i suck at chess pls give advise.

@tpr said in #3:

... Better play 15+10 instead of 10+0 and use average 40 seconds per move.
@kindaspongey said in #5:
... in a 15+10 game, 40 seconds per move would completely exhaust the 15-minute reserve after 30 moves. Without an easy win, many could expect disaster, averaging 10 seconds per move subsequently. ...
@tpr said in #10:
... At lower levels and in faster time controls a game is over sooner. A chess game is essentially decided by move 30. ... Keeping 10 seconds per move after move 30 is no problem. It is pointless to save time on the clock for moves that never come or no longer matter.
At https://lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/was-i-seeing-ghosts there is a discussion of a 15+10 game where, for one player, the first 30 moves were played at an average of ~39 seconds per move. That player lost.

get a board vision. Eat well products , which may help you with focus and attention. so it would be easier for You to get board vision, like where are holes, what are main danger and possibility to strike. also it will be easier to set goals according to current position by analyzing what piece what may to for you and your opponent

^careful with the danger thing, dont want them to play scared because of seeing ghosts everywhere...

7...Nxh6 was an ~2 second decision.

who cares about the time?!? im not trying to pull your leg here, sponge, but if i as a beginner paid a coach and they told me that i would fire them into the sun!

what is a 2 second decision for me or you is not a 2 second decision for our friend there is what you got to understand, what i am trying to do is forget the time forget best/worst piece forget plans, just ask what does this move do? aha, thats it, i blundered my queen, rinse and repeat, practice like alice, play like we are in wonderland

@g6firste6second said in #13:

... what i am trying to do is forget the time forget best/worst piece forget plans, just ask what does this move do? aha, thats it, i blundered my queen, ...
Offhand, I would guess that, in the

https://lichess.org/OFpKwp9P

game, after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 dxc4 4 e4 e6 5 Bxc4 Bb4 6 Bd2 Qxd4 7 Bh6 Nxh6 8 Qxd4, Aldiyar2132 was aware that the queen had been blundered.

One blunders a bishop, the opponent blunders a queen, all because they think only 2-3 seconds while they have 9 minutes available on their clocks.

Offhand, I would guess that, in the lichess.org/OFpKwp9P
game, after 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 dxc4 4 e4 e6 5 Bxc4 Bb4 6 Bd2 Qxd4 7 Bh6 Nxh6 8 Qxd4, Aldiyar2132 was aware that the queen had been blundered.

not the end of the world when down a queen for knight and pawn against a 900 rated player =] both players played on valiantly and we clap our clapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclap

Stop sucking.

You can achieve this by studying a topic you are bad at until you get good at it.
Then pick another one, rinse and repeat.

You gain nothing by studying and practicing what you know. You gain a lot by studying and practicing what you don't know.

@Alientcp said in #17:

... by studying a topic you are bad at until you get good at it. ...
As far as I know, there are no generally accepted standards for "good"ness on chess topics.

@kindaspongey said in #18:

As far as I know, there are no generally accepted standards for "good"ness on chess topics.

If that topic manages to win a game, or draw it if he was losing, and/or raises his level to another height, its good enough, until it isnt and he has to go at it again.

And between not knowing a topic and knowing it to any degree, the latter is better.

So long he sees improvements, he shouldnt care what you think "good" is for you or anyone else.