FACT: You can't improve at chess

I don't mean to be a jerk but 600 and 800s really shouldn't talk about what's possible in improvement. Most people don't agree on what means you should expect to be improving anyways. some people think playing a bunch of blitz and bullet is training and are surprised when they don't improve. I would be surprised if anybody but a very weak player improved by such methods ( If its fun for you then do it, you don't need to be a GM to have fun.). In my opinion strong player should only expect to improve by introducing himself to new concepts, identifying weaknesses and attacking them no mater how boring or distasteful he finds them, and seriously studying his games ( not 3 minutes on chess.com's analysis board either, I mean actually studying) and the games of masters. By strong players I mean relative to the general chess community, so like 1700-1800 rapid or more. For our purposes I consider IMs and GMs to be freaks. Note that I don't mean genetic freaks but rather statistical anomalies and outliers that need not be considered.

Well that's it guys, the OP has discovered the terrible truth. You can't improve by practicing.

The op said you can't improve by practicing but in the rest of his paragraph spoke as if he meant you literally can't improve by any means. So that's what I took his opinion to be. Check out Nihal Sarins chess.com account and look at his all time blitz graph, its quite a smooth advance from 1700 to 3150 over the last decade or so. 

Playing chess is an art. If you want to measure the skill of a player by the number of loses and wins, then yeah, a person may be hoovering around 1500-2000 elo points, but that's a human created system that has its failures. I have been playing chess for more than 10 years. I haven't improved much in skill, but I am much more intuitive and less naive than in the past. That's for sure. 

I agree. To some extent.

Hard work, patience and skill(intelligence) are required to do well in chess.

I have worked hard and I have patience. I lack the intelligence.

No matter how many games I tried, I have not managed to do well. I make the same mistake again and again. With great difficulty I put lichess and chess in my hosts file to prevent myself from wasting a minute more than I need to. I enjoy the game, but being a pathological loser is not fun.

I live better. With my slight intellectual disability, I do fine in other activities in life. Just that chess is not for me.

You won 7 of your last 8 games. And you're rated around 1100. There are players on this site who struggle to reach 500, and have been struggling for years.

If you don't want to continue with chess, that's entirely your choice. But you're not as bad off as you think.

I started as a noob who new where to put the pieces and lost every game, and now I am beating players of such higher levels than me.

Oct 9, 2021 
#489
Like I said…. given 4player is a much broader board and vastness of area, along with much more going on considering two other players than standard, your chances highly increase of gained knowledge to your skills, having so much quicker improvement.

#490
960 helps too because it’s not the same routine standard setup.

wait are there actually people who are struggling to reach 500? i should consider myself lucky to be able to improve so much. i also dont beg streamers (chess streamers obviously) on information on how to improve. if im not doing well then my missions will be not to lose a lot of rating, and also to beat my puzzle rush pb.

I’m in my early 60s. Can I improve? Maybe.

I think Loser’s chess is useful.

Note: Loser’s differs from suicide. In loser’s chess, check is still check and the king cannot be captured. I’ve lost many games because my opponent forced me to checkmate their king.

Oh god I am sorry, but you are just simply wrong. The reason why some are stuck in not getting further with their rating is that they started too late and/or have the wrong methods. It is definitely not genetics and practics improves play a lot. I simply couldn't disagree with all of this more. It is even scientifically proven that you improve in any area you put work into and that it has greater effects on your outcome than your natural talent.

Looking at graphs is absolutely wrong too for two reasons: First is that nobody takes online chess really serious and is here for entertainment. Second is that you can improve a lot in theory without it yet showing in practice - you do not take the whole situations, willingness and concentration of people into account at all. We don't need to show you gradually linear improvement as this is not the way improvement works and also more than often enough it doesn't show in numbers - still I can assure you that a 1300 from India with 10.000 games will completely destroy you, while a 1300 with 100 games will be easy to beat.

960s are fun… They have lmao 960 different backrow setups, so it’s always a different game and that alone is fun! I myself do not find reading where to move, tactics etc., that to be chess, because it’s me playing my opponent, and enjoying the effort to overcome and win, my own work and not from a book’s show of positioning etc., lmao I don’t even know any of the names, gambits lol whathaveyou, that’s not chess to me. The four player is also extremely fun, even more than, however they radar in on newbies and you starting out could be removed with five plays, so is better first view either from spectating a game in the arena or YouTube about and watch there. But, both dramatically can increase your standard skills, mainly the four player FFA. 

Oh yes you can improve at chess, I have played for over 50 years and I learned more in the last ten. Playing here, Lichess, and Chess Tempo. And most of that learning practicing the puzzles. Yes, there is probably a Peter Principle for all of us, but I am not there yet.

I personally have improved in the last two months but it wasn't very quick i had to play  thousands games to see any really change or improvement, I only use two openings and have only used those two openings. I play the same first three moves almost every game for the last couple thousand games but have gradually gained elo based on pure chess development and an increase in understanding. There is a cieling for everyone in everything, that being finite always is defined by limits that are defined. The climb; the aspiration to learn and/or grow is what makes learning/playing chess, lifting weights, studying a field, painting, or anything else worthwhile in the first place. I think your issue with being unable to improve/enjoy has nothing to do with the game itself and everything to do with how you approach chess and your appreciation of the game.

…yeah I don’t even understand how bullet’s considered chess.. It’s sure not taking the proper time to view whats before you on the board, but sure is let’s bust out faster than the opponent ridiculousness, and can also be viewed a sense of disrespect to what’s the purpose of the game, such focus.