1750+ folks on here - it's starting to seem more and more apparent to me that there are plenty of highly rated users who blunder often and suffer from tunnelvision (me included) - way more than I imagined. I always thought every 1800 player plays the perfect move (at least the first 10-15 moves anyway), but I guess not. This makes me feel like I could go higher up the ranks without needing to study. I don't know. So my question is : how far can someone who's never learnt chess make it to on chess.com in rapid? No opening knowledge, no theories, etc. Is 2000 doable or been done? I'm curious to know.
En passant confuses lol
@punchdrunkpatzer I learnt how each piece moves when I was a kid (idk 6 or 7 maybe). Since then I'd randomly play friends/family - just like how any average person would play video games or watch a movie. I never bothered to improve until I joined this site I guess. Lately I've been spam playing whenever I get free time and that's about the only thing I'm doing to better my game
1 day ago
0
#28
The OP 's situation is unusual but fairly common, there is a large minority who are A-class without any real attempt to practice and improve.
I don't intend on playing chess professionally (I have other career aspirations) but it's def. exciting as a hobby
These days, you can get pretty far just by playing a lot, and reviewing your games with an engine to learn from your mistakes.
I took lessons for a summer in my youth, from a National Master - he helped me progress from a 1400 to a 1700 player. After that, my progress (from 1700 to 2400) has been mostly a result of playing a lot, losing a lot, and trying to learn something (with the help of the engine) from each loss.
I took lessons for a summer in my youth, from a National Master - he helped me progress from a 1400 to a 1700 player. After that, my progress (from 1700 to 2400) has been mostly a result of playing a lot, losing a lot, and trying to learn something (with the help of the engine) from each loss.
I’m currently sitting at my peak rating of 1258 and I can’t say I’ve never studied the game, but I’ve done very minimal studying. My guess is you’ve seen a lot of games so you recognize patterns, so in a way you might have been studying the whole time.
1 day ago
0
#32
I have 696 rapid games, and I'm plateauing at 1850. If I were to play much more, is it possible I would reach 1900 sooner? Because evr since school started I play less, and my results are kinda bad. During summer break, I played pretty much everyday, and went of 500 points.
1 day ago
0
#33
I think some high-rated players on chess.com often underestimate just how much simply playing a lot of games here can help you improve. For my progress, I think rapid games have been at least equally important to my studying.
Can you get to 2000 without studying? Yes, but studying would definitely help. Like @Chess_Player_lol said, a combination of studying and playing is ideal.
Hey everyone,
My first time posting on these forums. So lately I've been playing a lot of chess. And it seems kind of ridiculous to me that I'm nearing 1800. I've never studied chess besides knowing which way each piece moves. Hell, I still get confused with the en-passant rule at times. I did play chess growing up - with friends and family for laughs though and never professionally.
I personally never imagined I'd go past 1500. But lately, playing with a bunch of random 1750+ folks on here - it's starting to seem more and more apparent to me that there are plenty of highly rated users who blunder often and suffer from tunnelvision (me included) - way more than I imagined. I always thought every 1800 player plays the perfect move (at least the first 10-15 moves anyway), but I guess not. This makes me feel like I could go higher up the ranks without needing to study. I don't know. So my question is : how far can someone who's never learnt chess make it to on chess.com in rapid? No opening knowledge, no theories, etc. Is 2000 doable or been done? I'm curious to know.
Maybe 2000, but around 2100 and up it gets harder, you don't get lucky....there are fewer players who would blunder and those that do drop below 2000