Sub 1000 (ranging from just below 1000 to about 400 :O)
Sort:
Oct 25, 2016
0
#2
i forgot also ... tactics tactics tactics! :). When you get above 1000 you should start to become familiar with different chess patterns.
Oct 25, 2016
0
#3
I think those playes plays great chess. By great chess i mean they are not high rated enough to understand enough things about chess to make them strugle. They haven't study at all or are unable to apply it on games. They just play a lot. Many with thouusands of games every day playing.
What i mean is sub 1000 players don't ask themself what did my opponent do or don't do it every time. Because of that their chess is pure chess. I mean they can fully enjoy chess without obbeying rules. They play chess on their own - what they want they do it. I played some players that have 0 plan, they don't know what they are doing and many moves are kinda random, but i can see some have potential they dont know about it, because many of their moves played by instinkt are ok enough.
Higher rated players can't play like that, becuase they see the mistake or they get punished for that. Sub 1000 players get a lot of fun, excitment, from mate in 1 you can lose your queen next move etc.
This is one of the many reasons many players even the strongest grandmasters play 1 min bullet chess. Why? Because things can get messy very quick even at highest level. It's a lot of fun and very compettive.
To sum up ~1000 rated players are not good enough to know how bad they are but thats not importhan
>>>1000 rated players are good enough to know how bad they are...
I want to suggest to ~1000 rated to just play a lot , but unfortunately they already have played a lot, but they don't learn from their games. They just start new game imidiately and forget about last game. They don't apply previous patterns they encounter , or very little. That makes their improvement of any (not that they wanted to improve at first place) very slow and little. They are focused only on their move on specific area of the board. Fix that and + hundreds of elo points are guranteed.
Oct 25, 2016
0
#4
Wow we have good perspectives being thrown out there by different people. This is good. I agree that playing a lot would help. I've been told to stay away from bullet until you reach around 1800, but I guess there are people out there that got better by playing only bullet. I wouldn't say it's for everyone, but for some, playing only bullet is a good thing, perhaps the select few... I think what's key is playing against players that are a lot better than you every once in awhile, so you learn better technique, even if you get clobbered every time. I think playing a lot, along with studying a theory book geared for your level, in this case, something like Bobby Fischer teaches chess, along with learning basics on endgame, and also doing some sort of tactics regimene, as part of getting better is learning basic tactical motifs and mating nets. I do not think playing against stockfish is the same as playing against a human that is a lot better than you simply because the human player will make more human based moves and what you will learn from playing the human would be more gainful because you might see those moves played by one of your own opponents eventually even if they are lower rated, at least the first few moves or so...
I like Aim-ace moves take on beginner games. knowledge base is not there at that level so you play a lot of epic games where one side blunders in the beginning and then only to lose after dropping a queen! Even at my level there are still enough blunders to change the tide of the game after a blunder, in blitz at least... In a 3 minute game, even at my level, you could still flag your opponent by playing defensively and creating a fortress. Or try and win a queen :P. Either or...trying to win a queen for a rook is not always possible though...
I wasn't trying to imply that people at the sub 1000 level are below me or anything like that. As I said, I have been there, and done that, and know how it feels. As Aim pointed out, most beginners or even Amateurs as good as I am tend to focus on one part of the board or focus on their attack and forget to scan for mating threats or even look at what their opponent did last move, especially in blitz or bullet. Part of getting better is doing what.I said before, making a "list" of candidate moves, along with figuring out the best opponent reply, I mean best as you will have to look at more than one of his replays as to only look at one and stopping there might cause you to miss a resource your opponent has. I'm not sure about all the chess players out there, but most people, especially beginners, cannot do this in blitz, which is why people like Dan Heisman say you should play slow chess 90% of the time, and blitz 10% of the time, and avoid bullet until you are already "good"... like I said I do not know if AIM got good by just playing bullet. Maybe he did. more power to him. But, most people, cannot do this. Anyway, before I started talking about Aim and bullet chess I was trying to make a point. I know how it feels to be a sub 1000 player as I was there. I didn't start out above 1000 like some people do as they are naturally gifted and know the game. I had to work to get where I am. It took me 15 years to get at my rating, and my rating is not very good at all. That should be a warning sign for anyone who thinks only playing chess will allow you to improve. It will, but at a very slow rating. Only when playing is coupled with study and a good tactics routine for your level will you see fast improvement. Dan Heisman has the way mapped out for you. you cannot go wrong by reading his books or going to his site or even reading his articles on chess.com, or even reading his novice nook columns. A guide to chess improvement, a book written by Dan heisman, is all the knowledge you'll need to know on how to get better in chess, the right way.
I like Aim-ace moves take on beginner games. knowledge base is not there at that level so you play a lot of epic games where one side blunders in the beginning and then only to lose after dropping a queen! Even at my level there are still enough blunders to change the tide of the game after a blunder, in blitz at least... In a 3 minute game, even at my level, you could still flag your opponent by playing defensively and creating a fortress. Or try and win a queen :P. Either or...trying to win a queen for a rook is not always possible though...
I wasn't trying to imply that people at the sub 1000 level are below me or anything like that. As I said, I have been there, and done that, and know how it feels. As Aim pointed out, most beginners or even Amateurs as good as I am tend to focus on one part of the board or focus on their attack and forget to scan for mating threats or even look at what their opponent did last move, especially in blitz or bullet. Part of getting better is doing what.I said before, making a "list" of candidate moves, along with figuring out the best opponent reply, I mean best as you will have to look at more than one of his replays as to only look at one and stopping there might cause you to miss a resource your opponent has. I'm not sure about all the chess players out there, but most people, especially beginners, cannot do this in blitz, which is why people like Dan Heisman say you should play slow chess 90% of the time, and blitz 10% of the time, and avoid bullet until you are already "good"... like I said I do not know if AIM got good by just playing bullet. Maybe he did. more power to him. But, most people, cannot do this. Anyway, before I started talking about Aim and bullet chess I was trying to make a point. I know how it feels to be a sub 1000 player as I was there. I didn't start out above 1000 like some people do as they are naturally gifted and know the game. I had to work to get where I am. It took me 15 years to get at my rating, and my rating is not very good at all. That should be a warning sign for anyone who thinks only playing chess will allow you to improve. It will, but at a very slow rating. Only when playing is coupled with study and a good tactics routine for your level will you see fast improvement. Dan Heisman has the way mapped out for you. you cannot go wrong by reading his books or going to his site or even reading his articles on chess.com, or even reading his novice nook columns. A guide to chess improvement, a book written by Dan heisman, is all the knowledge you'll need to know on how to get better in chess, the right way.
What is the best way to get better at rapid? I cannot speak from personal experience, but I do know learning not to play the first move that comes to your mind is important. You must learn to think about more than one possible candidate move. You also must learn to figure out your opponents best reply. I am still bad at this....
What is the best way to get better at blitz? Play someone that is a lot better than you with a time advantage. If you are a slow thinker, play 10 minutes to 2, depending on how good your opponent is.
Another tip, pick a good opening repertoire for a beginner. I know it has been said not to focus on openings when you are just beginning, however, I remember when I was a budding chess player when I didn't have an opening repertoire and I remember playing a lot of garbage. Though I didn't get better by studying openings, I did get better eventually but at the cost of it taking over 10 years to do. Studying general opening principles along with knowing the responses to the openings you play is key to improving your rating even at the lower levels. Learning things about pawn islands and doubled pawns is also helpful. Pick good openings, not ones that require a lot of theory like the kings gambit, but good, nice, normal openings, for both white and black. Stick to e4 as white, and e5 as black if white goes for e4. If white goes for d4, go d5, and if he plays c4 next move play c6 and figure it out from there. Don't grab the pawn :). You may need to know more than that later on but for now that should be sufficient. Do not defend e5 pawn with f6, ever as black! Instead defend it with Nc6. If Bc4 mirror him. If you want to experiment play Nf6 instead and learn a lot when you lose :P, not that it is a bad position from the get go. E4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 is still playable after d5 exd5. Now this is a critical moment in the game. There is one commonly played bad move and one commonly played good move. What would you do as a budding chess player? Before you look at the answer, what do you think you would play? Think about it and scroll down...
If you played Nxd5 you played into what is called the Fried liver, and is losing for black. To give you an example of what not to do against the Fried liver attack I would urge you to look up a video by a guy named the backyardprofessor. Type in backyardprofessor Fried liver on YouTube to get the video. As you are watching the video try and see why what he did in response the Qf3+ was a bad one, as in this variation there is a way for white to win back his lost piece.
Do not be concerned so much about the squares of domination over the board until the game comes at a critical moment, like when your opponent creates a weakness in his position allowing you to take advantage of a weak square or allow you to make use of the squares you already had control over as thinking in your mind "I played e4 so d5 and f5 are being attack by me" a bunch of times in your head probably will do more to make you lose your concentration than to make use of your opponents mistakes.
I did not include a complete repertoire as the purpose of this post isn't to spoon feed but to give general guidance to people that started out in the same place as.i did, in hopes they do not repeat my mistakes. It's up to you to search master games, opening explorer, or whatever, to find a good opening repertoire for you. Just don't get too carried away with memorizing up to the 15th line at this point :). When you lose a game due to a new variation of a particular opening that you chose, look up the opening and study it, and keep repeating. Write this stuff down in your own personal opening book.