your first task as a beginner is to start to really love chess...

a bunch of beginner threads;  some silly others serious had me thinking of what truly is the best advice for a beginner.

Perhaps your first task (as a beginner) is to really deeply love chess.  

"Yes, of course."  says the beginner.  " I LOVE IT!  I think about it all the time and play blitz game after blitz game!"

Let us get to one of those 'long nights of blitzing' ...after perhaps ah our playing half-hearted blitz games; he is little progress.  His first 20 minutes was pretty good; a nice little winning streak, but he lost a few games strait... and spent 30 minutes trying to pick up the rating points he lost- losing from tactics after tactic.

You plead with him!  You've GOT to learn your tactics- and so  he solves 25 tactical puzzle- until his head is buzzing and is guessing (no longer calculating) hoping to bring his meager tactics score up.

now someone says- you need to learn endgames!  (he sits down with a video showing the KPK endgame.  of course he says! passively watching out) what about Annotated master games? says another...

gasp! you've NOT fully analyzed your last few games!

now he's frustrated, perhaps tired and not wanting to do any more chess.  I just "want to play chess!  he says" as he gets off chess.com.

perhaps another day; he vows-  He'll do tactics puzzles, or perhaps learn more about endgames and try to understand the "dragon" (What a COOL name! surely THAT is a great Opening).  But, Tonight he switches to his favorite mindless video game.... and tommarrow, he'll go again and play the blitz.

- perhaps he does love chess- but he doesn't love it Enough to really make himself a better player.  do you?

You stalking me?

I need to study more and play less but more focused . I'd like help plz

I have a very similar idea about it.

People tend to think (and it's true) that every player has a ceiling -- a rating they can't move beyond.

But I think the biggest factor in determining what that ceiling is, is how much their personality happens to enjoy doing work that happens to be useful. (The ceiling is raised if your parents or government or etc force you to work with a trainer and follow all instructions.)

And the "right" kind of work is basically learning a little bit about everything. To someone who likes this it's not "which book should I read or which opening should I learn?" it's "I want to to read all the books, I want to learn something about all types of positions" After reading a book it's not a feeling of "now I can check that off my list" it's "I think I'll read it again because it had so much good information."

Unfortunately a lot of us enjoy solving puzzles. Or playing blitz. Or something else like this. Year in and year out: solving puzzles 8 hours a day, reading about endgames 8 hours a day, playing blitz 8 hours a day... any monomaniacal thing like this just wont help very much. The approach has to be eclectic. Play lots of games, review lots of games, analyze all sorts of positions, read all sorts of books. After 5 to 10 years of this (and if people actually had the time) I'd best most would be over 2200 to be honest.

But the moment it becomes hard work, and the rewards aren't enjoyable, then a person loses all motivation and simply won't do the work.

Unfortunately you can't really advise someone to love doing the right kind of work. You either like it or you don't. Like saying "you need to love the taste of healthy food and dislike unhealthy food." That's just silly. There has to be some outside force or motivation in you so you're willing to put with the things you don't enjoy naturally.

But there are those freaks of nature who prefer carrots to cake. Or maybe they're a pseudo masochist for work they find grueling, or something like this. These are the people who really do well.

I do agree MR digital.  I like your posts. 

... that said I think you CAN learn to love chess more.  How?   by resisting the impulse to drive yourself nuts over chess.

*don't play blitz three hours strait trying to recapture rating points.

*don't dive into elaborate crazy projects that your not likely to enjoy or complete.

*Keep a routine;   and if you find chess is getting less enjoyable.  get back to some of the funner stuff.

I get what you mean about chess; and to a point you DO either like it or not. (if you don't truly like it- like my wife and kids- your NOT going to significantly improve).

but even though I DO like it.  sometimes it Does seem Grueling.

the point is to keep you GOALS REAL.

 ?

i do see a trail of posts and questions about general improvement.  on the other hand, if  I read your stats right you ARE improving, and are gradually increasing in your standard rating.

that Looks Right to me!

the question is patience.  are you being patient with yourself?  I know you want to grow strong- but overloading yourself with tactics puzzles will NOT help (neither will ignoring them completely).

I strongly recommend keeping a good notebook.  this is the SINGLE biggest and most successful thing I have done.   It helps me focus- I know when I've written a few pages; I've done enough chess- and I know when its been a few days I need to get back to the routine.

I wonder if your are young (though its not really any of my business) - if so, you should take comfort that nearly every younger person I ever played with- made SUBSTANCIAL growth in their understanding of the game (particularly as teenagers)- and each of them Without alot of study.  Just liking the game and playing it was enough.

any way you are slowly getting better at the game.  Whatever you are doing- its Working!  I think you should be happy with your progress- and avoid the urge to study like crazy and get burnt out on the game.

(though, if you honestly doing hardly ANY study.  some study; routine tactic training, ENDGAMES, and annotated games are recommended).

great thread, has given me some good pointers to keep in mind. the notebook... what should i be keeping track of? i would love to become a better player and not blunder so much! hahaha. the game of chess facinates me. i love the strategy, the tactics, the theories as well as the history.

ive got a few books out from my local library but the choices were very limited. ive been reading just a little everyday. its becoming easier for me to follow a game thats written out which is a nice improvement. ive finally become a member here at chess.com and the videos and tactical puzzles are amazing. 

i find myself "hinting" too much on the daily lessons, so the first order of business was to make a decision not to allow myself to use that feature anymore.

at any rate, i liked this thread very much and thought i would briefly commment. 

happy games everyone!

Erik

When i started chess as beginner i really did not love or like much chess. I played it online (blitz) just for one single reason. To win. It was interesting with all diferent pieces. But i did not care much. I did not had any great plan or harmony with pieces and its tipycal for someone rated 1200 or so. I just moved pieces to see what will happen.  I found chess to be like any other game for example Counter-strike - where you buy specific weapon (chess opening) you go to specific spot (develop pieces) you wait or you go in attacking and shooting others but you have to be carefull and to watch out (taking opponents pieces, tactics, see if the move is safe) and then defuse the bomb if its planted (checkmate the king if opponent did not resign) in a strategic way for example trow flash, granade or with some technique... I did not knew much about the game and yet i was winning games. I did not feel some joy. Not until much, much later where i started to play way more reqular few years ago. Instead of twice in a month to four times in a week. I study more i improved above 1500 only then i kinda started to like chess, the way you maneuver pieces, the way you excute tactics and combination or the way you can outplay your opponent in the endgame and reach winning position. All that was hiden when i was quite good beginner.

So unless one have talent or is really fast learner i dont think a beginner can say i love chess, simply becouse he does not know what is chess about really. And they all play bullet and 3 min blitz, check any low rated player here, they all have thousands of games and did not improve over the years. So they cant take chess to next level and see real beauty of the game.

Not that 1700-1800 rated patzer understand everything, but is way more closer than beginner.

I like this post, but It almost sounds like you have to be high rated to enjoy chess.  I'm not sure I completely agree with that.  it Surely is true that generally, some aspects of the game will be less understood to someone who is low-rated.

and I DEFINITELY think you must get over a few myths and understand a few concepts to really love chess.  but its a mistake I think to think of understanding as connected with rating.

Rating is a number that describes performance not understanding.

I often think of the issue of someone who plays thousands of games over years and remains stuck at 900 blitz or 1200 rapid.

Quite a few of them find this pretty frustrating and as a guy who's own rating has stayed stuck in the same place for a whole year- I empathize.

and Just sayin' per my notes

I have spent 37, 155 minutes studying or playing chess in the last year.  thats 619 hours of chess study for negligible rating gain.

I enjoy chess fully when i am playing without stress, without the need to pursuit the win and without the need to be in 100% concentrated and without the need to make 10 accurate opening moves or to follow strictly rules like you can't play Na3 on first move.. oh yes i can.  (Also IM Trendle is playing like that vs lower rated in his Hack Attack show)

 That is only possible when you play vs lower rated than you and the games does not matter for official rating etc. Yes, its very enjoyable to beat higher rated opponent in official game but thats way more different.

You have to be high rated (above average lets say 1700 chesscom blitz) and to know things and two about chess, to win vs not full beginners or those who hang 3 pieces in one game - that you can enjoy fully chess by playing whatever you heart wants, not to follow rules and still outplaying positional and tactical your opponent who is not completely beginner, lets say 1350 rated blitz.

Many players really enjoy brillant combination - sacrifice and then checkmate the king.. i don't really see it that way (yet) Yes i like to attack, but i dont need to make great combination to enjoy my game.

Beginners can love and enjoy chess, but they are playing diff type of chess, blunder chess... I made experiment by playing only lower rated than me in past few months. All of them were extremely agressive and attacking players. when i beated them with simple moves i can tell they did not enjoy chess - they all run away or type insulting words. I can say i can fully enjoy game were i was completely outplayed. Thats the chess they play. Agressive, blunders, one move attacks...and they all move quickly without thinking. They can't say they love chess or having fun, they play for time, they play hope chess and absolutely one move attacks wanting imidiately to checkmate...

I had ( and I think I still have) lots of wrong ideas of how to improve in chess.  Tons of books (several of them are already put aside, since they were too advanced for me), blitz playing, trying to memorizing some opening moves...  well, I learned that's not the way.  I think I am going to the right direction now.  

I stopped playing blitz games.  I play games of 3 or 4 days.  I read articles for beginners, I try to analise my own games after the end, and I have a good person who is coaching me, helping me so much with my repeated mistakes, lots of them I didn't even know I was doing.  

By the way now that i read (ed?) end to end first post have to say nice post i like it and i think is absolutely true for all of or many of us.

For a beginner best thing to do to improve is to first gain experience. You have to play a lot - to see diff types of position vs random opponents. Not 5 games vs one opponent. But first to learn to play correctly - watch videos how a master or much higher than you plays blitz with commentary. Then copy-paste. But not 1 min or 3 min games. Good start would be 10+5sec games. Not very long, but not very short. Put bishop above pawn chain, don't make a3 h3 moves caressly, develop pieces, look if something is hanging etc. Then or at same time start solving tons of tactics. Continue watching videos, lessons on basic endgames, 

and more take diamond membership, start watching video analysis of members games by Title players, see what simular rated do wrong and how to fix it etc.

well, one thing i think we would both agree to.  there is the Drive to gain rating- to improve- and to achieve

and there is enjoying the odd spontaneity of chess, which is easier when you Are NOT like "I MUST win...."

but even in situations where you feel very driven and very determined and yes perhaps stressed- there is a certain degree of enjoyment and yes amazement in chess; its complexity, its depth, the fact that it is so easy you can teach an ant-in-his-pants kid of 9 the game.   and yet, you can stay and think HARD for 10 whole agonizing minutes (and Longer as you get stronger) at a critical move.

there is a certain enjoyment of that- espacially when- in the end, you made the correct move, the variation plays out, the opponent is in trouble.

thats enjoyment yes.  

I think you Must see the enjoyment in that or higher rating in the game will be completely impossible.  quite simply you'll give up on the game before you get to harder games.

even my own frustration is the beginning of a bad attitude, and If I want to really improve I must see my current rating as a plateau that can and will be broken rather than a barrier or worse, an insult.

too many 500-1200's have stigma and bad attitude about where there rating is; and allow that to hurt their attitude.

I also wonder, at my age, 57, if it will take longer for me to improve than if I was younger... the thing is that I can feel I am improving, when observing my latest games.  Not much blunders, ideas getting better.  I can feel it.  Maybe, slowly, but I am improving somehow.

you know marcus, we should have a club

"middle age chess improvement"...

I am 44.  it does seem a little harder at this age. yet you totally have to be determined to improve.  unconditionally.

and I see SO many promising chessplayers especially younger ones give up.  perhaps determination and deep commitment is the counterpoint of not being at an age where there is constant change and learning.