Never can win as beginner

Sort:
Avatar of greenstar04

I am okay at tactics for my level (usually I get ~14 on puzzle rush), but I always struggle to make an attack against my opponent. In my last game, my opponent just formed a pawn chain and I just couldn't figure out what to do. 

Avatar of KetoOn1963

Common theme:

All you're playing is speed chess.  You wont improve playing that way.

Puzzle Rush is not a good indicator of tactical ability.  Its a game.

"Attacks" at your level do not exist.

 

 

Avatar of blueemu

Tactics flow from a superior position. If you feel that you are OK at tactics, but have a hard time implementing them in a game, the most likely reason is that you are having difficulty maneuvering into a superior position which will generate tactical opportunities.

Avatar of Cool_Prakhar
@blueemu I agree, though strategy is also pretty important
Avatar of Cool_Prakhar
Which is pretty much what you said tho
Avatar of KetoOn1963
Cool_Prakhar wrote:
@blueemu I agree, though strategy is also pretty important

He described strategy.

Avatar of KeSetoKaiba
KetoOn1963 wrote:

Common theme:

All you're playing is speed chess.  You wont improve playing that way.

Puzzle Rush is not a good indicator of tactical ability.  Its a game.

"Attacks" at your level do not exist.

Generally, I agree with this. However, I wouldn't say "attacks" never exist at the beginner levels of chess - just that they aren't usually perfectly attacking nor defending. When beginners play tell me this:

Player A is up by an extra Queen, a few minor pieces and several pawns.

Player B only has a pawn shelter near the King.

Player A then goes after the King and gets checkmate - perhaps not in the most efficient manner, but they got checkmate. Wasn't this an attack? I mean sure, they may have been up way more material than a GM would have needed to convert it into a win, but that doesn't make it not an "attack." It just means that "attacking" chess looks different at lower levels of chess than at higher levels.

Avatar of larazeus

we all got beat when we were beginners like you, you only get better by playing more games. practice makes perfect, you will win games soon, PATIENCE

Avatar of notmtwain
greenstar04 wrote:

I am okay at tactics for my level (usually I get ~14 on puzzle rush), but I always struggle to make an attack against my opponent. In my last game, my opponent just formed a pawn chain and I just couldn't figure out what to do. 


He didn't just form a pawn chain. He sniped pawns starting on move 3 because you do not know the most basic openings.

You must have faced 2 Qh5 about 100 times at this point. Do you lose your e pawn every time?

Avatar of KeSetoKaiba
greenstar04 wrote:

I am okay at tactics for my level (usually I get ~14 on puzzle rush), but I always struggle to make an attack against my opponent. In my last game, my opponent just formed a pawn chain and I just couldn't figure out what to do. 

The members in this forum and chess.com in general usually give good advice though. Opening principles and basic endgames will help you improve a lot more in the "beginner stages" of chess than studying "attacks" from players like Tal, or Steinitz. To be blunt, "attacking" (real "attacking" that @KetoOn1963 was talking about) is complex and above your level right now. That doesn't mean that it is incomprehensible, but just that it is better to learn more fundamentals first before fully understanding more complicated thinking.

Avatar of KetoOn1963
KeSetoKaiba wrote:
KetoOn1963 wrote:

Common theme:

All you're playing is speed chess.  You wont improve playing that way.

Puzzle Rush is not a good indicator of tactical ability.  Its a game.

"Attacks" at your level do not exist.

Generally, I agree with this. However, I wouldn't say "attacks" never exist at the beginner levels of chess - just that they aren't usually perfectly attacking nor defending. When beginners play tell me this:

Player A is up by an extra Queen, a few minor pieces and several pawns.

Player B only has a pawn shelter near the King.

Player A then goes after the King and gets checkmate - perhaps not in the most efficient manner, but they got checkmate. Wasn't this an attack? I mean sure, they may have been up way more material than a GM would have needed to convert it into a win, but that doesn't make it not an "attack." It just means that "attacking" chess looks different at lower levels of chess than at higher levels.

I should have been clearer by what i meant. 

"Attacks" at your level are generally missed.

Avatar of greenstar04

@notmtwain sorry I got confused that game and was playing fast. 

Avatar of greenstar04

But I am very appreciate of all the advice. 

Avatar of greenstar04

I didn't mean anything advanced by attacking. I was just referring to a way to checkmate. Not any particular strategy or something like that. When my opponent forms a pawn chain, I can't break through and just end up cycling my pieces around the board. 

Avatar of KeSetoKaiba

 

Avatar of greenstar04

Okay, thanks. I will try to attack the backwards pawn or go around them. 

Avatar of KetoOn1963
greenstar04 wrote:

Okay, thanks. I will try to attack the backwards pawn or go around them. 

Think of it as a tree.  Where do you start chopping a tree down?  The base.

Avatar of PriestMarmore

Also I noticed that you haven't played a single Rapid Chess game. If you really want to improve you should focus mainly on this type of mode since you'll need to focus more. I'm no GM but that's how I got better, by playing a lot of rapid chess and my rating increased a lot in a very short amount of time

Avatar of KeSetoKaiba
PriestMarmore wrote:

Also I noticed that you haven't played a single Rapid Chess game. If you really want to improve you should focus mainly on this type of mode since you'll need to focus more. I'm no GM but that's how I got better, by playing a lot of rapid chess and my rating increased a lot in a very short amount of time

Good suggestion about rapid chess and longer time controls in general. When I was learning chess on chess.com, I typically played 10 min. games, but I also played longer OTB games around that time too. I was constantly improving my chess, analyzing my games and learning new things. I especially recommend playing longer time controls if you are feeling "rushed" - especially when learning, you need time to think with quality; you'll play faster time controls more accurately when you develop better pattern recognition and opening theory helps give you more time for the middlegame and endgame. 

I naturally moved kind of fast I think (I can calculate kind of quickly), so 10 min. always felt okay for me; I could play a 5 min game all right, but 10 min gave me a little "extra thinking time" but if 10 min. is rushing for you, then try 15/10, or 30 min or something like that.

Avatar of Yu-Hopkins

You can do it. Just improve and learn slowly. Step by step. There are many videos on YouTube that are available for beginners and even advance players. Many videos feature analysis of famous games. Watch them. Watch videos of John Bertholomew. They are very helpful and instructive. Especially watch videos from his playlist "climbing the rating ladder ". You will get all the basic understanding like how to play against pawn chains and what not.