Everybody keeps telling me that I'm taking it way too seriously, but I don't think I can just shrug the losses off and then NOT feel the need to play again... and I want my current anger-based motivation for playing chess to disappear completely, because it's self-sustaining and I need to struggle with it to break free because I'm a really angry person even without it, apparently.
Huge motivation problem
Sort:
Talekhine93 wrote:
Last night, I lost my Black Bishop on a2 because it got trapped by b3, and for some reason, it made me especially livid.
I think I was still kinda smad and recovering from the Blue Monday (which I literally found out was a thing two days ago), but then I realised that it's my anger that had been motivating me during the past 10 or so years of playing chess.
These days I don't really get shaken by my mistakes, so I forget that I made them and thus repeat them; however, yesterday I remembered that my fury was what fueled the fire of my motivation to improve at chess. Themes can hardly be properly remembered if they don't leave you with a lasting emotional impression, and there's nothing as productive in that respect as pure, unadulterated anger.
Anyone else feel like this?
My style is more to be smooth, steady and decisive all of the time.
UrkedCrow wrote:
Looking at a couple of your games it seems to me that you have a nice, aggressive style but you have to understand there are some moves you CANNOT play.
You have to look around for danger, try to anticipate what your opponent would like to do.
Maybe ease back on the throttle and look at some Karpov games, I dunno. If you're not that confident in your tactics then try a slower pace, consciously aim for a favorable endgame.
Have you, perchance, checked my games out on my account on Lichess? If not, then you're searching in the wrong place, and too many people have made that same faulty presumption. I don't know if I should always spell it out before writing anything whatsoever. 
Talekhine93 wrote:
Last night, I lost my Black Bishop on a2 because it got trapped by b3, and for some reason, it made me especially livid.
I think I was still kinda smad and recovering from the Blue Monday (which I literally found out was a thing two days ago), but then I realised that it's my anger that had been motivating me during the past 10 or so years of playing chess.
These days I don't really get shaken by my mistakes, so I forget that I made them and thus repeat them; however, yesterday I remembered that my fury was what fueled the fire of my motivation to improve at chess. Themes can hardly be properly remembered if they don't leave you with a lasting emotional impression, and there's nothing as productive in that respect as pure, unadulterated anger.
Anyone else feel like this?
That is me exactly.
I started to studying chess because I was so angry and frustrated about having no clue what to do after developing my pieces and losing to everyone.
Now I have far exceeded my original goal. I am hoping something new cl8cks so I can get better. Resign really helps get rid of the rage for playing an idiot move.
UrkedCrow wrote:
You play differently on Lichess?
Why would that be?
Because I only come here to play when I'm already tilted from Lichess and really badly itching for the next game, which makes me play even worse. xD That's why I don't think that what you can access and analyse on Chess.com is enough - I use this site too experimentally when it comes to the games themselves, so I'm comparatively less serious about what I play and how I play it.
@Thee_Ghostess_Lola: Both interpretations might be equally viable in this case. xD We all learn stuff so it would work not only once, but always; yet, we also forget pretty much anything that isn't a multiplication table, it seems. It's kinda eerie that one can look at a chess position three times, not understand it the first time, then learn it and thus understand it the second time, then FORGET it the third time. Why the patterns of our minds' eyes are so fragile, I do not know, but I personally think I'm at a disadvantage compared to some.
There are people I know who are remarkable visual talents and who can solve geometry problems better than I'll ever be able to (and those people include my own mother, regrettably, as some of that inner sight got lost on me), while I have to struggle and draw additional lines then redraw them over and over until I reach some conclusion. I feel that chess is very similar to that, except I don't get to draw any lines; instead, I must internalise them all and then prove that I can do it more efficiently than somebody else, which is a tough order if you're a logician with no real visual inclinations.