I want to play people better than me.

It doesn't do me that much good to keep playing people at my own ELO. I'd like to play (and no doubt lose!) to people better than me so I can improve. I'm trying to do custom challenges setting ELO range to -25 thru +400, but I still only get matched with people at about my own level. Playing bots doesn't seem to help much as I'm only a 600 ELO but can (sometimes) beat bots at 1500. They don't play like humans, or make silly random blunders that 600 players wouldn't even make. Any advice? If you are better than me and would be kind enough to indulge me a game, I'd be grateful. Thanks!

Would you like to play 10+0?

You only joined less than a month ago. Be patient, you’ll play higher rated players when you improve. You won’t learn tonnes from getting destroyed by people even 12, 1300+. Play 1000s if you must, but the best thing to do is play at roughly your level

Play in online tournaments. I find that I often get paired with people of all rating ranges, and I find value in all of the games I play there, especially the ones where I am facing higher rated opponents. I've had many games against players who were rated up to 2000+.

Thank you all for the kind replies. I appreciate that getting decimated from more advance players may not be helpful by itself, but I can also solicit feedback from them.

I rarely disagree with @DoYouLikeCurry but I must add that the lessons which STICK with me the most are those where I get utterly DESTROYED by higher-rated player.

Sure, not like 2200 and such ... but what matters to me is their methodology and style. I wouldn't want to play against pawn chompers, for example, because they don't show good chess behavior (?). Not sure if that's the word I'm looking for but I want to learn from those who respect the game - not treat it like a joke.

Every severe attack I've had ... I can still see it as clearly as if it was a major car accident. And they're even in slow motion. So for some people, higher players are exactly right. Also, it strikes me that players at my level can only demonstrate behaviors at my level. I learned early on how to checkmate them all but ... as soon as I went against higher Glick, those methods all failed so why did I learn all of that?

Anyway, Adam knows there are few I respect more so this is just my personal opinion as a newb.

If you want to play people better than you then get better. Hope that helps

I sent you a game challenge and you declined it.

That is so unhelpful.

Honestly my advice to improve would be to play games and review them. Look at your mistakes and try and figure out why. Turn engine lines off just get it to tell you the bad moves. From this try and figure out the correct move before looking at the engine line. Treat it like a test.

Other than that learn the basic strategies/tactics (pins, double attack, etc).

Don’t focus on developing a deep opening strategy. You will learn a particular line and a 600 will not play the moves you want or theory. You will forget it by the time you get the opportunity. You should learn the key opening principles (e.g. control the Center, knights before bishops, develop with threats, etc).

Don't resign when you make a mistake; your opponent will make some as well.

If you want to play stronger players do tournaments. You could even ask your opponent for comments on your game. 

Good luck!

And your opinion is 100% valid. My question, though, is despite the memorable nature of the games, did you learn anything practical from the experiences? Or did you just enjoy the demonstration of proficiency? I’ve played titled players - I almost always lose to them - I’d say I learn more playing players slightly better than me (say 100-200 points) which is why I recommended OP play up to a maximum of 1000 rated to learn. I do set my game searcher to -50 / +400 for this reason. But if I played Magnus Carlsen, I’d learn nothing from it.

Yeah op you would learn more when people make 600 level mistakes against you

If you played me I'm not gonna fall for a remove the defender tactic for example, but a 600 would.

It's because there are millions of people rated 600, and the rated system tries to get the person closest available to your rating, so it goes -25 elo to the CLOSEST open challenge +400 elo. So essentially the statistical chance of playing anyone higher than +50 at the rating of 600 is INSANELY low.

fr bots are underestamating lower elos

Thank you, Adam. This wasn't an easy one to accept so I reevaluated my Study Plan and it actually says 100 +/- so I've implemented it! Not sure how I missed that. So much to learn!

Bot ratings are hyperinflated to make you feel good

Ah yes playing people better than you, a pretty underrated method of chess improvement. Send me a daily game if you want to play me. 3 days + unrated.

Sorry. I appreciate it, but I was unavailable at the time.

Thanks very much. Looks like I'm too far below your challenge rating settings to send you one.

I sent another request. Its an unrated daily game at 3 days per move.