What does a 1600 rated player know?
Sort:
A couple of site related observations that I believe are important, before I answer your question. First; I have been playing 1600-1800 eaters almost exclusively since I got on this site. Second; I believe almost all of them use an opening database move for move on this site.
I hold an 1800 plus rating live, I have met very few below that level with solid opening knowledge. It is therefore impossible to evaluate the legitimate opening abilities of anyone online.
That having been said, in my experience, the avg 1600 player is a tactical creature with very limited positional knowledge. They tend to take a roughly equal position out of the opening, then attempt illadvised tactics which expose their positional flaws to attack. However, I find many 1600-1800 players put together sharp tactical assaults, whereas 1200-1500 players make repeated tactical and positional errors. Above 1800 I find consistantly sharp tactical play and progressively greater positional understanding. If you want to get better, practice every day your tactics, attempting to see farther into each line, but more importantly look farther into your opponents plan!
I think you need to take things one step at a time a 400 point jump is too big. There is a huge difference between a 1200 and a 1600. First lets look at a 1400. From 1200-1400 is where you learn to have solid opening positions and refrain from doing stupid things in the opening like moving out your queen move 3 or making 10 consecutive pawn moves without sense--basic stuff the most important thing I have seen here is that players not only stop breaking basic rules but also understand why they should not be broken and are CONVINCED that those reasons are valid. Between 1400-1600 is a tactical/strategic leap you sharpen your understanding of positions get the feeling for pawn structures. Learn theoretical endgames learn the TURE art of defence in chess and the like.
Gorul wrote:
A couple of site related observations that I believe are important, before I answer your question. First; I have been playing 1600-1800 eaters almost exclusively since I got on this site. Second; I believe almost all of them use an opening database move for move on this site. I hold an 1800 plus rating live, I have met very few below that level with solid opening knowledge. It is therefore impossible to evaluate the legitimate opening abilities of anyone online. That having been said, in my experience, the avg 1600 player is a tactical creature with very limited positional knowledge. They tend to take a roughly equal position out of the opening, then attempt illadvised tactics which expose their positional flaws to attack. However, I find many 1600-1800 players put together sharp tactical assaults, whereas 1200-1500 players make repeated tactical and positional errors. Above 1800 I find consistantly sharp tactical play and progressively greater positional understanding. If you want to get better, practice every day your tactics, attempting to see farther into each line, but more importantly look farther into your opponents plan!
I think this answer is spot on.
what rating does most tournament players have then?
cool i thought it was like 16-1800 maybe. i can compete at that level thanks Skw
Skwerly wrote:
uscf average is 1391.
how you find that out ?
Oct 29, 2011
0
#49
For the 1600 player, read everything you can by Dan Heisman. Practice on Tactics Trainer. When you get to 1800-1900, read Silman.
Benkobaby wrote:
Other than the need to develop .... nothing.
+1
Develop. Develop. Develop. It is THE advice!!! Because chess is all about the dynamics of potential, development is the key. How can you expect to make your pieces dominate over 64 squares if all your stuff is cramed along the edge?? Anyone that I teach chess to, I tell them this, of openings, and when they don't develop, I ask "how did that move help to control the center, whilst clearing the back rank of bishops and knights, so that the rooks can eye each other along the back rank, in preparation for the claming of open files?" Sometimes the answer is a good one. " I would lose a knight if I didn't move it?" yes, you would. Smart student. But most of the time it's "I don't know... I just saw something that looked good and went with it." Bad student. Don't chase the rabbits unless you can see all the way down to the bottom of the hole (mate or real gain of material). Instead, be patient. let the pieces find their best squares. If you must deal with something, deal with it. Then develop some more!!!
Develop your pieces, why don'tcha there....
wowiezowie wrote:
Benkobaby wrote:
Other than the need to develop .... nothing.
+1
Develop. Develop. Develop. It is THE advice!!! Because chess is all about the dynamics of potential, development is the key. How can you expect to make your pieces dominate over 64 squares if all your stuff is cramed along the edge?? Anyone that I teach chess to, I tell them this, of openings, and when they don't develop, I ask "how did that move help to control the center, whilst clearing the back rank of bishops and knights, so that the rooks can eye each other along the back rank, in preparation for the claming of open files?" Sometimes the answer is a good one. " I would lose a knight if I didn't move it?" yes, you would. Smart student. But most of the time it's "I don't know... I just saw something that looked good and went with it." Bad student. Don't chase the rabbits unless you can see all the way down to the bottom of the hole (mate or real gain of material). Instead, be patient. let the pieces find their best squares. If you must deal with something, deal with it. Then develop some more!!!
Develop your pieces, why don'tcha there....
Interesting.
Nov 5, 2011
0
#52
wowiezowie wrote:
But most of the time it's "I don't know... I just saw something that looked good and went with it." Bad student. Don't chase the rabbits unless you can see all the way down to the bottom of the hole (mate or real gain of material).
I can agree with "develop your pieces" but not 100% with the above. In the opening phases, sure, development is usually key. However, I don't always see a line completely to quiescence but sometimes it looks like it is best and I'll go with it. At lower rating levels you can't guarantee your calculations, except in the most trivial of positions.
I had a tournament game last weekend where my gut move ended up being the best, though I went with a much more cautious line because I couldn't calculate the best continuation. I got lucky that my opponent when ahead and didn't play his best continuation in that particular line otherwise it would been an even game. Instead, I ended up with a won position.
Had I want with what looked good, I would have been "winning" according to the engines at least and I knew that I had attacking chances if I went that route but went with the safer road. This is of course, not in the opening, but sometimes, "what looks good" is a valid option.
Musikamole wrote:
sumedhgupte wrote:
I went from a 1200 rating to 1600 rating (really slowly & gradually) & what I can tell you is a simple thing: don't repeat your mistakes & you'll always improve.
+ 1
The best advice.
I don't know...there's always plenty of other mistakes out there just waiting to be found... 
Other than the need to develop .... nothing.