Can I reach 1500 online rapid by the end of the year?

Thanks again for all the advice... And arguments with each other. I will continue to study and play rapid. My new peak is 1275.

P.S. click on my username and look at my actual name. Some of yall will laugh.

The OP said he knows the Caro Kan opening.

How well does he know it?

How many moves?

I am the OP. I know the Caro-Kahn quiet well. Most variations, too. I analyze all the games I play it to learn what the computer likes in certain positions that regularly occur in it but are far enough out to not be “theory”

There are a few things I'd like to address here, so I'll just bullet point them for my response:

- If you've been playing chess for 4 years now, then what makes you believe you can cross 1500 by the end of the year? Chess rating gets tougher to gain as you get higher. The rating system is mathematical and higher players are tougher to win against because they play with a smaller margin of error to decide their games. What do you plan to do differently to reach 1500 THIS YEAR? You must have been trying to improve the other 4 years, right?

- Can you reach 1500? YES! It won't be easy as @tygxc makes it sound though. Many higher rated players (including many titled players) forget how much struggle they had on their own rating journey and they underestimate how tough the lower rating levels are because they are so much lower than where they are at now, but this isn't because lower rated players are "so easy" to win against; that is just that these higher rated players have learned so much by now and come so far! Well, I haven't forgotten how tough the lower rating levels can be.

I actually crossed 1500 chess.com rating within my very first year on chess.com, but I worked very hard at my chess during that time. Most people never even cross 1000 rating...ever. Crossing 1500 is a feat most never reach (never mind in just one year), but with that being said, it isn't that 1500 is impossibly difficult to reach. It is just that most people never invest the kind of work required to reach this level, or they don't learn as optimally as they could.

- The last part about your mind learning easier because you are young is silly and arrogance can definitely hold you back in chess. It takes humility to constantly play tough games, lose heartbreak situations, analyze them to learn and then come back with motivation to play some more. When I joined chess.com, I was starting college, so I didn't join chess.com as young as many others have, but we can see I improved a lot regardless. Similarly, former chess world champion Mikhail Tal reached his peak chess rating of 2700+ when he was age 44!

I'm majoring in Psychology and there is some truth to younger minds learning easier, but this "critical learning period" you reference is roughly age 3 and many people misinterpret how easily (or not) children around this age learn. Children older than this until say age 10 or so still learn a ton, but I don't believe this is because their minds are so easy to absorb information.

I see children absorbing information like sponges because they can afford to invest massive amounts of time and effort into improving. Children learn (and improve at chess) so much because they put lots of work into it! Children are also very motivated once they set their mind to something; adults aren't always this persevering and can't always invest the same amount of time for something like chess because of life responsibilities like work, errands and so on.

You absolutely can reach 1500 by the end of the year if you work hard at it, but it isn't going to be easy and it will probably take you longer than a year. Why set an arbitrary goal for something you don't know how tough it will be though? Even if you reach 1500 in 2 or 3 years, that would be a big milestone regardless.

Here are the Stats and the Stats don’t lie!

People lie, but the Stats don’t lie.

The Stats are a collection of data based on the actions of the OP and not based on his words.

We can see from the above picture the most played move by the OP is 1.e4.

The win rate isn’t looking healthy!

His opponents are winning 2% more vs. him.

We need to change this around!

Lets dig a little deeper!

‘’OH MY GOODNESS”

ARE YOU PEOPLE SEEING THIS? 67% 

When the OP plays 1.e4 and his opponents play 1…c5 in response they have almost a 70% chance of winning the game?
ARE YOU SERIOUS???

Are you starting to see it!

This is why your not 1500.

Those Sicilian players are marching right in to your home turf and they are robbing your points blind! What are you going to do about it?

At this rate, your not going to reach 1500. You will be lucky to keep the points you have!

By end of the year those Sicilian players will probably rob more of your points and you will be 800 again.

————————

What opening are you playing vs. Sicilian?

Its an emergency!

You have to do something to change the score.

———————

Look at 1…e5 - Very good!

Keep the white win rate very high and black win rate very low!

Show them who is boss!

That is how you reach 1500!

————————

Look at 1…c6 - Very Bad

What is happening here again?

Now the Sicilian players have told their Caro-Kan buddies to rob you.

————————

Any C pawn move is your weakness it seems.

The Stats are exposing this - We have to change this around!

You need more chess opening!

I mean if you have the opening but not the positional knowledge all it is is learning for fun just keep that in mind if you wanna get good at chess sin a year don't get so hung up on openings they are important

Btw In my experience most 1200s are really bad at openings

Same as 1900 they just play goofy things (good just no understand opening )

You should learn openings just be really really careful how you do it

Okay. I will definitely work at my response to the Sicilian

Try the delayed Alapin. The delayed alapin has a few traps that catch low level players out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzuRNjyKY4k

I use the wing gambit, which also works great, but it is more difficult .

There's actually a "practice " setting on chess.com where you can learn opening. Learning the opening isn't the most important but if you really want to get good at the opening that should be the place not sure if you need diamond memb or not tho

@Post #61

I think you are correct.

However, not everyone on chess.com wastes time, I think my messages even though some of them got downvoted are still sinking in!

My methods of improving are not normal, but that is because I never learned chess in a normal way. I wasn’t able to learn chess like other people. I am more methodical & analytical.

A lot of players are very good at following chess principles and just developing stuff randomly. Than coming up with middle game plans in their random chess positions.

I couldn’t do it.

I needed a logical reason on why I should play each move.

From move 1 to move 25 for example

Right now for example I am working on my endgames because I believe my openings & middle games have been very thoroughly examined.

How did you learn chess?

I learned chess by learning everything(opening mid game and endgame mostly endgame tho ) and trying to imply it to my actual games most important is learn how to play positional chess cause that's how you get the tactics

Playing gainst opponents tougher than me ex -25 + all setting

Openings arnt a complete waste of time but you don't focus on the opening in order to improve you win in the endgame unless it is like an 8 move checkmate or blunder

I also like to do odds against low rated players in rapid

I was told to ignore endgames.

The only endgames I learned were the checkmating endgames.

Queen + King vs. King

Rook + King vs. King

etc.

My chess teacher told me the most amazing chess question’s ever.

He said Chess has been around for over 500 years out of all those chess games played how many of them had a Chess opening? And how many of them do you think had Chess endgame?

True lol but you learn the opening by playing the game not by memorizing random stuff that you don't even get in your games cause you can't imply it

I understand what you mean about endgames and being very analytical. Very impressive. You definitely have a mind for chess. 
I usually have a high endgame accuracy—sometimes ninety percent—and just no the basic principles. I never have studied each idea in a rook endgame, or what specific rule is applied in a knight and pawn endgame. I just use common sense—regarding chess, that is: such as looking for threats, making them, avoiding mistakes, and calculating far enough ahead to be sure it is the right idea—and let the opponent’s inaccuracies and blunders show.

Rating is just a number...

What is going to happen if you don't reach 1500 till the end of the year? Is the world going to end or something?

Uh, no. Why? What’s the dark twist?

If I don’t get to 1500 by the end of this year, I will quit chess forever and never again play a game of it or willingly watch anything that teaches you something about it. I will hate all people who even know what chess is, and will scream and tear my hair out when the word chess is said within a mile of me.

(Lol! I will actually just keep working if I don’t get there this year.)