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

  • #601

    realistically, it's a little bit of everything. there's no magic to get you to 1800, or any other rating.

  • #602

    Indeed. I think ratings are relative. I don't play chess competitively anymore nor study. It's just a hobby. My rating is just an indicator on this site how experienced I am. 30+ yrs. I imagine anyone who is rated 1300 on this site wanting to improve to say, 1800 (or beyond) and is relatively new to chess overall, is going to go through some growing pains. Back in my day, I never had as many resources as we do now, if one was interested in improving you had to go get it. Books, tourneys, a love for the game and an often on again & off again commitment.

    In hindsight, I can honestly say I studied more than I improved. Pattern recognition is to me, stifling.

    Studying a fair amount of tactics, combos, which is to say not make it a priority, is all you need. Essential endgame principles, positions is key. Mainline of openings is sufficient. In competition, of course keeping up with current trends is a no brainer. But for self improvement, I absolutely believe less is more.

  • #603

    The 1800 player knows that he sucks, the 1300 player thinks he's the best.

    It's not a difference in skill but in mentality.

  • #604
    stuzzicadenti wrote:

    The 1800 player knows that he sucks, the 1300 player thinks he's the best.

    It's not a difference in skill but in mentality.

     

  • #605

    The 1300 is a couple of years (maybe more) younger than the 1800.

    I have a 1362 fiderated 56  year old friend , and it looks like he reaches 1800 when he gets 58, after five years of competing otb.

  • #606

    fewer mistakes and consideration of more number of moves

Top
or Join
=

Online Now