what's the main difference between a 1300 and a 1800 player?

I am a new 1300 hobby player.

I got there in a year or two playing chess during my free work time. Hitting only a bullet or 5min chess. I started at around 800 points . It is true, that we just hit the figures and let them flow. Intuitively also a lot  I know a little tactics like pawn fork, knight fork, king pin and a few more. Otherwise we play by some general rules like fight for center, if you have more material then just trade everything in sight  Tactics was my main concern.

Now I realize that I want to know more about positional chess. And I also know, that I dont know much about end games too   Times to pause games a little and study also a bit. Maybe I will slow down my chess play on 10 or 15 minutes ... that is my plan to improve a bit.

Better rated players can see more moves and variations way ahead of most. Most average to good players from probably 1200-1500 rating know or utilize fewer openings and can only look ahead 3-4 moves. Whereas lets say 1600-2000 probably can double their mind database in both facets. Bobby Fischer & Gary Kasparov were great thinkers who can switch their game like a needle on a thread and forecast the path to victory. Right now am a "C" class player trying to get to "B". It isn't easy, but we try.

Positional awareness. Both 1300 and 1800 players could probably tell where a weakness lies in the position, but the 1300 can't probably tell how to create a weakness where none exists.

Additionally the awareness of position evaluation is a big gap. In positions of equal material, very often lower elo players can't evaluate the position properly. They will think its equal material so its equal, whereas if you put it into a computer you will find that one side is +1.5. This is not uncommon.

The higher elo players evaluate the position precisely and they know they are better and more importantly they know why they are better and they bang away at those weaknesses.

Then there is of course stuff like tactics and stuff, but the reason why they are good at tactics is because they are able to calculate further.

Both 1300 as well as 1800 players will be able to spot a tactic if it exists right now. However the higher elo player is also able to calculate tactics later on down the line. So he goes ok if play goes like *this* *this* and *this* then three moves later there will be this tactic that I could then capitalise on.

This is the fundamental difference across all elos. The higher elo player just always calculates further in the same allotted time.

Lastly there is endgames. Endgames are like a mini game within a game and higher elo players invariably have the better technique. So even if you last till the middle game with a higher elo player, the end game will eventually win it for the higher elo player.

Strategy evalutation

The answer is 500 ratings points. Glad to help!

Are you sure?

As someone who regularly plays against both, let me give you the definitive answer:

Unprotected pieces.

That is literally the difference between 1200-1400 strength and 1800-2000 strength. Weaker players leave their pieces unprotected and become vulnerable to tactics. Stronger players have a handle on that, and keep their pieces protected.

There's your difference. /thread

yeah i have to go with tactics, just basic blunder awareness. 

Definitely. I used to be rated under 1000. Once I got a handle on blundering - not hanging pieces or leaving pieces unprotected (exposing oneself to tactics), my chess strength improved like 800 points. Just like that.

People would be amazed at how fast they would improve if they would only think before moving.

What would you say helped you the most in not blundering as frequently?

Honestly? Thinking before moving.

Also, don't leave pieces unprotected if you can help it. There will be tactics that you will inevitably not see. So if you have pieces that aren't protected, there is a chance that at any moment you could go down a piece. So keeping one's pieces protected is important.

But most importantly, thinking before moving.

Less errors and a lot of .better understanding

How much time they take...?

Doesn't it depend on the person. I've known a couple 1300-1400 players who seem to understand chess almost as well as me, but they blunder and often make multiple "wtf" moves a game. Most 1300 players have a lesser understanding of chess than me. Many of them also don't know endgames very well. 

I know a lot of 1800-ish players, and honestly they have very little in common with each other.  Most A/B players (1600-2000 rating) have spent a good deal of time building (and yes, studying) the inherent strengths in their playing styles and learning how to steer the game in a direction they prefer, and covering for (or at least distracting from) their inherent weaknesses (which a player will still have even at the Expert level).  However, there's no one path to this level of play.

If you're a 1300, I suggest taking stock of your past games and figuring out what types of positions and tactics you prefer, and which tactics from your opponents you are vulnerable to.  Focus on openings that play towards those positions and tactics that help, and which make those tactics you fall victim to harder to spring.  The above advice about loose pieces is certainly valid, but too much focus on protection can leave one vulnerable to overloading, and cause you to overlook forcing moves and complex tactics - particularly of the Zwischenzug type (and this tactical concept alone is often the difference between a 1300 and a 1600).

Better tactics, attacking ability and endgame technique; that is short version. Going through Logical Chess Move by Move help me get to 1500 uscf and higher, a strong chess foundation ( soundness) is the key to building your skills. No amount of studying  Silman's book "How to Reassess Your Chess" is going to help, why, if your tactics is inadequate your whole game is wanting; it doesn't matter if you know how to place a knight in good square, when your opponent is setup a tactical motif that you miss and you lose because of it. It true that blunders is a key factor to low rated but it is true also that a D-class (1200- 1300) miss a lot simple tactical motifs or lose to poor endgame skills.Three chess books I will recommend is (1) Logical Chess Move by Move by Chernev, (2) Chess Tactics For Champion by Susan Polgar, this tactical book is not overwhelming. I like another tactical book better but I feel most amateurs aren't committed to go through 1001 tactical problems, that is why I omitted it from the list. And Silman's Endgame Book, its excellent!. Three books to get you to higher level, why stay at D-class (1200-1300), maybe at least one year of studying and you are in higher class playing strength. 

usually I just checkout the oponents profile. The tactical trainer will give you an indication of his/her skills. I think that chess.com should only match players with the same tactical trainer skills, rather than their ratings. it would cause players to do tactical ratings so that they can be taken serious. personally my tactical rating is around 1650. I win 50% of my games. The weird thing is that people with quite pathetic tactical ratings can outplay me thus indicating that someone is cheating. is it not so that ones tactical skills win games. if you have insight to identify a winning line, you should have a greater probability to win. I cannot get my rating above 1300 for years now, and I been playing chess everyday. I should get better. When I play I am exceptionally strong, yet I stay way below 1300. i would say my insight into the game is most likely close to 2000, but the amount of engines on the sight, make a good players look like a beginner. I do win some as I occasionally can beat a chess App at a top level, buy fail to do so all of the time. I think that 5% honest players are correct, and they usually request rematch games, because you can actually feel if a players is honest. it has a specific feel whrn you do encounter a human intellect. Many players are so good at playing lines, that if you service that, then your tactics can kick in. This is alsoba way to know that you play a human.

"... This book is the first volume in a series of manuals designed for players who are building the foundations of their chess knowledge. The reader will receive the necessary basic knowledge in six areas of the game - tactcs, positional play, strategy, the calculation of variations, the opening and the endgame. ... To make the book entertaining and varied, I have mixed up these different areas, ..." - GM Artur Yusupov

Years of hard work and discipline.