Ratings Predict Outcome

I am really impressed on how accurate the rating system is in predicting  the winner or loser of a game. In reviewing my Win/ Loss outcomes I find I won 90% against lower rated players ,and lose to higher rated players.  ( 100 points  either way)

I seem to be stuck in the 1400-1500 range myself. I suppose if i want to move up I will have to do the tedious task of study, rather than off the cuff play.

Alas, it is true that to improve one's play, some study or perhaps getting some coaching as well, may be necessary. Then, we hope, our play will improve and so will our rating (as a trailing indicator).

Best wishes.

That is correct the mathematics is faultless, not for one game but after a number of games.

I hope you can improve, but remember you may then be stuck in the 1500-1600 or with more effort 1700-1800.

You have to decide is the game worth the candle.

Think of one's repository of chess knowledge and skill - as measured by our rating - as the level of water in a fluted vase (see below).

As we study, play and learn, we fill the vase up and our rating goes up to match.

However, the rate of evaporation from the vase increases as well. Consider this proportional to the effort we must expend to learn that which will raise the level in the vase - raise our skills, knowledge and rating.

It gets harder and hard to do. So, moving our skills, knowledge and rating from 1200 to 1400 takes a certain amount of effort and time. Moving from 1400 to 1600 takes more effort. Moving from 2000 to 2200 is much, much harder than any 200 point boundary before that. And so it goes.

(Not a perfect analogy, but one that gets the point across. I learned this one from Chess Master at Any Age by Rolf Wetzell.)

I have to agree with the OP's assessment, though I'm only going by my own experiences.  Though it is fun when I occasionally beat someone rated 100-200 points higher.

i think we should try to play people rated higher than us as much as we can.  not much to gain from an easy victory over a lower ranking player than yourself ,is there?

 Ultimately it will make no great difference you will still rise to your appropriate level you cannot defeat the statistical mathematics, anyway on this site we do get to play a range of opponents. I often find it very difficult to beat players rated more than 100 points lower.

I always thought there was a psychological aspect to ratings. Personally I almost expect to lose against higher rated players.

I quite often Beat players Rated 100 to 300 +points abouve my current Rating

yeah, i agree. i would take alot more time in making my moves against a higher ranking player.  sometimes though  i can get complacent against a player a few hundred points behind me and maybe end up losing

Define "quite often", please

I have found that with by working through the beginners study guide and with the help of game explorer to get a solid opening going and some careful thinking I have moved quickly to 1550 in turn-based chess (9/0/0). Now playing players 1500-1700. They play much better, very few mistakes and will probably lose my unbeaten record. I feel like I am playing good quality chess.

Playing live chess (3/4/0) is a lot harder even playing 30/0 and I am still around 1100 (not allowed game explorer ), making 4 blunders a game (rather than only 2 in 9 games in turn based). Learning fast though as players around 1100 tend to throw their queen out asap so have now looked at some ways to take advantage of this . Hopefully should improve this rating as I play more live games.

I analyse all my game trying to work out where I went wrong so in the last 2 weeks have really improved.  

Great to hear from someone who is making progress.

I am still hovering around the 900-1000 rating on turn-based games, but I am starting to make fewer 'silly' mistakes now. 

Analysing games helps, but you do need someone to explain why some moves were inaccurate, and that is my problem with the chess.com analysis. Some mistakes are obvious, and often lead to me saying to myself "why on earth did you do that??!".

I don't play live chess so much as this leaves me with too little time to work out the best moves and I usually lose quickly.

I have set myself a goal of getting a 1200 rating. To do this I have started studying some opening theory (though not too much) and use the tactics trainer.

I would like to have an unrated game with someone who could talk me through some of my (and their) moves. If anyone would like to offer I would appreciate the advice!

Andrew

Yeah, one can just keep a settings that says you will play against players rated up to 200 below or above or whatever range you like. If you win against those below your own rating, you will increase your rating gradually and thus gradually meet stronger players. Thus you don't need to concentrate on only higher rated players. Besides if all players only wanted to play against higher rated players no games would be possible.

@ Wasabi65

I really recommend working through this study programme....

http://www.chess.com/article/view/study-plan-for-beginners-the-opening2

...though you need to be a diamond member to watch the videos. Well worth the upgrade I think if you are genuinely keen to improve your game. I hope there are others for the mid game and end game.

Do you use 'game explorer'? It's a great tool for setting up the opening. Worth exploring the possible variations.

Do you 'analyse' the board? For each move I play around with possible moves and responses. Flipping the board is very helpful when doing this. I think the game looks so different from the other side.

Happy to play an unrated game (send me a challenge) and discussing moves via 'chat box', though I am still learning myself. I suppose I must be doing something right. 

Cheers 

DJ

EDIT: Study guides can be found here....such a great resource

http://www.chess.com/article/view/study-plan-directory

Thanks DJ.

Will certainly take you up on your offer!

Andrew