The whole point of the rating system is to match you with someone of roughly equal ability. If you do improve then you will be matched against better players, and should lose as often as you win.
The only way round this is to keep improving. If you can figure out how to do this, please let me know.
Losing is part of the game. Once you accept this, it becomes much more enjoyable.
Hikaru helped me to cross that bridge in my mind. Watching him play online one time, as he got into trouble, he casually remarked, "if I lose, I lose," in a 'no big deal' tone of voice.
I think that's how we should all look at losing. JMO.
Try to play fewer games a day.
"if I lose, I lose," in a 'no big deal'
Or as Tyson Fury put it, "You can't take a swim without getting wet". He was talking about boxing and getting hit, but the principle holds for chess.
so either pick a huge study to play ratio so i'm always effectively underrated or don't play. That is what I'm hearing.
Sure losing sometimes is no big deal. Even enduring an extended period of time where you lose more than you win can be acceptable. But what makes that worth it is the carrot at the end where you get better and dominate. But with the rating system that never happens.
If I spend a lot of time and energy to get really good at basketball, or soccer, or poker then afterward I get to go to my local gym, park, or casino and consistently win. That is the incentive. But if I try to follow the same process in chess, the payoff just isn't there.
i think finding your weakness and removing it is key, ive been heavily practicing middlegame tactics and study due to me having a huge accuracy and win rate drop in it according to insights.
my oppoments play like idiots with terrible,weakening moves that i can see but dont know how to convert the advantage. as well as not seeing tactics very well. and with the drop of motivation due to london stans being in all my games ive taken a break and focused my time on study.
Winning 50% plus is very difficult if u play at ur full strength level....it will happen only if u continue to improve
Yes and the worst thing is...... You only know you are improving because you have over 50% win rate!!!???? So what you learn is hard to quantify 😐😐😐😐
I've got 48% won and 50% lost with 2% drawn so win more I guess?????
thats interesting, I have 11% games drawn, I suspect that the percentage drawn would be much higher for strong players.
thats interesting, I have 11% games drawn, I suspect that the percentage drawn would be much higher for strong players.
That's interesting you have 160 something games drawn as your 11% in rapid your win\loss each above 400s more than twice my rapid games played and over 200 ELO higher than me
Sure losing sometimes is no big deal. Even enduring an extended period of time where you lose more than you win can be acceptable. But what makes that worth it is the carrot at the end where you get better and dominate. But with the rating system that never happens.
If I spend a lot of time and energy to get really good at basketball, or soccer, or poker then afterward I get to go to my local gym, park, or casino and consistently win. That is the incentive. But if I try to follow the same process in chess, the payoff just isn't there.
Why would you enjoy beating players who are far weaker?
If you want to improve, aim to play opponents at such a level that you only win 1/3 of the time.
Sure losing sometimes is no big deal. Even enduring an extended period of time where you lose more than you win can be acceptable. But what makes that worth it is the carrot at the end where you get better and dominate. But with the rating system that never happens.
If I spend a lot of time and energy to get really good at basketball, or soccer, or poker then afterward I get to go to my local gym, park, or casino and consistently win. That is the incentive. But if I try to follow the same process in chess, the payoff just isn't there.
Why would you enjoy beating players who are far weaker?
Its more about not losing, and being able to play tired/mindlessly sometimes and still win. Also a bit of sadism, which is why beating the computer just doesn't hit the same spot.
I already have a competitive game that I really care about improving at which is not chess. I just thought chess might be a nice change of pace, but I think I was wrong about that. Losing really hurts the same even when there isn't money attached to it.
I enjoy chess but I don't like playing games where I can't actually win in the long run. I might be willing to actually study, but even if I do study I won't be able to win significantly more often because of the rating system. Is there a way around this?