Why It's Time for Me to Quit Chess

I've really just had it with this game.  It's time to give it up entirely.

I'm nearing 50 years old.  I've known how to play since I was 10, and I've played various accounts online first in Yahoo then on Chess.com for the past decade.  I'll bet I've played 15,000 games in that time.  And I've never improved much beyond 1200 in any category.  I didn't take the time to sit down and read "Reassess Your Chess" or "Silman's Complete Endgame Course."  I don't have the patience, and I had other things to do, like raise two children, build a happy marriage, make sure I was paying my mortgage, and get eight hours sleep a night.  

How utterly sad is it though that I could play 15,000 games and never improve even 100 points?  I'm a relatively intelligent person in most regards.  I can read Aristotle, do some calculus, write essays on political theory for peer-reviewed journals, and even read a little Latin. I know how to teach a class of teenagers how to improve their reading and writing skills.  I can read medical journals.  But I can't seem to improve my chess game.

I wish I would have gotten a good coach when I was younger.  Maybe he or she could have forced me to sit down and read through books by grandmasters or just spend more time thinking through opening and middle-game patterns while correcting my errors.  Heck, I could have hired such a coach as an adult.  But instead, I chose the road of playing 5-minute games ad nauseum without ever really analyzing them afterwards.

It's ridiculous to be frustrated and hate the game because I'm not good enough when I never put the right effort in to learn.  How irrational is it to get so angry when I lose decisively to a player 100 or 200 points below my already dismal rating?

It's time to walk away.  I'll replace those hours wasted with something more valuable to me.  Maybe I can spend more time with my kids.  Maybe I can finally read The Illiad or Shakespeare's Twelfth Night.  Maybe I can go make myself useful by volunteering at the local homeless shelter.

I have simply to finish one last daily game.  I'm certain to lose.  That would be an appropriate ending to an utterly banal and pointless waste of my time.

Too bad you didn't have fun. If you had had fun, it would have been a good hobby.

It looks like your rating has improved 50 points since August.  I guess we'll have to take your word that your rating hasn't changed in the last ten years.

I am sorry to hear that. 

If really chess isn't your thing, quitting maybe IS the best option.

Not really a plateau if he is just playing the games (especially if they are blitz) and not putting an effort to improve.

@GuavaShoe

You can look at it in another way. If you enjoy playing but don't have the will to really improve, you could just play for the kick of it. If you do not enjoy playing, then yes... it is the right thing to quit something you do not enjoy. 

But if you do enjoy playing, you could play and forget about the rating or even play only unrated games. 

And then you win... 

15,000 games? Where have you played them?

I see 406 puzzles, 180 blitz, 29 rapid, 44 daily.

I have 6200 blitz, 14000 bullet, 10000 puzzles only on chess.com.I don't read books too but have steady, about 100 points per year improvement.

RIP. Wish you had found it a fun hobby and sorry it didn't work out to your liking. But like you said, if you want to improve, you need to put in the time to improve (#games != time spent learning). Best of luck to you!

A chess player once told me that it doesn't matter if you win or lose as long as you have fun playing but it can get frustrating if one never wins a game.

I can completely understand how you feel. Plateauing is extremely frustrating. Especially when you feel you've done absolutely everything to improve. I can't even count how many times I've "quit" chess in the past 5 months.

Yes, I can read what I wrote.  Why do you ask?

I'm guessing I played about 5,000 games on Yahoo!  Across about 5 accounts here on Chess.com, I've played well over 10,000.  Of that I'm sure.  When I decide to quit and close an account, I don't ever seem to be able to open the account again.  So you're just seeing the numbers on the most recent account.  Why question me, though?  What incentive would I have to stretch the truth.? If I had only played 300 games, I would have said that.

I'm glad to hear you've had steady advancement.  I have not.

Marco-

the difference here is that Guava DIDN'T do anything really to try and improve. He just assumed playing a bunch of blitz chess makes you a better player. It does not. Chess like anything else, takes some hard work, study, even reading some good chess books!

It is not a video game. you don't just automatically get better or advance to the next level because you have played dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of games. 

There are so many things that players will not find on their own without coaches, or mentors, or reading books, or whatever. As an example, I remember playing many games against a weaker player many years ago at the Seattle Chess Club. I noticed after a few games that he was completely oblivious to the power of doubled rooks on the seventh rank. He allowed me to do so nearly every game and got crushed. I kept thinking that he would eventually pick up on what he was doing wrong, but he never did. The fact that it occurred later in the game, after many moves and much tactical fighting probably obscured the point. 

After we played out nearly a dozen or so games (these were relatively fast time controls) he said thanks for the games and mentioned that he clearly needed more work on his openings. I thought to myself, good gawd man! your openings had nothing to do with the outcome of this match. You don't have a clue about doubling rooks on the 7th rank. 

GuavaShoe, it is time for you to quit chess and pursue other interests.

I'm really glad you mentioned video games, because that is a lightbulb moment for me.  I've always played video games (since pong, in the mid 70's) and I almost always progress after hours of steady play without thinking. I have naturally fast reflexes and I played a lot during my teen years (when the brain is ripe for learning), and so I rarely came up against plateaus.  I suppose if I did, I was just off to the next game.

Now that you mention it, I think I've just assumed that chess works the same way.  What a stupid assumption!

My 2 cents would be to accept that for whatever reason you'll never be great at this game and either play strictly for fun once in a while, or get a coach, quit your job, read those books, quit speed chess, put your family on hold and focus 100% on chess; or just quit.

I doubt seriously that Magnus, Hikaru or the other great GM's did anything but chess for many years; not kids, no speed chess, just focused.  I think you could do it if it's that important to you.

I wanted to be a great guitarist, but at 71 it was obvious that no matter how much I practiced it was never to be, so I just strum and noodle and am happy with it.  Same with chess.

So I guess I'd say play for fun and don't get ground up when you lose, or walk away.

I'm 64. I didn't pass 2000 until I was in my early 60s.

Maybe you just haven't peaked yet?

That's inspiring!  I would love to pass 2000.  May I ask how you got there?

my rating plummeted since I started playing again and my rating just recently starded got better

@GuavaShoe you can't improve if you don't study at all and feel privileged to a higher rating. That is the definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and believing the result will be different this time, in the 15,0001st game. A little studying of tactics or simple endgames is all you need to get to 1400 really. Blah blah blah I have a family blah blah blah me too. 30 minutes of studying 1 day a week is all you need to improve, instead of playing braindead bullet or blitz. You know what you need to do, so do it already.