Stop with solving tactics ??

One thing Coach Heisman keeps emphasizing is that chess study has to be fun or you won't stick with it.  Sounds like tactics aren't fun right now so why not try something else?  Maybe go old school, get out a board and play through an annotated collection.  What do you think you'd like to study?

Thanks for your reply, you are always very helpful. Chess study has to be fun, that's a very good point 

Right now im reading capablanca's book "my chess career". But i want to improve and see some results .. maybe it's a matter of being patient. Anyway if you or someone have a suggestion i'm all ears.

@airantrobo:

Thanks for the kind feedback.  I keep things fun by combining study and play; that's right, I'm a correspondence player.  I rarely play more than a couple of games at a time but use every legal avenue possible to research whatever opening I'm in.  I mean like watching hundreds (OK, dozens maybe) of games using my HIARCS database.  I mean obsessively comparing DB statistics from 3 or 4 DB's with FCO, Wiki, Chess Opening Essentials, the major Youtube channels, any courses on the ChessMentor or video series (Like GM Shankland's 9 part series on the Caro, or was it ten?)and doing my very best to soak up typical plans  (Hmmm, so if I can get in c5, I should essentially equalize; there are only thousands of them).  Yep, by the time we're ready to play chess, I almost know what I'm doing.  And of course what makes it fun is how little of my study "sticks", so next game in that opening I get to do it all over again.  Your mileage may vary.

Reading over master games will certainly help your playing strength.  The original masters didn't have CT-Art, but they all got to be pretty good chess players.

Just keep at it OP, you should be beating BTB's TT rating of 3500+ soon, and maybe your other ratings will start to climb above 1300-1400 as well.

Probably about a 98% chance of cheating at TT.

Something doesn't add up with 2500+ TT and 1200 blitz.

I agree. I spend way more time doing tactical puzzles on chesstempo than I do here. The timer on chess.com's tactical puzzles causes me to rush. I hate getting the puzzle right and losing points. I don't quite understand why it is set up that way. Chesstempo has standard, mixed, blitz and endgame (theory and practice) puzzles. The only ones that are timed are the blitz puzzles. Why doesn't chess.com have untimed tactical puzzles? 

I suspect they don't have staff.

Why else would there be simple things that haven't been fixed for years and a major update that was supposed to be out August 1st still not here?

You can set TT to not rated mode, and it does not time you -- but no rating score.  That's how I am doing it now.  I compare my results with how many solved the puzzle and average time.

There's a correlation between blitz mode rating and FIDE rating.   No such correlation for standard mode and FIDE.  So the people who are complaining about being "timed" for their tactics puzzles are approaching things wrong.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who can see what's going on around here.  "Keep buying those subscriptions guys, the brand new version which fixes all bugs and implements all the ideas you've been asking for is right around the corner.  Promise."

The problem with doing TT without the rating system is that there is no way of measuring your performance over time. 

Actually there is the statistics section which shows your perfomance curve over time

But how it measure your performance over time if you are doing unrated problem? 

You shouldn't be doing unrated tactics problems.

SilentKnight5: There's a correlation between blitz mode rating and FIDE rating.   No such correlation for standard mode and FIDE.  So the people who are complaining about being "timed" for their tactics puzzles are approaching things wrong. 

[I tried using the quote function but it wouldn't work so I cut and pasted your comment].

This seems counterintuitive to me, but it's just a coorelation so I won't read to much into it. One would think that FIDE ratings, which I assume are based upon "standard/slow" play would coorelate more closely with standard tactics puzzles that aren't timed, but I have to say that on Chesstempo, my blitz tactic rating is about 1300 and while I don't have a FIDE rating, my standard live play rating is in the mid-1200s. My standard tactic rating on Chesstempo is mid-1600s but I've never been able to get it over 1270 on chess.com. My blitz playing rating on here is dismal (in the 800s) but I rarely play blitz so I'm not sure how informative my blitz play rating is. I just hate getting a tactics problem correct in a reasonable amount of time and losing points. Makes no sense to me. Is there some rationale as to why you lose points when you get it right? Wouldn't just lower positive score make more sense? Then again, I don't know how ratings and such are calculated so I'm just thinking out loud.  

Why? 

To use an exaggarated example... if it takes you 5 minutes to solve a problem that most people can do in 10 seconds, don't you think that says something about your playing strength?  Should those two people be rated the same?  I dont think so.

That's likely why there's a correlation between timed problems and standard OTB rating.  You don't have an infinite amount of time there either.  In order to calculate deeply, you have to be able to eliminate bad moves otherwise you'd have to analyze every possibility.  People who can quickly spot blitz mode style tactics in their OTB games can eliminate potential bad moves and eliminate possible replies by their opponent.  

The people who are concerned about losing rating for getting a problem right are going about it the wrong way.   You're worried about the result, but not why you aren't as good at tactics as others.  Those are the same people you will be playing OTB, so you should be trying to be more like them not changing the rating system so it makes you look similar when you aren't.