Wow, 2000 Elo! Congrats on that progress. First of all I wanna thank you, it’s actually very helpful and incouraging to hear that you hit 1500 without even knowing openings and managed to break through it specifically by focusing on tactics. It gives me a clear idea of what to expect and what to prioritize when I (hopefully) get there. And you're right—I'll make sure to keep enjoying the game along the way. That is something I sometimes forget about
Thanks for sharing your journey!
Is the Italian Game enough to reach 1500 Elo? Or am I wasting time?
As a near-2500 USCF / near-2400 FIDE / near-2600 chess.com blitz rated player and semi-pro coach, I'd like to chime in with a concise response:
It doesn't matter.
Pick any sound, playable opening and focus on improving your overall game. Improving your middlegame, endgame, tactics, and strategy will take you a lot further than worrying about which opening to play.
Not to mention 1.e4 e5 is a small subset of the positions you'll face as white and black.
Not to mention you can change your opening repertoire in the future when you get to a higher level, if at some point your openings actually become the reason you are not progressing.
Now is not that point.
Chess.com puzzles are limited, I know you have diamond membership but still. The tactics on chesstempo are free and unlimited, the rating is more accurate, and idk why but I often feel when I do cc puzzles that they aren’t very likely to happen in a real game. I just have taken the habit to do tactics on chesstempo (which also have a lot of other great feature) and it worked well, while cc puzzles didn’t seem to bring my play much
I just downloaded the app on my phone and I’m going to start using it right away to see the difference for myself. It’s interesting that you find the Chess.com puzzles less 'realistic, I’ve had that feeling sometimes too.
Coming from a 2000+ player, this tip is gold. Thank you so much for pointing me toward Chesstempo; I really appreciate you sharing what actually worked for your own improvement.
Regarding your tip, I've mostly used Chess.com for puzzles until now. In your experience, what are the main differences between Chesstempo and the puzzles here?
Sorry, I'm not the person, but I think since you've diamond membership here, it won't make much difference
But if I must say, the puzzles there, for some reasons, make more sense and are much harder. In cc, 2000 can be solved even by a 1000. Compared to Chesstempo? Even a 2000 rated player will struggle a lot to solve a 2000 rated puzzle. The website reflects more toward OTB rating, and for some reasons, it feels "applicable." I'll say give it a try, maybe the UI isn't as great as here, but I guess nothing wrong will happen
No worries at all, I really appreciate you jumping in! That’s a very interesting point about the rating inflation on Chess.com. If a 2000-rated puzzle on Chesstempo can actually challenge a 2000-rated player, it sounds like exactly the kind of reality check I need (that's why I don't like play on Lichess).
I don't mind a simpler UI as long as the content helps me improve my real game vision. I'm going to give it a try and see how hard it hits! Thanks for the honest comparison.
Thanks for the encouragement! To be honest, 2000 Elo feels like a different planet right now, so I'm trying to keep my feet on the ground. For now, I'm just going to focus on the grind and keep working hard to hit that 1500 goal first.
Haha ask any 2000 - they will all tell you one thing: they are worse than you expect them to be
They still make stupid blunders and mistakes. Maybe not as frequently and they think some moves ahead, but once you reach there, you will realize it's actually dumber than you thought it was lol
Hahaha, that’s hard to believe! Even at my current level, it sometimes feels like I’m playing against aliens who don’t miss a single thing. The idea that a 2000-rated player can still make 'dumb' blunders is honestly beyond my comprehension right now. :)
But since you’re at that level yourself, I’ll take your word for it! It definitely makes the journey toward 1500 feel a little less intimidating. Thanks for the reality check!
As a near-2500 USCF / near-2400 FIDE / near-2600 chess.com blitz rated player and semi-pro coach, I'd like to chime in with a concise response:
It doesn't matter.
Pick any sound, playable opening and focus on improving your overall game. Improving your middlegame, endgame, tactics, and strategy will take you a lot further than worrying about which opening to play.
Not to mention 1.e4 e5 is a small subset of the positions you'll face as white and black.
Not to mention you can change your opening repertoire in the future when you get to a higher level, if at some point your openings actually become the reason you are not progressing.
Now is not that point.
First of all, thank you for taking the time to chime in. Having someone of your caliber give me advice is a privilege I don't take lightly.
I completely hear you. It’s a humbling reminder that at my level, I’m barely scratching the surface of what this 'game' really is. I say 'game' in quotes because, the more I play, the more I realize it’s an endless universe of strategy and psychology.
Your point about the Italian just being a small subset of what I'll face is well-taken. My goal isn't just to memorize lines, but to use the Italian as a stable starting point so I can finally focus on the 'real' chess you mentioned: the middlegame, the endgames, and the tactics. I’m committed to the grind and to deepening my understanding of this incredible world. Thanks again for the reality check and the guidance!
i used the Italian game back when i was playing blitz and still had 250 rating, and i dont even just play normal chess after that, i try to go for fried liver attack which gets countered by the Traxler counterattack, sometimes though the opponent is stupid and falls into the trap
even then it can be foiled by not moving the other knight after move 3 or doing that but not the queenside knight on move 2.
The italian can take you far, its just a matter of if you enjoy it or not.
Thank you, Master. It’s great to get a perspective from a National Master!
You hit the nail on the head—enjoyment is exactly why I’ve stuck with the Italian. I really like the open positions and the logical development it offers. It makes the 'grind' much more fun when you actually like the positions you’re getting on the board. Knowing it can take me far is all the motivation I need to keep at it!
i used the Italian game back when i was playing blitz and still had 250 rating, and i dont even just play normal chess after that, i try to go for fried liver attack which gets countered by the Traxler counterattack, sometimes though the opponent is stupid and falls into the trap
I remember those days! The Fried Liver and the Traxler definitely make things exciting at that level—it feels like a high-stakes gamble every time.
I'm trying to move a bit past the 'trap' phase now and learn the deeper ideas of the Italian, but I definitely agree that it’s a fun way to start. Thanks for sharing your experience, and keep enjoying the game!
Any legitimate opening will easily get one to 1500 elo; in fact many somewhat" questionable "ones will as well. Play what you enjoy playing--that will definitely get you to 1500.
Italian game was the first opening i started to play as white and i played it up until 1650. I gave it up because I felt a bit tired of how all games started to be a war of attrition and I lacked the knowledge on how to improve, which had nothing to do about it being a good or bad opening.
What really held me back at the time was that I sucked playing against sicilian, french, and as black against D4. I pretty much relearned all those repertoirs and chose opening variations that I actually understood and learned how to play them in the mid-game.
You can absolutely hit 1500 with the Italian Game, and honestly, it’s one of the best openings to build real chess understanding around because it teaches piece coordination, central control, planning, and timing rather than just cheap tricks or memorized traps. The idea that you need the Ruy Lopez or wild gambits to climb is overrated; up to 1500, most games are decided by blunders, poor piece placement, weak calculation, and bad decision-making under pressure, not by opening surprise value. The Italian only becomes “boring” when it’s played mechanically, but in reality it has huge strategic depth and is still played at the highest levels because of how flexible and instructive it is. If you keep focusing on understanding positions, reviewing your games, and improving your middlegame decisions instead of constantly hopping openings, the Italian can carry you far beyond 1500. For substantial growth, and structured learning material, look into the various classes we offer at our institute, Chess Gaja.
https://chessgaja.com/one-to-one-classes/
Italian game was the first opening i started to play as white and i played it up until 1650. I gave it up because I felt a bit tired of how all games started to be a war of attrition and I lacked the knowledge on how to improve, which had nothing to do about it being a good or bad opening.
What really held me back at the time was that I sucked playing against sicilian, french, and as black against D4. I pretty much relearned all those repertoirs and chose opening variations that I actually understood and learned how to play them in the mid-game.
Twin? I too started with the Italian although I kept playing past 1600. I also suck at playing against the sicilian, french and black against d4.
Italian games works at the super GM level lol. One of the best openings of all time
Haha, fair point! If it's good enough for the Super GMs, it’s definitely more than enough for me to grind toward 1500. It’s actually quite inspiring to see the same opening I’m struggling with being played at the highest level of the game. Thanks for the reminder—I'll stick with it!
Any legitimate opening will easily get one to 1500 elo; in fact many somewhat" questionable "ones will as well. Play what you enjoy playing--that will definitely get you to 1500.
That’s a great way to look at it. It’s reassuring to know that I don't need to overthink the 'legitimacy' of my opening just yet and that enjoying the process is actually a key part of the climb.
I’ve definitely been having fun with the Italian, so I’ll take your advice and keep focusing on that enjoyment while I work on my overall game. If it can get me to 1500, I'm all in. Thanks for the encouragement!
Italian game was the first opening i started to play as white and i played it up until 1650. I gave it up because I felt a bit tired of how all games started to be a war of attrition and I lacked the knowledge on how to improve, which had nothing to do about it being a good or bad opening.
What really held me back at the time was that I sucked playing against sicilian, french, and as black against D4. I pretty much relearned all those repertoirs and chose opening variations that I actually understood and learned how to play them in the mid-game.
That is a very honest and helpful breakdown. It’s interesting that it wasn't the Italian itself that held you back, but the 'side quests' like the Sicilian and the French.
I can definitely see how the Italian can turn into a war of attrition if you aren't prepared for the long haul. Your point about learning the mid-game plans for those other structures is a wake-up call for me—it’s a reminder that I can’t just master one opening and hope for the best. I need to be ready for whatever my opponent throws at me. Thanks for sharing your journey, it gives me a much clearer idea of what to expect on the road to 1500!
Italian game might be the best overall opening, and it will show you the correct ideas you need to focus on in the opening phase. Openings like English or London (or any d4 openings) are fine, but like for some reasons I don't feel you can get as much understanding compared to the Italian, or at least might be useful in the future once you gained the required opening knowledge (maybe with the exception of QG).
That’s exactly why I chose it! I’ve always felt that the Italian forces you to understand the 'why' behind each move rather than just memorizing a setup like the London. It’s reassuring to hear that this approach might give me a better foundational understanding in the long run. I’ll stick with it and focus on those core ideas you mentioned. Thanks for the insight!