How many daily games should you have?

OOOOOOO BURN

I mean if you want to reach that rating. It's a lot easier to reach 2000 with 5 games than with 1000. look at the players on the daily leaderboard. do they have loads of games?

Ok it was not clear what your meaning was.  But I would say that regardless of rating, the benefit of daily chess is to train yourself to look deeply into a position, and that is done by spending time on a single position.  

If you are playing dozens of games  at the same time then you are basically just playing blitz across numerous games.  It kind of defeats the purpose of daily to begin with.  

i had 200+ once i think... never again!!

I never played a daily game until June 13th.  Since then, my rapid rating has gone from 1340 to 1397.  Sure there is normal variation in those ratings, but I have reached my all time high rapid rating and I think daily has helped.  I play one daily game at a time, while I play rapid or occasional blitz, pretty much every day one game per day.

I really think daily has helped me to see the board better.  I used to wonder how GMs could spend half an hour on a move.   Now I am learning how much there is to consider.  

True, but if Methusela (969) from the bible used that formula, wouldn't he get like 17.17171717?

18.211,,, my math was way off

How many physical chessboards can you set up in your living room?

No more than that.

Playing a bunch of correspondence games defeats the purpose.  It's about research and a deep dive into individual games, not a wide breadth of games.  Best way to learn *and permanently absorb* openings and endgames, in my opinion.

I only have 5 chess sets, 2 of which are travel sets with some of the pieces missing. Does that mean I should only have 3 games?

I have 236 game 

OMG so much 

Thanks for the intelligent answer but I am sorry to say that the chess.com forum is becoming a waste of time for people who actually want intelligent conversation.  

You do realize you just basically said that your understanding of what I said is on par with a couple of kid's understanding of what I said?  Just checking .

I didn't bother replying before, because when someone's main drivers are things like "my mom said I couldn't" or "I can't afford another roll-up board on my allowance", then there's not much point in trying to impart anything that is coming from another place/time in life.

In your case, though, I will respond:

People do indeed analyze with more than one board at once.  Surely you can imagine that this might be true even if you'd personally rather reset the board every single time you switch games?

Keeping a game set up on the board allows you to just glance at your coffee table and ponder a position at any time.  One board per game allows you to do said pondering for whatever game suits you during a 3 minutes commercial break, etc.  Things also hit you when you aren't actively analyzing...who wants to set up a board from scratch when you can start immediately from the current position for every game you are playing?

I suppose you pull out a device and load a FEN every time you want to wander 6-8 moves down a candidate move's variations?

Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.  Maybe you've had the experience of a favorite Kasparov game that you have played out 100 times, and you know every single move backwards and forwards, and know the reasoning for each choice so much that it affects your decisions in other games with similar positions?  Now imagine you have that kind of understanding level of every daily chess game you are playing, and that for every opening/endgame/etc. that you have played out this way, that you have that same experience of bettering other games you will play.  That is what I mean by talking about depth vs. breadth.  Or, just play puzzle rush and blitz...since neither of us are ever going to become GMs, it only matters what you enjoy and what improves the kind of chess you want to play.  I like rapid (30 min) as a *minimum* time control.

People don't analyze with more than one board at a time so what use is his answer?

Really?  What kind of nonsense is this?

I guess he was trying to say less than 10, or something,

And how did you come to this nonsensical conclusion?

 but ultimately he said nothing at all as even the children who commented immediately after him were able to point out.

He said something alright, and it was clear and unambiguous.  Are you drinking tonight? 

Although, I will say I agree with his sentiment, and I even untracked this topic because of the painfully childish banter that followed.

Good for you, although I wonder if you can even follow the childish banter correctly.  

Ok then, I am too.  Cheers!  

Fair enough...I guess I am just wondering why anyone that does not want to take daily games seriously would click on this thread in the first place, though ...

60 games