25 years old & learning chess - my practice blog

not true. martin weteschnik learn chess at 25 and achieved fide master. his current rating is at 2300 range.

 

https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/2/31/understanding_chess_tactics_by_martin_weteschnik/

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=64102

I was also pondering this question and went on to search players who became masters at an older age. There are many stories of people reaching GM, IM, FM, CM or NM titles well into their 30s, 40s, 50s or even 60s. This implies that with enough training it is possible to get better at practically any age. So if an adult could get to 1800-1900 rating in a few years, why would it suddenly be impossible to improve from there with further training?

I do understand that it is rare and probably very unlikely, but saying it to be impossible just sounds a bit silly to me. Regardless, luckily for me I'm not playing chess to become a master. I'm playing chess to learn, improve and enjoy. If I get 100 points better than I am now, then that's great. If I get 100 points better after that, even better. I'm not looking for some numbers set in stone that I want to be 2000 rated player, or that I want to be 2400 rated player. I'm looking at where I am currently and trying to improve. Who knows how far I get from here? Small steps at a time and every time I learn something new and improve is good enough for me. :-)

I have not done a rating update in a while, so figured I might as well. Here are my current ratings (and + points shows improvement since the start of this blog).

Ratings at 23.4.2018 (2 months, 11 days after start of blog):

Tactics: 1628 (1768/3020)  +468 points increase
Lessons: 1834 (491) +360 points increase
Blitz: 1181 (239/199/19) +172 points increase
Bullet: 1138 (365/336/15) +134 points increase
Rapid: 1250 (45/22/4) +237 points increase

I played my first game here on chess.com against a stranger (I played 2 games against my girlfriend 3 years ago, and then never played another games since) just before Christmas on 22nd of December. That means I have officially played online chess for just over 5 months now. During these 5 months I have played 1244 games, done 3020 tactics puzzles and completed 491 lessons. On top of this I have watched hours and hours of YouTube videos, read one chess book and followed these forums closely. One could say I've gotten really into this game recently and I need to be careful not to let it consume all my free time! Yikes!

When I started this blog I had a goal (or a dream) of becoming a consistent 1400 rated player over all game modes I play. I'm making good progress towards this, but having played couple games against 1300-1400 opponents I realise I'm not quite there yet. So currently I'm trying to break 1200 rating on blitz and bullet (less serious about bullet, just for some fun) and 1300 rating on rapid. I have been playing tournaments lately (3 already) and it's a fun way to play. I wish there were tournaments for 10|0 or 15|10 time controls, but alas I have to play 5|0 or 2|1. These are definitely not my strongest time controls and I feel like these games are not teaching me much. So for that reason I'm trying to play very simple chess, so I have more time to focus on the critical moves (playing same openings over and over again). I'll experiment occasionally with some newer stuff but basically I prefer to play e4 and against e4 I play e5 and against d4 I play d5. I think they are all okayish openings that lead to pretty standard games with nothing over the top crazy going on. Like John Bartholomew said in one of his videos that if you are a beginner, you should play classical chess. I guess it's something similar to when you start learning a new instrument, you almost always start learning the theory through classical music. Once you got the basics down and feel like you understand the principles why so called classic variations are classic (well they've been played for ages, and therefor must make a lot of sense), you can start to experiment with more modern variations. So that's what I'm sticking to for now.

https://www.chess.com/blog/post

I have decided to include occasional games against computer on my training regime. I remember when I started playing online that I had hard time against level 2 computer already, and not long ago level 4 computer seemed like impossibly accurate opponent - always finding the best move. This of course is not the case, but compared to my playing strength at the time even the level 4 computer was almost an impossible task.

Today I played one game against level 5 computer, resulting in a pretty easy win. I guess there were times where I could've done better moves or ended it more quickly, but I didn't want to ruin it because I never beaten level 5 computer before. According to the analysis tool I had 1.14 advantage by move 10 and then it just kept increasing ever since. Move 15 I was at 1.93, move 20 was 3.39. Eventually by move 40 I was already at 7.50 points in lead according to the computer analysis. Before move 60 it was over 60 points lead and game was long over. Computers I guess don't resign in a lost position so it took 68 moves to find the mate. 

Complete analysis of the game was 51 great moves, 9 good moves, 5 inaccuracies and 3 mistakes. 50% best move and average centipawn loss 0.78. Considering that I usually have a bit hard time focusing against a computer, I consider that a decent result for me.

Here is the whole game if anyone is interested (e4 to French defense).

Stay tuned for my attempts against the level 6 computer in the future. :-)

@Taskinen This is such an inspiring thread man, I really wish I could be as dedicated and gritty as you are! You have mentioned earlier that you've learned a lot of things by yourself, bet that comes in handy too. My problem seems to be that I lack the patience and concentration to consistently find good moves. So some days I play really good chess, even surprising myself, but on others I overlook the simplest of threats, and make blunders that make me want to bury myself deep underground lol. What do you think I should do to overcome this? Also, can you explain how you use the engine analysis? I mean, I check my inaccuracies, mistakes etc, but idk what to do to ensure I don't commit these the next time. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks for the kind words @BurntMagnesium ! I have this same issue sometimes that I seem to completely miss obvious moves and simply play really bad chess. For example today I played some bullet to kill some time and I played probably worst chess ever (well it was bullet, but still) and yesterday I lost 4 rapid games in a row. It's just what it is when you play against other people who are trying their best to beat you. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I think the most important part is how can you take the losses. Some people get really angry, or as they say tilted, and start playing even worse after. Some people tend to go through their games and figure why they lost. I'm trying to belong to the latter group.

I think the biggest obstacle with learning chess (or anything else for that matter) is the lack of understanding that progress takes time. You just need to keep practicing, analyzing and eventually you will see the results. It might be even hard to notice if you have made any progress or not, because it happens slowly over time. You just have to trust that you are and try to get over feeling stupid. Because feeling stupid is pretty much always the starting point towards learning. You try to grasp something that you don't quite understand and it's really annoying trying to wrap your head around it. But you just have to take it small steps at a time and try to break the obstacles to smaller pieces.

I'm using chess.com analysing tool to check through my games to help me see more clearly the mistakes I made (and better alternatives to said mistakes). I think it's very helpful tool, but I'm not sure if it's only for paying members. There is another similar tool also in lichess that I occasionally use. I really recommend anyone who wants to get better to use that analyzing tool as often as possible.

 

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/inspirational-adult-improvers?page=1

How have you improved so quickly???  I have played for over a year and always studying and have hit the wall at 950, which i hit about 2 months in. Started at 800...

I think there must be something lacking in your studying if you are unable to make progress from 950 onwards. I believe you can go from 950 to 1200 by simply doing tactics trainings. Like 10-20 tactics a day for couple months and you'll increase your rating in no time. At under 1200 level most games are won by hanging a piece, so just keep your pieces protected and look places where you could put pressure on opponents pieces. If you have more attackers than defenders, you can go and pick stuff up. At lower rating players tend to miss threats, if you are able to put pressure on multiple places at once. So try to get your pieces to squares where they preferably hit many targets (and maybe even protect some). I think that at under 1200 level the game is not really rocket science. You don't need to know opening theory, other than to keep your pieces protected and try to put your pieces in squares where they can reach as many squares as possible. Rest usually happens by itself and if you can continue putting pressure on weak enemy points and try to advance your pawns, usually players at this level start hanging stuff. Once you get a piece or couple pawns in lead you can start trading things and usually you'll win some material in the progress (just because you have more pieces that can cover more squares).

Tactics training helps you to identify which pieces you can attack and when is there a possibility to win material with capture. I think opening theory, middle game strategy and all that is starting to become more important once you reach higher levels. Low level game is just making tactics (pins, forks, skewers) and putting pressure on enemy pieces. Players in our rating and below are usually unable to see tactics very far ahead.

Good luck and keep at it, you can progress if you put your mind to it!

 

That is the problem when a beginner plays bullet chess, it will install many bad habits and won't improve your chess at all.  These bad habits are superficial thinking,moving too fast, lack of patience and hope chess . Bullet chess won't also improve your calculation skills. I suggest stop playing bullet chess. 

 

When you solve a chess puzzle , try as hard as you can at finding the solution. Solve easy puzzle for pattern recognition and hard ones for calculation improvement.

 

Study the different tactical themes here and solve puzzles. Study them well and don't skip a page. If you want to improve read them all!! 

 

http://www.chessfornovices.com/whatarechesstactics.html

 

Additional Tips to lessen blunders.

 

1. Always study your opponent's last move

2. Always look at the whole board to see piece positioning.

3. Before you make a move, check if there is a tactical drawback.

 

Practice using these thinking process above at slower time control.  Reduce making many easy one move blunders at longer time control(no time pressure). Play games at 15 minutes or more time control.

 

I just got my best victory so far, meaning the highest rated opponent I have ever beaten on chess.com. I think this was one of my best games at the same time, since I felt like I had a concrete plan throughout the whole game and executed it very accurately. I do admit that my opponent did not play the best game, so it was a fairly easy win (19 moves game), but I'm happy with my own performance. According to the computer analysis I played 16 excellent moves and 3 good ones, no inaccuracies, mistakes or blunders. This is a rare case and for me a game worth cherishing for!

Let's go through the game really quickly. This was a 15|10 rapid game, where I got to play the white pieces against an opponent almost 100 rating points higher than me. We start the game with e4, c5 Sicilian, with first two moves the normal (opponent dropping knight in c6). I figured that I want to activate my light-squared bishop right away and put it next to the knight on b5. So basically the Ruy Lopez opening for me with the intention that if the opponent challenges the bishop I just exchange to double his pawns. I'm not really sure if it's the most accurate way to play, but I liked the idea that I will have a bit better structure and some easier targets later. So enough compensation for trading the bishop to a knight in my opinion.

So my opponent challenged the bishop right away with a6 so I continue with my plan and after takes, takes my opponent is left with doubled pawns on c file. I want to target the leading c5 pawn right away, but first have to make window for my bishop, so d3 seemed like a natural move to me. It opens bishops eyes and solidifies my e4 pawn. I was thinking that I don't really want to play d4 move at some point anyways, since it would allow my opponent to undouble his pawns, basically removing any advantage I had created with the bishop-knight -trade. My opponent continued with g6 looking to fianchetto his bishop. I think this was too slow move for him and in 5 moves he had not developed a single piece. So I continue forward with my plan putting pressure on the c5 pawn with my bishop, getting it to a nice square on e3. My opponent replied with e6 - fair enough, it opens his bishop to defend the c5 pawn. Then again it seems a bit counterproductive with the previous plan of fianchettoing the bishop on g7.

At this point I also started to look for the weaknesses on dark squares on e5, f6 and g5. I was starting to think of another plan to maybe put my knight in one of those very tasty squares. It wasn't at the time possible, so I just developed my another knight and opponent did the same. At this point I played h3 to prevent the opponents knight from putting pressure on my key bishop. However in retrospect this move looks almost an inaccuracy, since I could've just put a pin on his knight and look for e5 advance.

Next couple moves I do just that and put pin on his knight, and he misses the opportunity of me hitting the pinned knight with my pawn. So after that I win a piece for a pawn and computer analysis already shows +5 advantage for me. At this point I was getting a bit scared with how well the game was going and took a bit more time with my next moves. First I castled queenside to prepare e4 knight jump kicking the queen and finally attacking the c5 pawn. I realised that if I jump right away the queen can take my b2 pawn, so some slowing down was necessary. Once I get my knight in e4 there was so many loose pieces for my opponent and forks everywhere that it was difficult to find a good move for him. So I just continue getting my knights closer to action and include my queen in the attack against c5 pawn. I was already looking to force the queens off the board with Qxc5 but my opponent kinda missed this and eventually Rd6 fork winning exchange (knight to rook) made him resign the game. Funnily enough Rd6 was not even nearly the strongest move in the position, but the situation was already completely winning for white, so opponent resigned.

Reason why I like this game is that from the very first moves I was looking to create weakness by doubling the pawns and then put pressure on this weakness. During the game opponent created new weaknesses while trying to defend the first one and I was quick to jump on these weaknesses, while preventing any counterplay in crucial moments. So that being said, I'm very proud how this game turned out. :-)

We've all probably heard of the good old "10.000 hours to mastery" rule, which of course isn't a one-rule-to-rule-them-all type of rule, but more of an emphasis towards the importance of practice. Even though researchers and scientists have debated for years about the importance between practice, talent and genetical advantages, one thing is certain: deliberate practice will NOT make you any worse. Even those with natural talent can only put this talent into use with deliberately practicing countless hours. So that being said, as I don't really have idea whether I have natural talent for chess or not, I will start measuring the thing that is more easily measurable. The time put into deliberate practice.

I will start a counter towards 10.000 hours of deliberate practice and see how far can I get. Things I will include in my counter are time spent doing tactics and lessons and games played with 15 minute or more time. I will not include reading chess books, watching chess videos or reading chess articles (even though they will most likely be helpful towards learning) to this calculation, since their effectiveness as "deliberate practice" is much harder to measure.

How will I calculate this "training timer"? Tactics trainer is easy, since it already keeps track of my time. So far I've spent 60 hours on tactics trainer. Lessons are a bit trickier, since it only keeps track of the amount of courses completed. I think that you can fairly easily complete about 10 lessons in a hour (so about 6 minutes per each lesson), so I'm just going to use that. So far I've completed 509 lessons, which would translate to 50,9 hours spent on lessons trainer. This is approximate value, since it's really hard to say how many lessons you can actually do (some take much longer than others). So far I've played 76 games with rapid time control (with 15 or 30 minutes per side), and since I spend time to analyze every game afterwards, I think measuring one rapid game as one hour of practice seems reasonable to me. Also it's much easier to calculate.

And before anyone get's overly skeptical let's admit that I will most likely never get 10.000 hours of deliberate practice on chess. By sheer mathematics it would take 27 years with one hour of practice a day, 13,5 years with 2 hours of practice and less than 10 if you do 3 hours a day. I don't have this kind of time available for chess, so I just set this tracker for fun to follow up on things. :-)

So if you put 60 hours of tactics trainer, 51 hours of lessons trainer and 76 hours of actual gameplay together, I've so far put 187 hours of deliberate practice in game of chess. This would be 1,87% of 10.000 hour "rule of thumb" goal completed.

Training tracker:
187 / 10.000 hours (1.87% / 100%)

Milestone reached!

After some games yesterday and today, I have managed to achieve a goal of mine, which was to get that 1200 rating in all game modes I play (rapid, blitz and bullet). I do admit that the blitz rating was a bit artificial milestone, since I played a few rated games against the computer when I was 12 points short from 1200 (at 1188). I would've reached it eventually regardless, but I just felt like getting this one done so I can focus on further goals. I think I will continue playing rated games against computers occasionally, since it's a relaxing and quick way to get a few games in every now and then.

Reason why I set this 1200 goal in the first place was because when I started playing chess online, I thought 1200 was the beginner level. I almost got very demotivated getting beaten left and right at the beginning and falling all the way down to sub 700 points in some game modes! I thought I was simply not made for playing chess, until I realized that people at the 1200 range had already played hundreds if not thousands of games! So for anyone below 1200 rating, take this as a reminder. 1200 is not the rating beginners should expect to get matched with other beginners. It's already a rating where people know the basic fundamentals, don't blunder pieces all the time and generally can play games that actually look like chess. So if you are just now starting your online chess career, it will probably take you quite a while to reach that 1200 starting rating again. For me it took almost 6 months with daily practice! So trust in your abilities, keep playing, learn from your mistakes and eventually you will get over this 1200 barrier! :-)

Now I'm going to focus playing more rapid games with 15 to 30 minutes time control. Even though shorter game modes can be quite addicting, I'm going to trust much better players than myself in saying that they are not the best way to improve your chess. Like IM pfren here on forums once stated, beginners should not play blitz or bullet, since they are waste of time at best, distraction at worst. So I'm going to take this advice wholeheartedly in and focus on playing longer games in the future. I will also continue doing tactics, lessons and watch chess videos and read chess articles. What a fun new hobby this is and I feel like I'm already improving at a rapid pace. I believe that it will only get slower from now on, so I will start with small new milestones to aim towards. My first goal is 1300 rapid rating, of which I am currently 58 points short. I have also thought about joining the local chess club in my city to get some OTB experience with this game. I need to see how I can fit this in my schedule of 8 hour work days and my masters studies starting next semester.

Thank you all who have followed me on this journey so far (and especially all of you who have left me encouraging words here or by message) and hope to see you dropping by in the future!

Ratings at 1.5.2018 (2,5 months after start of blog):

Tactics: 1780 (1870/3185)  +620 points increase
Lessons: 2039 (572) +565 points increase
Blitz: 1207 (273/214/20) +198 points increase
Bullet: 1218 (480/433/26) +214 points increase
Rapid: 1242 (49/26/5) +229 points increase

Just beat the level 9 Komputer (1550 rating) on 15|10 rapid game. Was a nice 80 mover battle, but in the end I prevailed!

if you can play any otb- especially rated games it will help immensely

i have played 5 rated otb games and once you get used to the environment you can really benefit by playing stronger players

i have played people with 800 uscf and they are better than many 1200's on chess.com

and when you play 1500+ otb rated players you really get a feel for what you need to work on

i liken it to sparring in martial arts or boxing with a much more experienced opponent; at first you are just trying to survive-- you will not be getting any attacks and you will be forced to pay attention to weaknesses in your position as your opponent uses every move to improve his position

it is also a good practical exercise to keep chess notation (at least for me)

after you look at your games at home you will see things you could have done better and benefit from the analysis you already do

then- when you play rapid games again it will feel like your opponents are just playing real slow (tempo wise) are your play gets sharpened up

that's all i can really add at this point
good luck in your training

1500+ over the board? You've summoned me!

Good piece of advice there daxypoo. I'm sure playing OTB would help me immensely, but I have tough time with my busy schedules to get some OTB experience in. Playing some games here and there on chess.com is much easier, so for the time being I'm sticking to that. However, I'm looking for opportunities to try my skills in OTB environment! Thank you for the luck wishes!

I figured I'd share a game I played today, because I'm pretty proud of it. It was a 15 minute game with no increments, against an opponent almost 200 rating points higher than me.

To make things interesting I figured that I'd give a go d4 opening instead of my usual e4s, since I have to practice those as well. I went for the London system, since that feels like all around solid opening (probably not the best one) where it is easy to find good square for all pieces, and aiming for a pawn break with c4 is simple enough strategy to aim towards. I really like this opening, since it gets me fairly safely over the first 10 or so moves, without blundering something obvious or falling to some clever traps. In this game I managed to make 18 moves without inaccuracy, and 27 without a blunder (before falling to an obvious fork).

Playing against stronger rated opponent I feel like I was playing more carefully and trying to make sure that I don't hang any pieces. Looking the game with analysis board afterwards makes me think that there was some room for more active play in the middle game. For some reason I kind of ended up on the back foot just responding to my opponents threats, rather than making threats myself. I guess that's how it is against stronger players, even with the white pieces.

My opponent got to a winning endgame, but fortunately I managed to play some pretty accurate moves and he eventually fell to a fork himself. Admittedly we were both getting quite low on time and the last 20-30 moves of the game were going on a blitz mode. Looking the game afterwards I noticed that I actually had a checkmate in 12 moves at some point, but I was not sure if being up a bishop was enough to force a win. Apparently it was, but considering I had only 20 seconds left on the clock I just went for the simple repetition draw, and was very satisfied drawing a game against a stronger opponent.

 Whats your OTB rating?? Online people make dumber mistakes than they do OTB. It proves nothing to get a high chess.com rating if your otb is low.