With all my free time, I have decided to take up chess as a hobby. I have been playing half hour time control games on chess.com for the past 4 months and looking over them to some extent without an engine as well as doing around 30 tactics problems on chesstempo per day. I am 1100
But the main problem that I have is I don't know what I should be studying. I want to create a study schedule but I have no idea what material I should be using.
Does anybody know what I should do?
Other urls found in this thread:
/asp/
Go there for educated opinions.
Why trust robots?
Why are there so many chess threads. Are there actually shills for chess now?
Wouldn't you rather play children's card games?
Wouldn't you rather play an MMORPG
wouldn't you rather just fap and goon for hours?
what i would recommend is that you look at the games you lose, run them through an engine and see when you start losing.
then with that information start studying middle game or endgame.
also its important to know as many openings and variations of major openings as you can remember.
How would I find the resources to study them?
Study everything, let your own curiosity guide you. Engines, books, annotated games, compositions its all good.
>I have been playing half hour time control games on chess.com for the past 4 months and looking over them to some extent without an engine as well as doing around 30 tactics problems on chesstempo per day. I am 1100
You're not gonna make it
don't listen to that guy
and don't listen to this guy either the reason you are having trouble improving is because you don't even know what to study. since im assuming you are doing this entirely on your own, your biggest friend is BOOKS. you have to go through beginner annotated books and games to find out what to play and why to play it. simply going through your games after you lose, even without an engine (which is a good habit to develop, you can use the engine though to check for tactical errors though)
also, at that rating, a huge problem is you are probably blundering your pieces to death. you need to practice doing easy tactics. make a custom deck on chesstempo in the 0-1400 (if you find some of them too hard you can go down even further to 1300 or 1200) and do that a ton. there's seriously no such thing as too much tactics, and doing them a ton will eventually pay off even if the other parts of your game are suffering. also if you get a membership it comes with a mate in one, two, three set etc. just start from the bottom and work up from there. if you need some book suggestions let me know, but to start you really need to be reading books for beginners with lots of annotations. they will help you massively, as a beginner teaching yourself, you will never improve until you know what to look for/improve in the first place. you can learn this by reading annotated books among other books aimed at lower rated players.
how can you people enjoy this boring shit
the game is so played out people have written literal books on it
have you ever actually attempted to enjoy it? or are you speaking without any experience?
Yes it's like checkers but you need a computer to play it
I'm 1700 and I started in 9th grade, played for a few years, then got bored. I only enjoyed it because it was something I was superior in. No one at school could beat me, but I never finished 1st at State (got top 5 though). Losing is a lot worse than winning, and chess is the worst game to lose in. It's fun at first, learning the tactics and openings and traps, marveling at the greats like Fischer and Morphy, until you realize you must dedicate hours a week to become a master. Otherwise you're just winning half the time, losing the other half, and every game looks the same because people memorize opening variations to have a decent chance of winning. If you want a fun hobby, watch anime or play vidya. If you want to improve yourself, exercise and read.
make a lichess account and add me, we can talk and discuss games and stuff
JackHammer4012
just because you got your ass whooped at something you thought you were good at, then it turns out you weren't, doesn't mean everyone else thinks like you. maybe he's got passion for the game and you don't. there's nothing wrong with that, but let people do whatever the fuck they want at least. clearly you didn't care past winning.
wanna play a game against me ?
I'm just saying it's a surrogate activity. Unless you're good enough to live off of it, you can spend your time more wisely. If I could've redone my life, I would've learned the rules of chess and maybe watched/played a few games to understand chess, but I wouldn't allow myself to be devoted to it. That's just my opinion, I'm not forcing anyone to do anything but I'm telling my true thoughts.
If anyone wants a game
working hard on something, regardless of what it is, is a useful use of time if it makes you happy. the only factor then is "do you actually want to do it or not". you didn't want to do it, maybe some day the person playing as well will no longer want to do it, but he has no reason to regret it, if he is doing it for the right reasons. i think your regret lies in the fact that you did not even enjoy playing, not the game itself.
what even is "spending time wisely"? some people spend their entire lives chasing money, is that spending it wisely? some people like to actually push themselves to improve things about themselves. whether it's through something like playing an instrument or chess or doing something competitively, as long as it is pushing you and forcing you to use your brain in active and new ways, i don't see how it could not be a useful usage of time. i think you cared more about winning more than the action itself. you had the wrong attitude from the start, and so it wasn't for you. there's nothing better though about exercising or reading books that chess can't provide you, or literally anything else. if it makes you happy, and you are working towards improvement and learning new things, then that is all there is to life in the end.
What I should I do to make it?
Nothing, your IQ is too low. I'm sorry user.
Thank you for having faith that I can improve. However, what are some good book recommendations?
In the event I had a decent IQ what could I do to improve my abilities?
Damn user, you put time into some hobby unlike most of the robots on this thread. That's really cool user, I hope your doing good buddy.
If you had a decent IQ your Elo wouldn't be 1100 after 4 months of semi-serious study
What if it was 3 months. Would I still have hope then?
Your reasons are dumb, but you are right that chess at high lvl is stupid. Th Russian masters would just memorize openings to end game, 30-50 moves.
Chess is kind of a bad game anyways. If you really look at games, it usually comes down to losing one capital piece, the rest of the game they just have to lean on you. A good game should get more complex as you go, not less. And sense it is a game of perfect Infomation, it can me "solved" at high lvls. It is much more fun to play people you know over and over, becuase you learn thier okay styles and how to beat them, much more fun than online bs strangers. Also Super fastSpeed games are more fun than serious games becuase you dont have time to "solve" and have to make approximations of the best move you can find in the 2 seconds you have, not just the best move
No. My chess.com rating was 1400 before I even started doing tactics problems and I'm shit at chess too.
Not if he actully just learned how to play. Most people learn how to play when they are 6 years old, then get serious at some point.
Protip, Tactic problems are a waste of time. Just play more games, till you are doing GM lvl tactics, it doesnt matter, learn tactics in game
do problems on lichess
read Silman's "The Amateur's Mind"
>Protip, Tactic problems are a waste of time
said no titled player ever. Don't listen to this guy OP. You should probably read chess forums if you want good advice.
Could I still have hope to least get to 1200?
I learnt the rules when I was 3 because my father was 1700 at the and wanted me to become good. However I near played any games until now.
Sure. You could probably get close to 2000 before you plateau, if you put in the time. Just keep grinding chess tactics and analysing games. That's the single best way to improve your rating up to 1800 or so. You should read books about this stuff if you're serious about it. Irving Chernev's analyses (particularly "Logical Chess: Move by Move") are highly recommended at your level from what I recall, but it's been so many years since I've played.
try irving chernve's chess move by move. get the book on b-ok org it should be there. also don't listen to anyone else talking shit to you or saying you'll never get good. chess isn't about being smart
But they are, becuase setting up openings into mid games are much more realistic. You arent going to be good till you play 10,000 games anyways.
>titled player
Dude op is ranked 1100, titled payers are like 2600. He isnt there yet.
>wasting that much time memorizing chess moves
l my a off
I see many blitz players on chess.com with thousands of games behind them who stay at 1000-1200. Meanwhile I improved my rating by 100+ points without even playing a single game. Tactics is the way to go. Most of your improvement at that point comes from learning not to blunder your pieces or miss obvious tactical opportunities to make big captures. OP will learn nothing from playing games at his level.
I bet that is why you tapped out of the game at state lvl. You ruined yourself with tactics, instead of learning real game positions, which repeat endlessly in real life.
>blizz
Eh, I could go up or down 200 points in a few days on blizz chess.com
I tapped out because I realized it was fucking pointless to waste thousands of hours of my limited lifetime on a game that I'll never play professionally because I didn't start when I was five years old. Pretty much every notable player agrees that tactics and endgame study are most important at that level. These patterns will show up everywhere at OP's rating. What is the point of wasting hundreds of hours of potential study time playing when OP is still probably blundering pieces every game? He's not going to learn anything.
>Eh, I could go up or down 200 points in a few days on blizz chess.com
I've seen similar things for standard time-limit players too. How can you possibly play over a thousand 30+ minute games and still be below 1200? Some of them are quite smart too. Focused study is really the only way to go.
You're never going to be good at anything anyways probably, certainly not world class, so why are you so upset in the first place LOL
Is this the pleb thread?
>get on my lvl
get "logical chess: move by move", learn about fundimentals like pins, skewers, forks, deflection etc..
use lichess and chesstempo to read on openings, subscribe to youtube channels, study the endgame, learn basic opening theory.. but studying tactics is the most important thing.. putting time into improving your ability to notice advantage obtaining moves is vital
You sound like a pretty sucky player user.
I love chess but I am a brainlet at it fuck me
Wanna play together user
Who's upset? I haven't even played chess in like 10 years, I don't care about it anymore. I'm just giving OP good advice. I could have been though, had I started serious study at age 5 like every other grandmaster these days. You're right that chess isn't about being smart, just having autistic parents.
Cant a computer beat any world class player anywway? Seems like a waste of time.
Nah, you care, you quit and you're crying about it to everyone here. It's obvious your failure bothers you, that's why you try to convince other people to quit like you.
hi ybot
I don't play chess
I used to play chess in highschool but I never learned proper openers etc.
I just did what worked and started to put a few pieces together myself.
I would say besides learning openers and setups, you wanna look at a board state and try to look at reasonable options a few turns ahead, and just keep trying to get further and further ahead.
It gets exponentially harder right but I think its just how the best players think.
As for studying just literally play the game, or some game that lets you play the last rounds of famous chess games.
If OP still enjoys chess, he should play. I don't so I don't. Video games tap into that part of my brain much more effectively. If you aren't going to be a titled player then it's all just a game, something casual to do for entertainment, and it's best to treat it that way. I don't play warcraft 3 anymore either.
You just sound like you're constantly trying to justify why you're not playing. If you're not gonna play then just leave it at that. You're trying to find reasons why other things are better, it's a sad attempt to justify your stance. You're clearly bothered, stop projecting.
There's nothing to justify. I didn't enjoy it anymore, and it was pointless for me to play, so I stopped playing. You can't name me a single grandmaster who started playing after the age of ten. If you still enjoy playing chess then by all means, keep playing. You won't ever be a titled player though.
>projecting
I don't think you know what this word means user.
I think 1100 is about the farthest elo you can advance through brainpower alone after that you need to memorize tactics and strategy which im too lazy to do, so i stopped playing.
>You can't name me a single grandmaster who started playing after the age of ten.
>You won't ever be a titled player though.
Yep, keep projecting because you suck so bad that you can't achieve anything. If you weren't gonna be good at chess, you wouldn't be good at anything else. Stop whining.
People were stronger than that before there were tactics manuals.
Prove me wrong user. Be the first adult to become a grandmaster without studying full time in early youth while the brain is still malleable. I look forward to reading articles about you 5 years from now when you manage to achieve the impossible through hard work and determination :^)
I read in a library book: Chess, The Will to Win, that I should learn 3 openings (not memorise, understand): Stonewall for e4 Slav Schalopp for d4 and French for e4. Is this valid advice? Learning the main ideas over memorization makes sense to me but I'm not entirely sure if I should.
This isn't about me, it's about you, and your failed desires, and projecting them onto other people. You failed, because you couldn't do it, and now you are projecting those feelings onto other people. It's sad, really.
>chess
>not shogi
Top kek, friend.
Isn't that bughouse chess?
I'm telling OP the truth, that he's never going to be a great player. If he still wants to play after that then good on him, chess is a fine hobby. Unless you provide me with an example of a player who didn't start until after 18 achieving grandmaster (protip: you won't), I'm going to continue believing I had no chance. It's a reasonable stance to take.
I don't plan on becoming the World Champion or anything. At most I'd want to get a title but that's a very very long term goal. Right now simply getting past 1100 is my task.
Yeah, it seems like the other guy doesn't have years of experience playing chess. If he did, he would actually know what you're talking about
>tfw too dumb for shogi
There's definitely similarities, but Shogi also has gold and silver generals pieces, no queen-like piece, and different promotion rules.
Honestly 2000 is well within your reach, depending on how hard you're willing to work at it. Just keep doing chess tactics and analysis OP, that guy doesn't know what he's talking about. Maybe a little endgame study too. Read a book on openings principles maybe, but don't waste too much time on them beyond that. It's useless at your level.
What is OP is underage? Could he still have a chance? Or would the usage of this board be a sign of his faliure?
The worst thing is it's extremely hard to find someone to learn with. Where as chess has mass appeal, any time you find a shogi match with some random online you're going to get fucking smoked.
Where my mahjong niggas at?
Note how not once did I mention anything about getting a title or becoming a grandmaster, you are the one who brought it up, which is how you can tell it's so obvious that you are projecting. I can tell you quit easily and have probably never accomplished anything in your life lol.
Bobby fischer teaches chess. It's a great resource that I used to get back into the game. I would say its pretty good for you skill level, too.
>I want to create a study schedule but I have no idea what material I should be using.
If you care about rapid improvement, 80% chess tactic learning especially chess puzzles, but also maybe a site like chesstactics.org can teach you a sort of structured overview of tactics, 10% analysis of your games, 5% endgames, 5% strategy/openings.
Literally nothing else besides chess tactics matters at your level of play. Really other things don't start becoming comparatively important until you hit like 2000elo. Openings can give you a small advantage from the outset, but it really doesn't matter a fart if you end up with a small advantage worth a fraction of a pawn if three moves later you leave a knight unguarded and your opponent takes it for free. Learning long term strategy without understanding tactics is akin to a general making a plan of war who doesn't understand what tanks and airplanes are, yes some basic strategical sense is useful, but it's pointless to learn strategy on any intricate level when you fundamentally don't understand the options you have available to you in any given battle.
Endgames at least can help you eek out a win with a more narrow advantage and you don't need to understand anything else to understand endgames. You should know how to win with a king + rook already. Learning how to win with a king + pawn + rook vs a king + pawn is also useful. Look up the lucena position
Also 1100 elo is low enough you can probably improve simply by playing more.
You're the one who brought up that "that is why you tapped out of the game at state lvl" when you had nothing else to say about your shitty advice. Was that you projecting then? See how retarded that argument is? Either provide me one example out of thousands of grandmasters who started late or admit that you're wrong.
>I can tell you quit easily and have probably never accomplished anything in your life lol.
I actually am quite accomplished in other areas of my life, thanks partly to the fact that I didn't waste 10,000 hours playing a board game that I'll never be good at.
It has good checkmate patterns inside but doesn't teach tactics or anything other than checkmate.
As for the people telling OP to just give up on chess and the other people calling them brainlet, nobody besides rich kids with genius IQs that started playing when they were 5 and sacrifice their entire lives for chess become world champions. Yes the game is played out and fucking filled with memorisation like crazy. I would advise one not to get too attached to becoming a super serious chess master and branch out, but it can be fun to study chess and get better for its own sake. It's not an excuse, it's the fucking truth, people who don't think it's the truth are either trolling or don't understand chess.
At the end of the day my fondest memory back when I played chess was teaching little kids how to play for the first time and hanging out with people I knew at the local club because I'm an Jow Forums user and these were some of the only people I just easily connected to.
OP though basically you're mostly already studying what you should be studying but maybe you should be adding some post-game analysis, that would be the #1 thing I would add.
>I actually am quite accomplished in other areas of my life, thanks partly to the fact that I didn't waste 10,000 hours playing a board game that I'll never be good at.
Uh oh, there it is. It's surfacing again. Those repressed feelings. You say that you don't care if people play, yet you are making insults about it left and right. You entered the thread to sway people from playing, and when presented with explanations why it is fine to play, you ignored them, and immediately got defensive. Why are you even still in the thread posting? This is humiliating. You're not hard to understand, your behavior is that of someone who feels regret and a constant need to justify it by talking about in to random people on the internet lol. I'm serious, this is embarrassing for you. You're just bringing up stuff left and right I'm not even mentioning. You're so easy to read.
He's right though. Playing the same way over and over is boring. Unless you're improving, chess sucks after a while. But no one wants to spend hours learning how to play a fucking board game just so they don't lose. It's pointless
Play what you want dude, it's just a game. I regret it no more than I regret playing a thousand hours of counter-strike or WoW or whatever. You're the one who's getting this butthurt that I called out your shitty advice. If being told that you're not going to become a titled player upsets you this much then honestly I feel sorry for you.
I'm not even the guy you were originally talking to moron. I also have no ambition to become a titled player, so that argument doesn't work either. I just saw you making sad excuses and projecting hard and thought it was necessary to call you out. Save your pity, let's both simultaneously expend it on you.
I've still yet to see an example of how I'm "projecting". Again, I don't think you know what that word means. Realizing your limits when it comes to chess isn't projection, it's called maturity.
kill your originally self