Being too eager to attack.
Considering your username it is no wonder
To be honest I think playing aggressively is great, as long as you don't try to start attacking too early.
I agree
Around 1600.
For me, I'd put it down to three main factors.
1. Lack of knowledge and experience in many different types of positions. Little understanding of certain game plans required. I haven't yet find a 'go-to' repertoire for white and subsequently feel more comfortable playing as black than with white, believe it or not.
2. Lack of practical thinking, especially in terms of long-term game plans. Most of my wins come from taking advantage of inaccuracies. I struggle to find the right long term ideas that ultimately push for an advantage.
3. On my day, I have drawn many strong players through solid and sensible play. But I lack an instinct to know when I could potentially push for a win and play more ambitiously. Again, probably more down to experience.
Ok going to be serious (2000 USCF) - Personally I'm too inclined to avoid tactical positions. Usually this bites me in the back when it turns out my safe move lost the advantage.
I'm usually not outplayed positionally, but when I do, it can usually be traced back to the opening. I should probably brush up on my theory - when I review my otb losses all of them can be traced back to bad opening play.
I mostly play correspondence chess and am 1400.
According to Insights, my biggest weakness is endgames.
I'd say the good and bad thing is that most players are a bit below where they should be when it comes to endgames, so gaining even basic competence and consistency will make you stand out! 
(I'd say this is more true but online but also just in general.)
Speaking about OTB I have 3 main weaknesses:
Having mental health problems sometimes I would turn up for a game either unfocused, underconfident or anxious and lose to players with less overall understanding than me.
Second is board vision. It's fairly rare I would be outplayed positionally but for my overall level I throw in too many beginner level tactical oversights. If I'm not vigilant I can make a simple mistake out of nowhere.
Third is that I'm often concentrated up until I gain a big advantage but then once attained it's difficult for me not to automatically completely relax as if the game is already over.
My last rating was a Scottish federation rating from a couple of years ago of I think 1799, but based on only about 12 games before covid hit. I'm sure if I was to play more games now I'd be more like 1900s.
Okay, nice - you certainly have an impressive daily rating, so you are probably a little bit underrated at 1800.
Do you think these problems that you've listed are solvable?
Ah yes, positional chess - the art of purposefully doing nothing 
This did take me quite a bit of time to grasp and I'm still working on it but it does get better with practice, and with playing higher rated players.
Around 1600.
For me, I'd put it down to three main factors.
1. Lack of knowledge and experience in many different types of positions. Little understanding of certain game plans required. I haven't yet find a 'go-to' repertoire for white and subsequently feel more comfortable playing as black than with white, believe it or not.
2. Lack of practical thinking, especially in terms of long-term game plans. Most of my wins come from taking advantage of inaccuracies. I struggle to find the right long term ideas that ultimately push for an advantage.
3. On my day, I have drawn many strong players through solid and sensible play. But I lack an instinct to know when I could potentially push for a win and play more ambitiously. Again, probably more down to experience.
Yeah, playing as White is actually difficult - too many options! I have had similar struggles.
As far as long term planning, I would say the same as I said to LeeEuler - long term plans are overrated, and it tends to be much more useful to have some idea of what you are going to do over the next 3 - 10 moves.
Intuition is a flighty thing, best developed by playing for the win regularly - but this involves risk taking which will inevitably lead to a loss here or there. I'd say it's pretty important to take some risks when your intuition tells you to, and when they lead to losses, learn from them. That's what online blitz is for
um i just um um mouseslip and um blunder um pieces
same friend
1870 here.
Probably my inability to tell whenever I have a better position, and how to effectively creating attacks on the kingside.
Okay, nice - you certainly have an impressive daily rating, so you are probably a little bit underrated at 1800.
Do you think these problems that you've listed are solvable?
SCF ratings seem to be anyway deflated against Fide by maybe 50-75 points.
Yeah. I play better when I get the size and timing of my meal right beforehand. Also some light exercise helps. I've also improved over the years at taking the game seriously until the end.
I never think about my the opposing player pieces or where their at on the board. I often move my pieces to where they would be captured I guess i just don't analyze the board
Hi all,
The title pretty much explains it, but I'm curious - what do you think your biggest chess weakness is? I'd be interested to see if, for example, there is one most common answer in a particular rating group.
If you want to leave an illustrative game that would be helpful
Cheers,
~ Jack
I'm a 1650, and my greatest weakness is putting my pieces in suboptimal squares
I'm a 1650, and my greatest weakness is putting my pieces in suboptimal squares
Isn't that the entirity of any chess mistake though?
Time management, and simple mistakes under time pressure. 7 out 8 serious games I've lost over the board were because of time pressure (Almost all in winning positions, too, haha.) 30% of my online games that I've lost were because of time pressure. I play a lot slower then my opponents, and pay for it at the end of the game.
Also how I take losses due to aforementioned low time blunders. Those almost never end well.
I don't think I have any weaknesses in chess.
Years ago I had a rating of about 1700 and I feel like I'm still about that now. So I know I will never be really good, and I know I'm above beginner level. I just play for fun, that's all.
The question would be like asking someone who grows begonias what their biggest weakness is. Someone else might have all sorts of ideas where there might be weaknesses, but for the person who wouldn't change a thing, I think the answer is none.
😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 😭 Blunder Blunder Blunderrrr....😭
When i calculate to play better i lose on time 😭 When i play fast i lose by missing tactics 😭
Time management, and simple mistakes under time pressure. 7 out 8 serious games I've lost over the board were because of time pressure (Almost all in winning positions, too, haha.) 30% of my online games that I've lost were because of time pressure. I play a lot slower then my opponents, and pay for it at the end of the game.
Also how I take losses due to aforementioned low time blunders. Those almost never end well.
Dude I feel you ! I have the same problem... In 10+0 or even 3+0 I'm fast and ussually quite good at time managment... But in serious games (15+10, 30+0, or slower) I'm extremely slow, sometimes using 10 minutes for a single move in a position that has several moves that maintain the advantage. I think the reason might be I have a slight imbalance in my game where my openings are still too good for my skill level (middle/end-game), so when I reach the typical +1, even +3 advantage in the early middle game I start considering many many different options and do not have the balls to just play one... So I guess just tactics, strategy books and endgame study are the answer to this time managment issue... If anyone has ideas do share!
My biggest weakness playing against solid stuff like the Bc2 Ruy. Not just openings, just example. in general when my opponents play “less ambitious” but super solid stuff, building pressure with a small advantage slowly. I collapse in these middle games quite often. The stuff I studied like Marshall, anti Marshall, Exchange var, I normally have a good sense of when I’m leaving theory and when I should start thinking really deeply. These are just examples but the weakness is dealing with less theoretical solid stuff that leads to complicated middle games. This style of play seems to stifle my ability to create sound plans I just start moving maneuvering with no purpose