Should I just give up ?

thegreat_patzer
zoomdba wrote:

Thanks for all the useful replies.  It is not that it is not fun.  I do not get to play live chess, and I don't really know anyone that plays.  So I have no reference as to whether I will lose every single time, or win once in a while.  I should play with more people on chess.com it looks like.  

this is confusing

 

why would you spend 1 year studying tactics and never play a chess game against someone?  

sometime you win and sometimes you don't, but when you are in a winning streak and are blowing up his position, its genuinely fun.  the very POINT of doing tactics in the first place....

 

and now, your original post makes even less sense.  you want to Quit playing a game you never play. surprise.png

(?)

BronsteinPawn

so basically your sissy levels have reached a dramatic point where you hope to never play a game but instead spend all your time studying in the closet so when you finally decide to play you crush everyone?

sick

Dodger111

You have only played two games ya doosh no wonder you suck

MickinMD
zoomdba wrote:

Hi,

I have been training on Chess.com for a year, doing tactics for hours.  The highest I ever got on tactics was 1000 and change.  I cannot beat the computer set to the easiest 1 setting.  Should I just give up?  Does this mean chess is just not for me?

 

Best regards,

 

Joe

Joe, taking the 166.5 hours you've worked tactics, multiplying by 60 to get minutes, then dividing by the 20,195 problems you've attempted, you are averaging 0.495 min. or just under 30 seconds per problem.  That is NOT "training," that's guessing.

Take the time, say up to 5 minutes/problem, and look for hanging pieces, overworked defenders (defending two pieces at once, and other tactical and positional situations and patterns.

Here are three sites where you should memorize the situations and tactical and positional maneuvers:

https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-tactics--definitions-and-examples

https://chesstempo.com/tactical-motifs.html

https://chesstempo.com/positional-motifs.html

Do you know the difference between Skewering and Pinning? How about the difference between a Dovetail Mate and a Swallows Tail Mate.  How are the two Bishops used differently in Boden's Mate and the Double Bishop Mate?

If you've been solving tactics problems a lot but can't answer those things, then you don't have a "hook" in your brain that associates a name with a tactic and a pattern, so you aren't getting the most out of solving tactics if you don't review each problem and determine which tactics, by name, were used to solve the problem. 

MateMasterMorphy

Hey there happy.png

I can relate to a point of discouragement when I was playing and trying to improve years ago. I was very motivated and was trying but would disappoint myself so bad when I would blunder, or it seemed to be for not in my understanding and applications. It had less to do with my efforts than my comparing view between time and effort, to improvement in comprehension and maintaining well executed moves throughout my games as I knew though. It is far from time to give up if you really do want to get better and enjoy the game. I think I will share this in a post for all as well since it is important to all us learners. I will be messaging you with some help after we can have a little chat to help understand your situation better if you are game. And for this part ignore my rating as well as your own please. I am new here and have played half way but I do want to help. I'm not as ambitious as years ago buy I do like to help others. 

universityofpawns
[COMMENT DELETED]
havelock3
MickinMD wrote:

 

Joe, taking the 166.5 hours you've worked tactics, multiplying by 60 to get minutes, then dividing by the 20,195 problems you've attempted, you are averaging 0.495 min. or just under 30 seconds per problem.  That is NOT "training," that's guessing.

 

Agreed! You should be aiming for a 75% pass rate or better. 50% is is not what what you want. Reset your tactic stats and make 75% pass rate your sole target. Forget the clock.

And for each tactic you do, look at the tags for that tactic and make sure you understand what they mean and why they apply.

Also, anytime you have a tactic where you don't understand  the answer, use the analyse feature to see why the solution you though was correct wasn't. That can be very enlightening.

DragonBallKai

Practice something more useful : sports, learning a foreign language, a programming language, cooking, etc. Most chess club players end up with mental problems and they tend to go postal when losing.

MidnasLament

I've heard that anyone can get to 1800 if they just put in the work.  What are you doing to improve?  Maybe it's your method that is the problem.  I would recommend getting a coach, even someone about 1500 would be fine.  The value of a coach is they can find holes in your chess knowledge and basics and help you to correct it.  Once you start learning the right things your rating will go up quickly.  

 

I like what other people are saying too..  Are you having fun?  Do you like chess?  If the answer is no or not really then chess isn't for you.  If you are then it totally is!  Passion breeds improvement.  Happy checkmating!  happy.png  -Stacia

thegreat_patzer

sigh.

BP gets it.  when the OP is THIS ridiculous, trolling is the biggest possibility.

 

telling a guy he isn't studying Hard enough, or doing it right- when he isn't even playing chess- is comic and silly.

 

maybe you are all trolls except brownstein (?)  idk.

.... if not THINK of your advice.  he N-E-V-E-R plays chess, yet he wants to stop (playing chess) cause he's not getting better at it?

 

does that Really make sense?

(PS I do get that a few of you want to help him solve tactics, which makes a little sense.  but you troll detector must be broke or something)

Slow_pawn
The op should definitely be playing others around the same level rather than just doing tactics and playing computer easy. I didn't look at his profile when I commented.
JubilationTCornpone

Whether you give up is your choice but I don't think you need to.

 

I just looked at your most recent game and I can tell you that you are completely ignoring very basic opening theory.  This is suicide.

 

I don't mean you aren't following the latest best move decided by GMs.  I mean, for example, that on the fourth move of your most recent game, you put your dark-square bishop on e3, even though you still had your pawn on e2.  Thus completely blocking your center for no reason.  Then, next move, you played a pawn to f4, opening your king wide to attack and gaining nothing in return.  If you will make good opening moves, just by itself, this will make you better.

 

In general, start with a central pawn on the first move.  After that you may have to respond to what your opponent is doing BUT (seriously BUT here) ONLY IF he is making a threat that you have to deal with right now (which he probably isn't) or IF he is giving away material.  Otherwise, concentrate on the following:  move your other central pawn, move your two knights, move your two bishops, ONE TIME EACH.

 

Your knights go on c3 and f3 unless you have a really good reason not to put them there.  At your level, you do NOT have a really good reason, so just put them there.  Your bishops are a little harder to decide where they go, so move them after the knights.  It will help you decide.

 

Then move your queen.  Then castle.  You can change the order if necessary, but do all these things first.  So both knights, both bishops, and queen moved, and king castled BEFORE you do anything else.

 

Obviously, you must respond if your opponent is giving away material or forcing you to recapture, but in general, do what I'm saying unless you are forced.

 

Never play f4 in the opening until you can say, for sure, why it's OK (and, really, it probably isn't OK).

 

By itself, that will help you.

kindaspongey

"... For beginning players, [Discovering Chess Openings by John Emms] will offer an opportunity to start out on the right foot and really get a feel for what is happening on the board. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2006) https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf

LehnSamuelJ

Ah, I'm gonna say how is it possible to enjoy a game you lose at like all the time?  I would say the striving, studying players are the loons.  It's like doing the same thing over and over and getting same results.  It's like ok... I studied 30 hours a week for five years... guess what - I still suck!  Got the perfect hand written chess notation to prove it.... that was fun ... like never!  I'd say that's when its time to give it up.  But dont give up until after a few years, even if you still suck, n if you aren't having fun... you'll learn a bunch of stuff and be able to watch real players play on TV for the world championship and be able to follow the commentators who you will also never beat....

LehnSamuelJ

Or the morons who use their phones on chess.com

Boogalicious

Don't give up. Taken me 10 years to get to 1800. Don't give up!

LehnSamuelJ

Yeah ok, it's taken me 30 years to be the crappiest player in the history of man

kingattacker3
Boogalicious wrote:

Don't give up. Taken me 10 years to get to 1800. Don't give up!

That's awesome.  I am 1500 here now and I am hopeful to get to 1800 someday! 

Boogalicious
kingattacker3 wrote:
Boogalicious wrote:

Don't give up. Taken me 10 years to get to 1800. Don't give up!

That's awesome.  I am 1500 here now and I am hopeful to get to 1800 someday! 

You can do it! Train lots of puzzles happy.png

RestedPawn

I'm going to give you a very simple answer:

If you love playing chess and are having fun, don't give up, it doesn't matter what your rating is.  This game is beautiful and amazing, if you don't love playing it, then yes, I would say find something else.

And one other thing:  All of us get "stuck" at a rating ceiling and we can sit there for months or years.  Yours is currently 1000, mine is 1800.   Even if you did improve and lets say you reach 1100, you would have the same issue, "I can't get past 1100..."  

1900 players may struggle to get past 2000.

2200 players may not be able to get past 2400....

Even magnus Carlsen has hit a limit, he can't get past Komodo!  But that isn't why we play.  I don't play to improve my rating, I play because I love the game and that is the best reason of all.

Please try to look at your rating as not as important as your love of the game.  I'm not saying the rating is unimportant of course it has value!  I'm saying that your passion for chess is the most important.  And when you play chess out of love for the game, your rating will probably go up, and even if it doesn't, that is ok too.