Planning on dedicating a month to improving in chess, How far do you think I'll get?

Sort:
Arnaut10

How did it go? My opinion is you did well and if you keep up like this you can reach 1300 pretty soon.

Mpirani
Arnaut10 wrote:

How did it go? My opinion is you did well and if you keep up like this you can reach 1300 pretty soon.

Here's how my ratings look at the moment:

llama47

I looked at your performance this last month vs the month before that, and I broke it down by your opponent's rating just to check if anything fishy stood out.

There may be underrated stuff going on, but seems like genuine improvement too. This method estimates ~200 points of improvement.

-

-

People near your rating might be interested in the activities you used to improve so quickly. Seems you played a few hours every day. Not sure how many puzzles you did each day. Anything else? Was there more motivation because of this forum? Did you play at a specific time of day each day?

Mpirani
llama47 wrote:

I looked at your performance this last month vs the month before that, and I broke it down by your opponent's rating just to check if anything fishy stood out.

There may be underrated stuff going on, but seems like genuine improvement too. This method estimates ~200 points of improvement.

-

 

-

People near your rating might be interested in the activities you used. Seems you played a few hours every day. Not sure how many puzzles you did each day. Anything else?

Studying openings and sticking to e4 helped a ton. I play a ton of aggressive yet solid openings, mainly trying to go for the Italian game, Knight attack, or the Evan's gambit. I also enjoy doing puzzles every so often. I was at 1200 in puzzles around July 20th, I'm currently at 2200 in puzzles.

llama47

One indication of improvement in the data, I think, is how the performance has this funny bounce... for example in the first set you did better (in terms of performance) against 800s than 700s and in the 2nd set you did better against 1000s than 900s.

I think this can be explained by noting the pairing system tends to match you with people around your rating. An improving player might have a lower performance against lower ratings because they weren't paired with higher ratings until they got better.

I think this is a good indication of there being improvement vs being underrated.

llama47
Mpirani wrote:
llama47 wrote:

I looked at your performance this last month vs the month before that, and I broke it down by your opponent's rating just to check if anything fishy stood out.

There may be underrated stuff going on, but seems like genuine improvement too. This method estimates ~200 points of improvement.

-

 

-

People near your rating might be interested in the activities you used. Seems you played a few hours every day. Not sure how many puzzles you did each day. Anything else?

Studying openings and sticking to e4 helped a ton. I play a ton of aggressive yet solid openings, mainly trying to go for the Italian game, Knight attack, or the Evan's gambit. I also enjoy doing puzzles every so often. I was at 1200 in puzzles around July 20th, I'm currently at 2200 in puzzles.

So before you played kinda random openings or what?

Mpirani
llama47 wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
llama47 wrote:

I looked at your performance this last month vs the month before that, and I broke it down by your opponent's rating just to check if anything fishy stood out.

There may be underrated stuff going on, but seems like genuine improvement too. This method estimates ~200 points of improvement.

-

 

-

People near your rating might be interested in the activities you used. Seems you played a few hours every day. Not sure how many puzzles you did each day. Anything else?

Studying openings and sticking to e4 helped a ton. I play a ton of aggressive yet solid openings, mainly trying to go for the Italian game, Knight attack, or the Evan's gambit. I also enjoy doing puzzles every so often. I was at 1200 in puzzles around July 20th, I'm currently at 2200 in puzzles.

So before you played kinda random openings or what?

Well no but I used to switch between d4 and e4, and also between the italian and the vienna, and I decided to focus on getting really good with the italian setup and openings revolving around that. This was I get a lot of middlegames I'm comfortable with and have a good idea on what to do.

llama47
Mpirani wrote:
llama47 wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
llama47 wrote:

I looked at your performance this last month vs the month before that, and I broke it down by your opponent's rating just to check if anything fishy stood out.

There may be underrated stuff going on, but seems like genuine improvement too. This method estimates ~200 points of improvement.

-

 

-

People near your rating might be interested in the activities you used. Seems you played a few hours every day. Not sure how many puzzles you did each day. Anything else?

Studying openings and sticking to e4 helped a ton. I play a ton of aggressive yet solid openings, mainly trying to go for the Italian game, Knight attack, or the Evan's gambit. I also enjoy doing puzzles every so often. I was at 1200 in puzzles around July 20th, I'm currently at 2200 in puzzles.

So before you played kinda random openings or what?

Well no but I used to switch between d4 and e4, and also between the italian and the vienna, and I decided to focus on getting really good with the italian setup and openings revolving around that. This was I get a lot of middlegames I'm comfortable with and have a good idea on what to do.

Nice thumbup.png

Just curious because I'm sure there are a lot of people who would like to go from 900 -> 1150 quickly... and even though there are lots of standard advice things, it's nice to hear the opinion of someone who actually did it both recently and quickly happy.png

Sounds like you focused on tactics, openings, and you played (basically) every day.

Chuck639
dfgh123 wrote:

we have the same puzzle rating except it took me years lol.

I was thinking great job by the OP to quickly shoot up to 2200 and I better get cracking at 2400 because he is going to surpass me at his rate.

Good stuff OP.

Mpirani
llama47 wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
llama47 wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
llama47 wrote:

I looked at your performance this last month vs the month before that, and I broke it down by your opponent's rating just to check if anything fishy stood out.

There may be underrated stuff going on, but seems like genuine improvement too. This method estimates ~200 points of improvement.

-

 

-

People near your rating might be interested in the activities you used. Seems you played a few hours every day. Not sure how many puzzles you did each day. Anything else?

Studying openings and sticking to e4 helped a ton. I play a ton of aggressive yet solid openings, mainly trying to go for the Italian game, Knight attack, or the Evan's gambit. I also enjoy doing puzzles every so often. I was at 1200 in puzzles around July 20th, I'm currently at 2200 in puzzles.

So before you played kinda random openings or what?

Well no but I used to switch between d4 and e4, and also between the italian and the vienna, and I decided to focus on getting really good with the italian setup and openings revolving around that. This was I get a lot of middlegames I'm comfortable with and have a good idea on what to do.

Nice

Just curious because I'm sure there are a lot of people who would like to go from 800 -> 1150 quickly... and even though there are lots of standard advice things, it's nice to hear the opinion of someone who actually did it both recently and quickly

The tricky thing for me to get used to is the variety in openings after 1000 ish, especially in 15|10 time control. I had to learn to play against the Ruy Lopez, The Scotch, The Scotch gambit, and so on, especially since I play e5 against e4 as black.

llama47

Oh yeah, after 1.e4 e5 white has a lot of options.

Good for you for sticking with something standard and learning about it. I didn't switch to 1.e4 e5 until a lot later, so that was time wasted for me.

Mpirani
llama47 wrote:

Oh yeah, after 1.e4 e5 white has a lot of options.

Good for you for sticking with something standard and learning about it. I didn't switch to 1.e4 e5 until a lot later, so that was time wasted for me.

I messed around with a couple of things to be honest, I played a couple variations of the Sicilian but honestly found the Sicilian a bit too theoretical and "vanilla"

I tried the Pirc, but honestly found the playstyle a bit too slow (I still play the kings Indian against d4 as black though)

I tried the Queens Gambit as white, I honestly had a ton of fun with that one, but then I really started enjoying the Fried liver attack, (Italian, Knight attack), and just switched over to e4. In studying these openings I started enjoying playing the black side of them too so I just started playing e4-e5 as white and black. 

I also tried almost every single good gambit in existence, just because it felt great to get someone to fall for the traps once in a while. 

Yeah it took a while before I settled on e4-e5.

Mpirani
Absolute_Best wrote:

You will not improve much because Live Chess is filled with a bunch of cheaters and fake accounts that spawn up daily and we can't filter those fakes out because chess.com doesn't know how to program that filter 

 

It can't even enable us to block trolls, cheats, fakes using the Blocking feature which DOESN'T WORK

I've actually never run into a cheater believe it or not.  I'm pretty certain this is because I play 15|10 and most cheaters play in the Blitz 5|0 and Rapid 10|0 pool. So if you find cheaters annoying just start playing 15|10.

AunTheKnight

You've got pretty far!

LoukasLusha

One of my students increased by 700 rapid points in 3 months. He went from 700 to 1400 within that time. I believe he practiced nearly 3 to 4 hours most days and he took weekly lessons with me. With dedication and consistency, a lot is possible. Don't listen to anyone who tries to limit the reasonable potential of your goal.

Mpirani
Absolute_Best wrote:
Mpirani wrote:
Absolute_Best wrote:

You will not improve much because Live Chess is filled with a bunch of cheaters and fake accounts that spawn up daily and we can't filter those fakes out because chess.com doesn't know how to program that filter 

 

It can't even enable us to block trolls, cheats, fakes using the Blocking feature which DOESN'T WORK

I've actually never run into a cheater believe it or not.  I'm pretty certain this is because I play 15|10 and most cheaters play in the Blitz 5|0 and Rapid 10|0 pool. So if you find cheaters annoying just start playing 15|10.

If you only play 15/10 then that is boring

I find that playing with increment makes it more intense, since my opponents don't blunder very often. Just having a 10 second increment makes the skill level so much higher in the games

Mpirani
dfgh123 wrote:

I play 5/5 because they moved 10 min to rapid. 5/5 is about 8 minutes per side.

I find that 5|5 is still too short for me just because of the fact that I like sitting and going through multiple candidate moves to play as accurately as possible.

x-0460907528

ok. your month is up. looks like you went from 872 to 1141. not too shabby.

Mpirani
pawnstar1957 wrote:

ok. your month is up. looks like you went from 872 to 1141. not too shabby.

My puzzles rating went from 1200 to 2200 happy.png

ninjaswat
Mpirani wrote:
pawnstar1957 wrote:

ok. your month is up. looks like you went from 872 to 1141. not too shabby.

My puzzles rating went from 1200 to 2200

surprise.png took me months to do that -_- I wasn't doing many but still-