Fun without studying?

Is it possible to enjoy the game of chess without studying at all? I feel as though it is more of a chore than a hobby if you have to study it. I enjoy playing without studying but I don't really see, to be getting any better, any tips?

I simply like playing the game... as you play you do learn things by playing people better than you, and I have used those things to my advantage to increase my rating.  So you learn by losing and use that loss to beat the players at your level. (In turn that helps get you to a new level.)

I have been told by my unofficial chess advisor to study chess.  One, I do not have the time.  Two, for now I just like playing the game; maybe I will get to studying it harder later on.  But I do not believe that the only way I can dedicate myself to chess is by studying it.  I get annoyed when I lose, but really, we all go through streaks and rating isn't everything.

Last week, I was at 1435, three points short of my all-time high.  I fell into a losing streak to bring me to 1376 and knock me out of my 1400-1600 tournament, but I'll be back.  Failing is a natural part of success.

Let me tell you, in blitz I was stuck around 650 for months.  Then, in one month I skyrocketed to around 1000, and have really settled around 950 for the time being.  Just keep enjoying the game, having the will to improve, and I think you will.

You can improve a little over time by just playing. Some of it will stick in your brain. Same as you can improve at backpacking by just backpacking. If you just want to play and not work to improve, go for it! It's not as though you get paid more at work or become more attractive by playing chess at a higher level.

Duplicate post

I've played this entire year without studying, there's a lot to be said with playing Chess therapeutically.

That being said, I'm going to start breaking down my game so I can have a richer understanding of the game. I personally settled on two former World Champions (whose styles I feel most comfortable emulating) to analyze and study at depth in the upcoming year (Botvinnik & Karpov).

I honestly feel like a beginner and can't wait to learn endgames in particular. 

kind of funny , Nekhemevich.

op says "chess study is boring and no fun"- you say- no matter read some Dvoretsky and you'll get over it!

...  people are saying NO, but I think the op's question is an easy yes.  Can you play chess for fun?  YES. of course!

I can also practically Guarentee you are going to get a LITTLE bit better at this game- if you are young.  

for myself, I would rather be "all the chess player" I can be, even IF studying is not quite as fun as endless Blitz.

The answer is actually yes, if you're talking about very little studying.

Achieving a decent rating (1800-2500) is time consuming, but just play a lot of games while applying basic endgame knowledge, the knowledge of imbalences in a middlegame, and some easy-to-learn openings like the Pirc, and just keep on analyzing your games (it's fun for me!), and become better :D

I always find it interesting when people define a "decent rating"

perhaps chess is more fun when one's standard are lower?  

and I still think You MUST take into account the chess player himself; has he been playing at 1000 for a couple decades- or is this someone young with tons of time, interest, and parental support for an intense competition.

the latter kind of guy might find it much 'funner' to get to 1800.   who knows perhaps he'll get most of the way there without a lot of determined study and work.

You (the OP) are really asking a couple of different questions.

For the first one,  it is possible to enjoy the game of chess without studying. You just have to find opponents that are close enough in strength to you where you have a decent chance to win. Losing all the time isn't very fun really. 

For the second question, you might be able to improve some without study but are not likely to improve much.  You have to eliminate your weaknesses to get better and if you don't make an effort to do that,  usually by some form of study,  then you will continue to make the same mistakes. 

You will not improve that much without studying chess. If you just like playing, go for it. But don't expect to improve.

Anyway solving chess tactics problems can be fun. You can probably solve two puzzles(or more) a day.Solving some tactics problems wont take much of your time.

It will help your game. Many people find fun studying. Maybe look for nice materials.

I just started doing tactics and it is fun, and you can watch your "tactics rating" go up and down too!  So it's fun, makes you feel like you are improving when you are doing well, and easy.  On the free account chess.com lets you do five per day.  If you make a practice of doing them every day, I think you really will improve.

As for the other comments, I disagree with parts.  You definitely can learn from mistakes by making them a few times, and you teach yourself how to correct and respond to the trap you fell into before, etc.  I have been slowly improving for the two years I've been on chess.com, and I have no reason to expect that to stop. 

Of course you can have fun just playing, and not studying.  

STUDY to have MORE FUN then is wonderful. Because you can feel bored if you don't progress.

What about minimal studying? You get a lesson per day in the free version. Is spending five minutes learning something a chore? Same with learning tactics - you only get five a day, that should take five minutes (don't stress trying to work them out you are expected to see them instantly, so if you don't get them in a minute, just look up the answer). You get free computer analysis of your game which should point out some basic tactics you have missed. Also, you get the first few moves of an opening n the explorer "for free" - just knowing the optimal first three moves in any situation should help you get off to a good start, which may just improve matters. The "workouts" are quite fun and should help you in finishing off games where you appear to be winning but aren't certain how to proceed.

The sad truth is I enjoyed chess more when I was weaker and starting out than I do now . I used to enjoy the experience and the social aspect of the game regardless of the result but now the result is more important which detracts from the " fun " of the game , at least for me it does . The more you work on chess and if you become better then you start to " expect " to win and these expectations are what kills much of the fun .  I guess I should be happy I never made GM , or even IM , because then the game would be even less fun ?   

I knew a regular club player who never looked at a chess book in his life but maintained a rating over 1500. Also knew an occassional social player who couldn't read but whom I couldn't defeat.

Study first, get better and improve. Then play whatever you like vs lower rated patzers and you will have all the fun that chess can offer you : D

I do whatever i like vs 1300 here is example: 5 min blitz and endgame is probably won by me , they don't have a clue how to play this type of endgame.

The 1300-1700 range is the blissful range where you are not angry because of a low rating, while the 1700+ range is where, as NM Reb says, the wins become more and more important.  I have fun playing chess and seeing a gradual improvement, not getting overly down over a loss here and there..

I have not studied much, besides researching openings and doing a few tactics, but I am hanging on either side of 1500 right now.  It's still fun for me.

GM Simon Williams couple of times played vs if i remember correctly about 1300 rated and the rule was to  checkmate him with a specific chosen pawn that he was previously anouncent to viewers but not to opponent. So if he captures that pawn game is over. And he indeed checkmated him with that pawn. It was hilarious. I myself sometimes move my king 5 times or more in the opening and i still win, so imagine how much fun you can have, just improve and get better first.