1950ish to 2200 in three summers

I hope my pass rate don't fall below 80% while reaching your score.

Nothing against the OP, everyone seems to do it.

Anyone who claims to have only done _____, play a (tournament) game with them and analyze... you'll discover they're much more well rounded than what they suggest. I don't think this is purposefully done as deception, some things we study because they're interesting and we don't even think of it as study. Like when you see an interesting game and review it. Or follow the games of a top tournament. That can be hours or weeks of study but people will just think of as enjoying chess. They wont say they follow top tournaments, because it wasn't a daily routine, and they ignore most tournaments.

Just an example of course. Same thing for books, videos, etc. If it wasn't a daily routine, and they didn't finish the book, they just read and analyzed interesting parts, they probably wont talk about it when you ask them what they studied.

This is insane.  As a fellow college student, but way weaker player... I can say that I am registerring for chesstempo.com right now.  I have heard positive things regarding that site before, but never in such good of a light.  So it seems worth it to at least check it out.

But how you got to 1800 in the first place was an appropriate question for sure, that is super impressive alone.  Although I am guessing it is relative to at least some level of natural ability.  Not trying to take anything away from your stellar chess accomplishments of course.

But seriously, any other recommendations than just straight tactics?  Tempo of play suggestions?  Did you play over the board often throughout your semesters with a club or something?

I am currently attempting to start a chess club at my school right now  what a task.  Although I have been attending a USCF affiliate club at a local university, it would be nice to not ride the bus half an hour.  

Yes. Chesstempo puzzles are notorious for being tricky.

I agree with you that tactics are really important, though I feel I have to get deeper in positional chess. Also, I would like to ask you something. How important you think is the book "Think like a grandmaster"? It teaches you how to think and improve your technique in different ways, but training tactics is other thing. What is your opinion? Thanks

I'm 1800 on USCF. Probably translates to like 1700-1750 FIDE?

I don't have a great pass rate in TT but my rating is 2350 because the levels/ratings of the problems that I am attempting are very high.

On chesstempo.com it says my estimated FIDE rating (standard tactics) is 2065. However, I know this is not the case.

My point being that I don't think practicing tactics is really translating very well into my OTB results. What do you think I need to do in order to do better in OTB games?

Mhmm.  I see you got a TT boost!  Do you remember I signed your TT rating a few weeks ago lol?

Anyway, as I said your pass rate is quite low.  You only see 46% of problems when you are hinted there is one.  Imagine what the percentage of finding the tactic in a real game?  Resetting your rating and focusing on pass rate over speed could easily improve your calculation dramatically and you game.

By the way, no matter how high your tactics are, people will still maintain the same high pass rate

What do you think is the reason you are losing your games?  I find that it is tactics, especially my especially my opponent's tactics.  I am rarely positionally grinded down, nor is anyone under 2000 honestly.

Any kind of rating you get online doesn't claim to estimate your FIDE and this is true for chesstempo as well. You should know that ratings aren't a measurement like the speed of a runner. They're always relative to the other players in that group. When your OTB rating is lower than something like chesstempo that says nothing about your strengths and weaknesses as a player.

That said, if most people who have the same OTB rating as you have a better chesstempo rating than you, then you're probably weak at tactics.

FWIW the difference between my OTB and chesstempo standard is also about 200 points.

@misterbasic

I think you will find these youtube interesting and useful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG5pfYMz5Mw&list=PLl9uuRYQ-6MDeV6F2L6mUiD4AFI-taEFv

@ch

I think misterbasic was estimating his fide with his established USCF.  He mentioned the chesstempo estimation with skepticism.   This is of course if your comment was directed at him or maybe you were just clarifying .

As I have emphasised before: too much emphasis is placed on positional chess.  It may be good to know how to evaluate a position (i.e. weak squares, pawn structure, etc.) but it really does not help much unless you can calculate well.  Straight tactics really is the key to chess improvement.  Other than that, I would emphasise that you know your openings well, but don't study openings like all day, just learn some lines and be done with it.  Then go back to doing tactics.  Also, I only played during the summertime alone usually not during semesters at all.

I assume that you are talking about the book by Alexander Kotov, right?  Well I am not a huge fan of it, because I don't think it is really as useful as others have said that it is.  The only good point Kotov makes is that you need to analyze a position based on the candidate moves.  So for example: always look at the checks, captures, and threatening moves in every position.  This is the only thing in the book that I think is important (I read it when I was 1800 level and it didn't help my chess much).

Very nice post David.  I am sure this has been a good reference for some people, including myself.

Sorry, I have no idea why I am calling you David, Peter.

yea, in his case That's like 10-15+ years ago where online tactic trainer did not exist like does now. I believe back before the computer engines and websites like chesscom, even players at 2000+ level can blunder on tactics like 1600 would do now. NM Dan Heisman said when he was playing chess, 1500 club player there would be the equvalent of 1100 rated now - something like this. Now all those young kids (<20y) are soo good at tactics and opening theory, that they are always seems underrated to old high rated veterans who are constantly losing to them.. i see so many young US Masters or experts at age ~16-20 is crazy. Back some years ago was abnormal for someone to be master at chess if he is not 40 or something...

Simon Williams himself prefers to play positional chess, something he admits he is not that good at, without any sharp positions against lower rated (to him thats "only" ~2000) young players...

Yes Scott-fox21, I was talking about that book. Thanks for your answer. The truth is that I have started to read it twice already and thought it was too difficult for my level. So I don't know if it is a must-read or there are other ways of thinking and calculating. I have also read that it is a book for players around 1800, the level you pointed. I guess I will try it again when I gain 50 points, and then again with other 50 points, until I understand it. Until then I agree that tactics are really important and one should do a lot of them every day ;)

Regards

Yeah true.  I did not stop to consider them factors.  Maybe I was being a little bias.  But good old Peter says it works with a tactic trainer.  Also back then, I am pretty sure that 2000~ players back then had access to other learning resources like a book full of tactics.  I am sure they were as good as 2000 these days at tactics (the difference in now and then stands more for lower rated players most likely considering many factors probably).   The only difference is, Simon focused almost exclusively on tactics and at a different rate as his "contemporaries" .  This prioritization was the difference.  Just like Peter.

Though there are x amount of factors, too many variables from person to person, though I think I have enough consideration and can say that this method surely is the best way to improve for some people.

I am repeating words like probably just to be 100% clear.  Topics like these can be controversial for obvious reasons and so disputes/opinions are in the plentiful.

I am out for this topic!  

congrats!