Loosing badly in timed games and online

I am fairly experienced with Chess and can beat the computer on some of the easier AI levels, but I spend a lot of time calculating the moves to make. When I play online, there is usually a timer and there really is little time to think about the move, and I very often make bad moves. I don't really learn anything other than "I don't think fast enough" or "I got tired" (in some cases).

I do okay with the openings (either textbook openings or something that tends to work) and often get large advantages, and then have my queen taken by a rook/bishop/horse because I didn't analyze the situation fast enough.

I'm getting discourage loosing to players who aren't even highly ranked (<= default rating).

Question is, should I study something, practice something. I wasn't referring to online games on this site, as players here are all good it seems.

+1 If the problem really is thinking speed, then that usually comes along with pattern recognition and experience. However, you've been playing 20 or 30 minute games: I doubt thinking too slow is the only reason you lose (although I admit it may be a huge factor). More important than learning openings at this level is to simply solve puzzles and tactics (daily puzzles on chess.com which are untimed, untimed tactics trainer, timed tactics etc.). The goal is to ultimately improve your pattern recognition and learn how to create plans during the game and learn what to look for in a position. This may sound simple, but I tell you it isn't always so simple; even GMs sometimes wrestle with how to formulate a precise plan to breakthrough, or what they should be looking for. You can eliminate most opening preparation early on in your chess journey by simply developing your pieces, controlling the center, and other "chess principles" I'm sure you have heard of.

Good luck with your chess

Agreed; except, perhaps 1000 or 2000 games is a bit much. Sure, eventually this many games may be played: but you shouldn't wait that long before deciding what to best improve in. I like to analyze almost every game I play and that takes time and study, but I know that it helps in the long run. Even from just the 9 games you have played, you can learn a lot. What I think @antonmo meant by the 1000 or 2000 games though, was simply that you need a much larger sample than 9 games before you become disappointed in your expectations. In short, even 9 games is enough of a sample to learn a little bit from, but it takes a far larger sample before you "disappoint" yourself.

p.s. If you would like, we could play an unrated long time control game sometime in live chess. We can either chat mid-game, or instead we could just play and then go over the game analysis and thoughts together. There are many members here on chess.com that I am sure would be willing to offer some help, but it would take some motivation on your end to though

Thanks. I was playing on these games available on the Mac App Store. They seem to pressure towards the shorter games for some reason. Nice to play with the app, but not worth that much. I played more than 9, and won a few, but not that many.

I think their pushing towards faster games created a sense that it was a good idea to learn to play (better) that way.

This site matches better after a few losses.

It takes some time to find your level. You have to remember that most players on here are hobbyists, so they aren't super easy to beat. You have played 11 games of Rapid and already beat a player rated 954, so that tells me that you knew a lot when you started, or that would not have happened. 

The faster games are fun too, but take some adjustment. I would suggest staying with the slower ones at first. You are off to a good start, and you can do it!

I've been using the analysis tool and it is great, even for games where I won. Shows that where the game(s) started to go downhill were often earlier than noticed.

Other issue has been attention. Beat a good player on blitz early in the morning at work after a few cups of espresso, then lost badly in the afternoon to a much lower ranked player.

Also found that I need to even out the clock - if the opponent takes a long turn, better to use up the extra time as he may have been "planning something".

Any idea why this is a "blunder" and why it wants suggests NE4 where it would be taken by D5?

There's this widespread idea that if we think long enough then we'll find the right move. Well, it's not like that.

Precise calculation is a must to determine the threats' "speed" and viability for both sides, but first, we must detect the threats –all of them–, or we may end wasting time on lines we shouldn't even consider.

Formally, good chess is about building the conditions to unchain a series of logically linked threats... followed by executing them with precision. And this last is where most miss the train, whether because they don't detect the moment to unleash tactics or are not paying attention to the rival's possibilities (more than often from an inferior position).

Working on tactics puzzles is nice but the previous play and when to start with strong tactics is what seems to be your problem. Working on Alekhine's books should help (they're widely available) but, if you can, look for "Chess combination as a fine art" by Kurt Richter.