How do players get better at Chess?

I've seen lots of Chess training websites, but personally, I just dont get it.  How do you see "Hard to find" Tacitics? And most importantly, how does a Chess master win so easily against a beginner in such a way that the beginner doesn't even know why he lost?

Chess master v chess amateur

If you havent done so try to get the book by Max Euwe, in the meantime you might like this, its avideo from the book - regards Robbie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQdfeGPqTao&list=UUobzLirPDBrauXhtJxI3dCw

There are different tactical themes.  As with anything, the first time you encounter a problem it can be difficult to solve.  But once you start identifying common difficulties, and looking for similar types of solutions, problems are solved more easily.

Complex tactics aren't any one theme, and finding their solution can require the habit and ability to calculate forcing moves to their conclusion.  Forcing moves are threats.  Checks or attacking an undefended piece are easy examples.

You find hard to see tactics by being familiar with related themes and having the ability to calculate sufficient forcing lines.

---------------

There are positions where the plans and evaluations (as in which side stands better) aren't intuitive... well for a beginner that's practically every position actually.  But even very experienced players are unsure in various positions.

Consider also that knowledge of positions build upon each other.  For example if you understand how to win a certain pawn endgame, a certain rook endgame, and how to draw a certain rook+bishop vs rook+knight endgame, then when your middlegame reaches a crossroads of those three, you can make middlegame plans accordingly.  These plans would be impossible to generate without the endgame knowledge.

With a large amount of known positions, a master may be confident in his victory very early in the game, long before a beginner loses any material.  Sometimes simply from experience in having played the various bad moves themselves, or from having beaten opponents who have made similar mistakes.

Interesting. But what should I do? Practice?  Anyway, thanks for the help!

The same way you know how to go to the grocery shop in your home town. You've spent time there and you know the language, so you can read the signs.

They are locals of the chessboard. The word you're looking for is "immersion".

Ok,Thanks.

Regularly playing stronger opponents in slow games (you win maybe 1 in 5) and solving tactical puzzles regularly are staples of improvement.

Of course you'll want all the basics: opening, endgame, strategy.  The order and method for those I'll leave to coaches.

I do regularly play better than me players, but constantly lose and clueless on why. Should I study with someone on why?

Have you ascertained why you are losing? make a study of your last twenty games as black and your last twenty games as white and analyse them according to the opening, the middle game and the end game.  Use a friend, an engine, anything, but you must be objective.  Ask yourself the questions, did i come from the opening with an advantage and equal game or a disadvantage.  Do the same for the middle game, ask yourself was it closed, open or semi open.  Was it an attack on the King, defence of the King combative play? and how did I handle it, did i get an advantage, a disadvantage, was it equal. What was the result of the game. Do the same for the endgame, was it a pawn ending, queen endgame, rook, bishop or knight ending or a combination of the above, did I get an advantage, a disadvantage , was it equal, what was the result. In this way be examining your games you can see what areas you may need to work on to improve your play and what type of positions may suit your style.  This can help in determining many things.

If you're not seeing tactics, you need to drill on tactics.

Start with easy problems and work your way up. If you use an online tactics trainer, request problems as easy as possible.

For books, I like Susan Polgar's "Chess Tactics for Tournament Players" and Seirwan's "Winning Chess Tactics."

Getting good at tactics is essential. It's a muscle you must develop. Chess is just too painful otherwise.

The good news is that it's the most straightforward aspect of chess to improve. Like a muscle it strengthens with regular effort.

Sucked I know. How can I prevent blunders?

How can you miss opportunities?

19...Ne5  20. Qg3 Nxd3

It's more a matter of eliminating one's own weaknesses.

The best way to improve is through long term CONSISTENT training. What you study doesn't matter as much as long as it's not exclusively openings. I would suggest studying the middlegame (tactics and positional play) first.

Chess is like real estate.

Location, location, location.

Tactics, tactics, tactics.

Really, I feel tactics don't help much. Only 1 every 200 positions you are in (That is if you are playing ok, hanging pieces I think aren't tactics) will there be a sequence of moves that tactics have helped you in. Really, its all about position.

There have been a lot of people who have asked this question on the forums, including myself a few years ago. Every time I see this question, I give roughly the same answer, which is made up of the following few paragraphs.

Keep playing chess. Also keep studying tactics. I mean that. It's true that there are not tactics in every position, but there sure are tactics in every game, and when they do occur, one slip up will kill you, so you must be studying and practicing tactics more than anything else.

In terms of playing chess, you must, and I cannot stress this enough, you must challenge yourself and regularly take on opponents rated 200+ points above you. You will get your butt kicked on a regular basis, and this is how you improve. With every win over an opponent rated 200+ points above you, you not only gain an enormous chunk of rating points but you also gain confidence in your ability to play chess at that level.

I myself was wondering this two years ago, as a sub-1000 player. I am now rated 1805 U.S.C.F. That's not where I want to be, as my goal is National Master and I'm not stopping until I get there, but I gained a lot of points so far and I think my advice is useful. Most of my games when I was rated between 1200 and 1700 were against players with ratings at least 100 points above me, and some were even against players 500+ points above me. Playing higher-rated opponents is very important. I must admit, my age is a factor. I am young (16 years old) and therefore it is easier for me to improve. It has long been known that in chess it is easier for junior players to get better than older ones, probably because the brain isn't fully formed until a person is in his mid 20s. While this makes it more difficult for older players to improve, I have seen older players do it. It is not impossible.

Finally, improving at chess is a commitment. You have to be willing to make chess study one of the top priorities of your life. You must play chess as often as possible- probably a tournament almost every weekend if you're really serious about improving. On the weekdays or whenever you're not playing in tournaments, you must A) analyze your games from your tournaments, B) practice and study tactics) and C) play more chess online, preferrably not blitz or bullet, as addicting as they are. You must be willing to dedicate many hours of your time to chess. If you aren't dedicated enough to do that, then you will not improve. It is an enormous effort even for a young player.

Inspiring. Sort of. Now let me try writing something of that length.

I recently had a chess session with a friend, and soon discovered that I was capable of proforming 200+ rating points of where im at (Which isn't that high.) I think playing bullet really ruins your chess skill because 1. You have to think fast, so you can easily blunder, and 2. You rely on time....

Alot. So yeah. I play longer games now, and don't play blitz and bullet. I have improved greatly. Now, based on what you said, maybe tactics IS the way to go. Okay, This isn't nearly as long and as helpful, so allow me to cheat...

Like Huey Williams said.

By "Tactics, tactics, tactics" I don't mean every position has a tactical shot winning a pawn, a piece or the game, though that's part of it.

But all the positional sense in the world won't help you if you're not tracking forcing moves and calculating the what-ifs. How many times I've been wrong-footed during a valid positional plan except I missed a zwischenzug!

Here's Kramnik's interesting take on Karpov as a positional tactician:

Karpov is a chess player of a great number of short, two to three move combinations: he transferred his knight, seized the space, weakened a pawn.

Hmmm....  Ok. Thanks!