brasileirosim wrote:
Puzzle rating is certainly higher than blitz or rapid rating in chess.com. Do you know how much point higher? Something like 300 points or more?
Solving puzzles and playing actual games involves different skills.
It's like comparing archery to sword-fighting.
In puzzles, you're given positions that are usually winning, or outright won. All you have to do is find the most accurate continuation to win material, or the game.
This isn't how chess is actually played. You aren't given winning positions by default - you have to create them and earn them, against an uncooperative opponent.
And most positions have various approaches a player can try - there isn't just a single "correct" sequence at every move.
If you want to get good at chess, work on chess. If you want to get good at puzzles, work on puzzles. But don't conflate the two. One does not equal the other.
1600 puzzle and 590 Rapid. I guess I should play more? 137 Games Vs 1340 puzzles solved
In a recent thread I proposed an experiment- how long would a 400 or 500-rated player take to reach 1000 in rapid with the help of a better player? Nobody was interested, even after I offered to help for free. I guess players at this level are simple not used to work in a more structured way. I am still offering my help, in the case you are interested. The idea is to get through some games from time to time to see what can be improved. Something like once or twice a week. I can imagine that everybody can gain at least 50 points every week, perhaps more, with proper advice. Or perhaps I am very wrong. Anyway, it would be a cool experiment.
When I started playing on chess.com I was already 800 after watching quite a few videos and within a month got to 1000, before watching the videos I would imagine I was 500. If anyone really picked up the game and got very interested they would reach essentially 500 to 1000 in also a month if that devoted an immense amount of time to the game (thinking about it like 12 hours a day, not necessarily studying, but thinking about it like watching videos). Really all depends on how much time you put into the game and how critical you think. I have never been coached to this day, at the time all I simply did was watch youtube videos that were also instructive. I can even remember when I used to look up "every chess tactic that exists" thinking it would take forever to learn them all. I suppose it could also depend on how open-minded your brain is to learning new ways to think, because like learning a new language, it would be a bit more difficult for an adult to go from 500 to 1000, possibly quite a few months if they tried hard.
I am sure wait for someone interested in participating in this experiment. I guess that people who are somehow interested in improving will find easily material every everywhere.