1500 puzzles rating but 400 rapid
Puzzle rating doesn't correspond at all with other ratings. It is completely normal to have much higher chess.com puzzles rating than rapid or blitz.
As for your games. I've looked many of them. They are filled with big mistakes on both sides, which is common on this rating range. My advice is to learn opening principles and do your absolute best not to blunder pieces. Principles should help you out to not blunder early at least.
The only reason to break principles is if you gain something by doing so, like winning material for free, or checkmate.
Puzzle rating doesn't correspond at all with other ratings. It is completely normal to have much higher chess.com puzzles rating than rapid or blitz.
As for your games. I've looked many of them. They are filled with big mistakes on both sides, which is common on this rating range. My advice is to learn opening principles and do your absolute best not to blunder pieces. Principles should help you out to not blunder early at least.
The only reason to break principles is if you gain something by doing so, like winning material for free, or checkmate.
Thank you for your advice! I understand there is a general discrepancy between puzzle rating and rapid rating but according to this graph 400 elo and 1500 puzzles is so extreme that it makes me question my method of learning. As I mentioned previously, I started playing chess a month ago and I'm wondering if rushing into puzzles might've actually harmed my development as a player by shifting my focus away from basic strategies. From this point forward, I'm wondering if I should continue doing puzzles
Puzzle rating doesn't correspond at all with other ratings. It is completely normal to have much higher chess.com puzzles rating than rapid or blitz.
As for your games. I've looked many of them. They are filled with big mistakes on both sides, which is common on this rating range. My advice is to learn opening principles and do your absolute best not to blunder pieces. Principles should help you out to not blunder early at least.
The only reason to break principles is if you gain something by doing so, like winning material for free, or checkmate.
Thank you for your advice! I understand there is a general discrepancy between puzzle rating and rapid rating but according to this graph 400 elo and 1500 puzzles is so extreme that it makes me question my method of learning. As I mentioned previously, I started playing chess a month ago and I'm wondering if rushing into puzzles might've actually harmed my development as a player by shifting my focus away from basic strategies. From this point forward, I'm wondering if I should continue doing puzzles
I do think strategy is important however from personal experience tactics and patterns win games more often, like if you don't think you have a solid foundation of the rules and principles I would also learn those, though puzzles are just as important.
I even made this guide and one of the things mentioned in it is consistent training and I definitely think puzzles can be an integral part of that: https://www.chess.com/blog/KingsideCastleNotation/how-i-got-2000-a-guide-for-you
Keep your head up do puzzles and good luck with your chess journey
I understand there is a general discrepancy between puzzle rating and rapid rating but according to this graph 400 elo and 1500 puzzles is so extreme that it makes me question my method of learning.
Nice graph! And I don't think that sounds extreme at all. If you're extreme, then what am I? I don't even fit on your graph!
Keep in mind that probably most people are underrated on puzzles, because everyone starts at a low puzzle rating, whereas with a game rating, you have the option of starting at different ratings, and there are volatility factors in the formula that helps ensure that you will quickly get to your true rating when you're just starting out.
Puzzle rating doesn't correspond at all with other ratings. It is completely normal to have much higher chess.com puzzles rating than rapid or blitz.
As for your games. I've looked many of them. They are filled with big mistakes on both sides, which is common on this rating range. My advice is to learn opening principles and do your absolute best not to blunder pieces. Principles should help you out to not blunder early at least.
The only reason to break principles is if you gain something by doing so, like winning material for free, or checkmate.
At this level it is very important to not blunder...I will look at some of your games and then write what I think...
Yeah, so as I thought you don`t fight it out...not anything against this but your rapid could really improve if you blunder check...and you fight out games.
Puzzle rating doesn't correspond at all with other ratings. It is completely normal to have much higher chess.com puzzles rating than rapid or blitz.
As for your games. I've looked many of them. They are filled with big mistakes on both sides, which is common on this rating range. My advice is to learn opening principles and do your absolute best not to blunder pieces. Principles should help you out to not blunder early at least.
The only reason to break principles is if you gain something by doing so, like winning material for free, or checkmate.
Thank you for your advice! I understand there is a general discrepancy between puzzle rating and rapid rating but according to this graph 400 elo and 1500 puzzles is so extreme that it makes me question my method of learning. As I mentioned previously, I started playing chess a month ago and I'm wondering if rushing into puzzles might've actually harmed my development as a player by shifting my focus away from basic strategies. From this point forward, I'm wondering if I should continue doing puzzles
I've seen many people that have 1 000 higher rated puzzles or more. There are some people below 1 000 with puzzles well above 2 000. Some have puzzles like mine for instance. But the issue is that if you don't have a better position, you will rarely get them in your games. Plus even if you do, nobody will tell you during the game that you have a potential tactic on the board, you have to find it all by yourself.
So puzzles are good for beginners especially, because they have a lot of patterns to learn and practice (so they will see a lot of unknown stuff). But of course they are not some magic wand that will solve all the problems. Training tactics in some way is very important because in many cases games are decided by them, even on much higher level than mine.
During games focus on not dropping pieces the best you can, and learn and practice basic principles.
In any case, don't be pressured to improve quickly. Chess is more like a marathon than it is like is sprint. I wish you good luck with your chess.
Here is something you might find helpful:
https://www.chess.com/blog/nklristic/the-beginners-tale-first-steps-to-chess-improvement
Puzzle rating doesn't correspond at all with other ratings. It is completely normal to have much higher chess.com puzzles rating than rapid or blitz.
As for your games. I've looked many of them. They are filled with big mistakes on both sides, which is common on this rating range. My advice is to learn opening principles and do your absolute best not to blunder pieces. Principles should help you out to not blunder early at least.
The only reason to break principles is if you gain something by doing so, like winning material for free, or checkmate.
At this level it is very important to not blunder...I will look at some of your games and then write what I think...
Yes, I agree. Not blundering pieces easily on 400 level would help immensely. By the way, I hope you were looking at OP's games, which is not me.
Being lower rated at chess doesn't mean a person is not intelligent.
Putting yourself down over your rating is not advisable. We all want to improve, but we shouldn't be slaves to those numbers. It will make the experience stressful instead of enjoyable.
Translating those skills into consistent success in real games often requires more than just puzzle-solving.
That said, I think it’s totally normal to feel a disconnect between puzzle-solving and real games, especially early on. Puzzles are very specific—you know there’s a tactical solution to find—whereas in actual games, it’s not always clear what the best plan is. Real games also involve a lot of other skills, like opening principles, managing time, and dealing with the unpredictability of your opponent’s moves.
As for struggling against lower-rated players, I wouldn’t jump to blaming smurfing just yet (though I’m sure it happens occasionally). Lower-rated players often play in ways that don’t follow traditional principles, and that unpredictability can throw you off. It’s not uncommon to see players who are great at puzzles or playing strong opponents but struggle more against chaotic playstyles at lower levels. I should know. I’m one of them ;-)
One thing that might help is really focusing on the basics—develop your pieces, control the center, and keep your king safe. If you can play solid chess and avoid unnecessary risks, you’ll probably find it easier to handle those tricky lower-rated games.
Also, analyzing your games is super helpful. Look for patterns in your losses. That’s what I’m trying to do.
I started learning chess about a month ago and have tried to improve my skills via puzzles. This past month, I've gotten a lot better at sensing patterns and have rapidly improved my puzzle rating. However, my skills have failed to translate in real games as I am still stuck in the 400 elo range. I am oftentimes playing games with ratings of over 1000 and still losing. I have even beaten 1800 and 1600 elo players while playing unrated. Despite all my accomplishments, I'm still struggling against very low elo players. I'm beginning to think there's a smurfing problem for this elo range or that there's something very wrong about the way I'm playing. I'm in desperate need of tips.