How to get to EXPERT LEVEL?

Sort:
mnag

It's time to learn a few openings well.

CrimsonKnight7

Hm, You are still young. It seems you like playing speed chess more than regular chess. (perhaps playing in longer games would be more helpful, especially  in tournament settings). You also haven't really even done any Chess Mentor courses, and very little tactic trainer exercises.

Without knowing more than you have stated, or that shows in your profile, its going to be difficult to give you better than just general advice. Which really isn't anymore than common sense, at least in my opinion.

Reading some books could possibly help you, but if you are hanging pieces, or getting into trouble because of tactics, that might be your answer, I do not know for sure however.

Just going by the limited amount of information you have provided, its impossible for anyone to know.

Do you have friends that are higher level than you ? Are you a member of a local chess club where they have masters ?

The tournaments you play in, do you know most of the players ? ( Like local tournaments ).

The reason I am asking you these questions is because that would be the best way for you to improve your rating. Getting feed back from your higher rated friends, and opponents. (Usually right after a game is best, when its fresh in your mind).  Local club masters sometimes, are willing to help younger less experienced players. I wasn't so fortunate, but you may be.

Good Luck, and I hope this was of some help, perhaps if you give the members here more info, they will be able to give you better advice as well. There's quite a few helpful people here.

waffllemaster
Shadowknight911 wrote:
ilikeflags wrote:
Abhishek2 wrote:

you have to beat 2000's to get to 2000.

like you know.


Abhishek's rating in real life is a bit over 2000 and he beat a couple of 2100's this weekend, so yes, I guess he would know.

it is true that the best way to gain rating points in bigger bunches is by playing players one class above you.

ilikeflags was only kidding (as he usually does).

But to be honest I don't think a kid who goes from 1800 to 2000 in a few tournaments does know what it takes for the average player.  Maybe he would have good advice for other rapidly improving jurniors though.

Otherwise the advice me be about as helpful as: "go to 4 or 5 tournaments" Laughing

Abhishek2
ilikeflags wrote:
Shadowknight911 wrote:
ilikeflags wrote:
Abhishek2 wrote:

you have to beat 2000's to get to 2000.

like you know.


Abhishek's rating in real life is a bit over 2000 and he beat a couple of 2100's this weekend, so yes, I guess he would know.

it is true that the best way to gain rating points in bigger bunches is by playing players one class above you.

yeah like you know!

lol his rating is higher than mine try getting up to 2000 you hypocrite Tongue Out

like YOU KNOW what it takes!

netzach

Listen. Better to think sensibly here. Will not reach ''expert'' level until actually are expert and this often involves a lot of practice/study.

TitanCG

Wash on, wash off?

JMB2010

I am not going to comment since ilikeflags is just going to say "like you know"

Abhishek2
waffllemaster wrote:
Shadowknight911 wrote:
ilikeflags wrote:
Abhishek2 wrote:

you have to beat 2000's to get to 2000.

like you know.


Abhishek's rating in real life is a bit over 2000 and he beat a couple of 2100's this weekend, so yes, I guess he would know.

it is true that the best way to gain rating points in bigger bunches is by playing players one class above you.

ilikeflags was only kidding (as he usually does).

But to be honest I don't think a kid who goes from 1800 to 2000 in a few tournaments does know what it takes for the average player.  Maybe he would have good advice for other rapidly improving jurniors though.

Otherwise the advice me be about as helpful as: "go to 4 or 5 tournaments"

If you've looked at my tournament history I go to tournaments like once a month, and a lot of practice in between. You do have to beat 2000's to get to 2000 (I post about my tournament go to my profile and check My chess tournament, parts 1, 2, 3, and 4. I talk about my tournaments and what I can learn from them. I realized after I lost to an 1100 in the states a year ago when I was nearing 1700 that I wasn't getting much good exposure to people rated higher than me, just the occasional 1800. After that I played in the nationals and got more exposure and did quite well. Then tournaments like Vegas, L.A brought me up to 1900. I stabilized quite well and am currently at 2000. Nowadays I never really try for money I try for more experience against 2000+ people because they can capitalize more on my small mistakes and I definitely learn from it to improve my game.

makikihustle

I'm in the 2000-2100's.

From the 1900's to here, the only thing I did was focus on a narrow repertoire.

Do you know your openings well enough to get to a solid middle game against a master?

If your answer is no, it might be a clue that it's time to start building a repertoire.

That, and keep playing, playing, playing.

redchessman

@abhishek2

It's funny that you say you have to beat 2000s to become 2000.  I have 0 wins against people 2000-2099 in uscf tournaments and a bunch of losses and draws.  The way I broke 2000 uscf is just drawing masters and 2100s constantly.  I occasionally beat them because they see that I am lower rated than them and they try too hard to win in drawn positions.  I almost never beat anyone 1900+ outright.  I basically never win games against such opposition.  But I also barely lose to people below 2300 in long otb games.  So realizing that I am just drawing all my games instead of playing in lets say a u2100 section I would play up into the u2300 section because most likely I would draw all my games and i'd gain more rating doing that in a u2300 section than a u2100.  Essentially i'm just going to draw my way up to master lol.  

makikihustle

The dreaded DrawMaster.

Players who need a full point must hate you. :D

redchessman
makikihustle wrote:

The dreaded DrawMaster.

Players who need a full point must hate you. :D

Yeah, but it's just too much work playing ambitiously haha

k0spe

I haven't read through every comment, so I'm not sure if someone has said this, and I'm not that good at chess. But I you should ask yourself where do I go wrong in the game, in the opening, middle game, or endgame. Suppose it's the endgame. Is it endgames as a whole, or just something like king and pawn endings while the rest of your endgame is great? Perhaps it's the middlegame, do you need more work in strategy or tactics? If it's strategy, do you have trouble making good plans or sticking to your good plans? Try to notice these things while you're playing and analyzing games and then, after figuring out what you need to fix the most, study the area that needs help.

1776new

Friend, as soon as I get there you can touch base with me, and know now that I am new to this evolving puzzle and it is fun. I know it is not going to happen for me over night. So much to learn and then there is information overload. Enjoy your games and study and keep on playing. Be sure to thank those better then yourself who play you for there is much you can learn from thoses games. Thank those who you defeat  easy for there is much to be learned from those games. Enjoy the game and learn from it and that is how you get there if it is going to happen.Cool

Abhishek2
redchessman wrote:

@abhishek2

It's funny that you say you have to beat 2000s to become 2000.  I have 0 wins against people 2000-2099 in uscf tournaments and a bunch of losses and draws.  The way I broke 2000 uscf is just drawing masters and 2100s constantly.  I occasionally beat them because they see that I am lower rated than them and they try too hard to win in drawn positions.  I almost never beat anyone 1900+ outright.  I basically never win games against such opposition.  But I also barely lose to people below 2300 in long otb games.  So realizing that I am just drawing all my games instead of playing in lets say a u2100 section I would play up into the u2300 section because most likely I would draw all my games and i'd gain more rating doing that in a u2300 section than a u2100.  Essentially i'm just going to draw my way up to master lol.  

depends on your style. My style is more win/lose so in the past ~50 OTB games I've played I've drawn 5, won 27, and lost 19

1776new

And then it appears there is anouther way, Just see Abhishek2 coments.Cool

Davidjordan
redchessman wrote:

@abhishek2

It's funny that you say you have to beat 2000s to become 2000.  I have 0 wins against people 2000-2099 in uscf tournaments and a bunch of losses and draws.  The way I broke 2000 uscf is just drawing masters and 2100s constantly.  I occasionally beat them because they see that I am lower rated than them and they try too hard to win in drawn positions.  I almost never beat anyone 1900+ outright.  I basically never win games against such opposition.  But I also barely lose to people below 2300 in long otb games.  So realizing that I am just drawing all my games instead of playing in lets say a u2100 section I would play up into the u2300 section because most likely I would draw all my games and i'd gain more rating doing that in a u2300 section than a u2100.  Essentially i'm just going to draw my way up to master lol.  

lol i know a few experts who got there by doing just that drawing with occasionaly wins

geminicricket

Analyze your losses.  Learn why you made positional and tactical mistakes.  See what you did early in the game that set up weakness later.  Study deeply in a strong system for White and Black.  Study broadly in the anti-your strong systems for Black and White.   Study master games often.  Play often.  And don't stop at Expert level.

MrKornKid
paulgottlieb wrote:

I think you have to be very objective about examining your own games, particularly your serious OTB games. Win or lose, your games provide your primary learning material. And I'm not talking about going through them with an engine and just observing. You need to take your games apart. How did the opening go? Did you understand it? Where did you leave book, and who deviated first? Check the books afterwards evaluate your play. In the middlegame, did you have a plan? Was the pawn structure one thast you recognized? Did you understand what your opponent's plan was? What about tactics? Did you miss any tactical shots--either yours or your opponent's? If there was an endgame, how did you do? Did you have a plan? Was the ending one that you understood? If not, do some studying and learn the basics of that particular endgame.

It you can get some coaching, all the better, but you can do a tremendous amount of good work on your own. And your own games will provide you with a lot of material.


I'm not done reading this thread yet but as soon as I read this I felt the need to post.  What a remarkable response Paul.  I am jotting down those particular questions to even help myself as a beginner.

AndyClifton
linuxblue1 wrote:

There is an interesting book that I am reading right now called How to develop Chess Talent that may be worth getting as well.

If there even is such a thing!