- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

I am finding chess extremely depressing.

#11

Try not to chase rating. I get my best ratings when I only play well. That usually feels easy. I like chess to be relaxed and fun. When it comes to openings you might want to try solid openings like Ruy Lopez. I mostly play such openings, except maybe in my bullet games. I don't see any need for gambits for my own games. I don't think many lower rated players memorize opening moves. It's probably more something for 2200 rated players and up that need a lot of opening knowledge. Knowing good opening principles and a very small number of moves in the common solid openings should be enough to get to my rating, since that's the opening knowledge I have.

Try not to chase rating. I get my best ratings when I only play well. That usually feels easy. I like chess to be relaxed and fun. When it comes to openings you might want to try solid openings like Ruy Lopez. I mostly play such openings, except maybe in my bullet games. I don't see any need for gambits for my own games. I don't think many lower rated players memorize opening moves. It's probably more something for 2200 rated players and up that need a lot of opening knowledge. Knowing good opening principles and a very small number of moves in the common solid openings should be enough to get to my rating, since that's the opening knowledge I have.
#12

By an Unknown Composer ... Page Numbers 268 - 269 in ... Lasker's Manual Of Chess . THAT is part of the reason we play Chess !! A Perpetual check by two knights over 17 moves around the board & back through the whole black army of pieces & pawns

By an Unknown Composer ... Page Numbers 268 - 269 in ... Lasker's Manual Of Chess . THAT is part of the reason we play Chess !! A Perpetual check by two knights over 17 moves around the board & back through the whole black army of pieces & pawns
#13

Failure implies you're doing something and not succeeding at it.

But it sounds to me like you've decided you're failing, and feeling bad about that failure, without even trying.

What are you doing to improve?

Come up with an improvement plan you'd be proud to share.

Start by promising yourself you'll use the time on your clock to try to find better moves, and stop moving in seconds.

If you start a 30 minute game, spend 30 minutes thinking.

Failure implies you're doing something and not succeeding at it. But it sounds to me like you've decided you're failing, and feeling bad about that failure, without even trying. What are you doing to improve? Come up with an improvement plan you'd be proud to share. Start by promising yourself you'll use the time on your clock to try to find better moves, and stop moving in seconds. If you start a 30 minute game, spend 30 minutes thinking.
#14

@myocarditis said in #1:

Okay, posting here because my failure to improve at chess is starting to impact on my mental health. First of all this is about my 7th or 8th account so my games on here aren't an accurate reflection of what I've put into this game so far.

First of all, why do I play chess? I don't enjoy the game, to me it is a massive issue that I am beaten all of the time by ~1200-1300 players, I consider myself a pretty intelligent person, I was a high achiever at school, have written several books etc, to me chess is this abnormality in my life which I need to correct by at least achieving a 1700-1900 rating, it drives me literally mad that I am not at the level I expect of myself, I feel like a huge failure and disappointment because of my realities playing this game.

I feel like we've been sold a lie by Youtubers, e.g. take Eric Rosen playing the Stafford Gambit and winning game after game, I watch the video, try it, and literally no player falls into any of the traps which happen on Youtube, I feel like we are being sold this myth that we will get the glory and fame of getting good at chess when 99% of us it will NEVER happen, we simply do not have the mental ability to do what professional players do.

Example - how many openings are there and gambits to learn and memorise? 100s, each with 100s of variations and confusing names, there is literally no way to beat somebody who has memorised all of these lines which requires a brain which is good at numbers, repetition and patterns, if you do not have this kind of brain you can't get good at chess.

Tactics - yes okay but if you try to use tactics against somebody who has memorised all of the movesets you are just wasting your time. Endgames - comes down to pure number crunching and as per the above, you will get smashed on openings anyway.

In terms of puzzles yes I do them, half are really easy, half I just stare at for hours then get wrong because there is no obvious way to proceed within them. Games, I have tried to focus on E4/D4 openings but even 1200 players seem to have learned all the openings and play some crazy counter, I am also convinced half the players on here are cheating with other chess engines open and stuff.

I guess I am just feeling so disillusioned right now, the other thing is half of the coaching resources out there etc are just money-grabbing schemes aimed at selling you this idea that you'll get good, but I guess there is a part of me now wondering if it is just futile and I should just stop playing chess so that I feel better about myself? Another part of me wants so badly to keep trying, but I find chess so ultimately depressing now, the anger I feel every time I lose, the amount of focus I put on my rating all the time and the fact that it isn't good enough,, that maybe someone like me should just quit for my own health?

Umm see this is too long to read so just by the title i guess that i also face the same issue but i don't feel bad for that because sometimes we are not good at all things i also want to achieve 2000 but i am not able to so i created another account and i got the default rating (1500) so don't get depressed ok , and if you care to much for your rating maybe you should play casual games and improve with comps , my suggestion is not to take chess way too seriously, so it is not bad for your health but now it's on you you wanna leave or not playing chess i would suggest to keep playin' and improve ok ?

Now to the money grabbing scheme ; so technically there is no money grabbing scheme they just teach us what they have learnt and what the have experienced but if you personally think that is not worth to pay them for classes then just go for the free site Mangus Carslen created .
Hope it helped

@myocarditis said in #1: > Okay, posting here because my failure to improve at chess is starting to impact on my mental health. First of all this is about my 7th or 8th account so my games on here aren't an accurate reflection of what I've put into this game so far. > > First of all, why do I play chess? I don't enjoy the game, to me it is a massive issue that I am beaten all of the time by ~1200-1300 players, I consider myself a pretty intelligent person, I was a high achiever at school, have written several books etc, to me chess is this abnormality in my life which I need to correct by at least achieving a 1700-1900 rating, it drives me literally mad that I am not at the level I expect of myself, I feel like a huge failure and disappointment because of my realities playing this game. > > I feel like we've been sold a lie by Youtubers, e.g. take Eric Rosen playing the Stafford Gambit and winning game after game, I watch the video, try it, and literally no player falls into any of the traps which happen on Youtube, I feel like we are being sold this myth that we will get the glory and fame of getting good at chess when 99% of us it will NEVER happen, we simply do not have the mental ability to do what professional players do. > > Example - how many openings are there and gambits to learn and memorise? 100s, each with 100s of variations and confusing names, there is literally no way to beat somebody who has memorised all of these lines which requires a brain which is good at numbers, repetition and patterns, if you do not have this kind of brain you can't get good at chess. > > Tactics - yes okay but if you try to use tactics against somebody who has memorised all of the movesets you are just wasting your time. Endgames - comes down to pure number crunching and as per the above, you will get smashed on openings anyway. > > In terms of puzzles yes I do them, half are really easy, half I just stare at for hours then get wrong because there is no obvious way to proceed within them. Games, I have tried to focus on E4/D4 openings but even 1200 players seem to have learned all the openings and play some crazy counter, I am also convinced half the players on here are cheating with other chess engines open and stuff. > > I guess I am just feeling so disillusioned right now, the other thing is half of the coaching resources out there etc are just money-grabbing schemes aimed at selling you this idea that you'll get good, but I guess there is a part of me now wondering if it is just futile and I should just stop playing chess so that I feel better about myself? Another part of me wants so badly to keep trying, but I find chess so ultimately depressing now, the anger I feel every time I lose, the amount of focus I put on my rating all the time and the fact that it isn't good enough,, that maybe someone like me should just quit for my own health? Umm see this is too long to read so just by the title i guess that i also face the same issue but i don't feel bad for that because sometimes we are not good at all things i also want to achieve 2000 but i am not able to so i created another account and i got the default rating (1500) so don't get depressed ok , and if you care to much for your rating maybe you should play casual games and improve with comps , my suggestion is not to take chess way too seriously, so it is not bad for your health but now it's on you you wanna leave or not playing chess i would suggest to keep playin' and improve ok ? Now to the money grabbing scheme ; so technically there is no money grabbing scheme they just teach us what they have learnt and what the have experienced but if you personally think that is not worth to pay them for classes then just go for the free site Mangus Carslen created . Hope it helped
#15

My advice: Stop playing gambits and instead play more sound openings (sicilian, queen's gambit declined, etc). I personally wouldn't recommend e4 since there are so many traps, and instead play d4 where you have to think positionally rather than play a trap you memorized. Try to think in terms of plans based on what your opponent has done (I know this sounds hard, but just familiarize yourself with all types of different positions like opposite side castling, closed positions, bishops vs knights, knights vs bishops, weaknesses on dark squares, etc) and come up with a plan for each scenario on how to exploit your opponents position (it doesn't even have to be a good ie computer-approved) plan, just something you feel will give your opponents trouble.

As an example, at your level, if your opponent as moved the g-pawn and doesn;t have a dark-squared bishop, you should immediately think about how to mate with your own dark-squared bishop on g6. Or if your opponent has a dark squared bishop and has played g6, think about how to remove his bishop so you can attack.

Good luck! Keep playing, and keep practicing endgames.

You should practice basic endgames as well. Rook endgames are very common, and while most are drawish according to computers, most rook endgames will probably be wins for either side at your level. Use the rook to attack as many enemy pawns as possible, and use your king to not allow your opponent's rook to attack pawns. Be rock solid on mating with queen + king, and with rook + king. Pawn endgames are a lot trickier, but mostly just use your pawns to take away squares from your opponents king so it can't sneak behind any pawns. Other endgames are less useful, but you should know that king vs king + dark-squared bishop + light-corner pawn is a draw, as is king + light-squared bishop + dark-corner pawn.

My advice: Stop playing gambits and instead play more sound openings (sicilian, queen's gambit declined, etc). I personally wouldn't recommend e4 since there are so many traps, and instead play d4 where you have to think positionally rather than play a trap you memorized. Try to think in terms of plans based on what your opponent has done (I know this sounds hard, but just familiarize yourself with all types of different positions like opposite side castling, closed positions, bishops vs knights, knights vs bishops, weaknesses on dark squares, etc) and come up with a plan for each scenario on how to exploit your opponents position (it doesn't even have to be a good ie computer-approved) plan, just something you feel will give your opponents trouble. As an example, at your level, if your opponent as moved the g-pawn and doesn;t have a dark-squared bishop, you should immediately think about how to mate with your own dark-squared bishop on g6. Or if your opponent has a dark squared bishop and has played g6, think about how to remove his bishop so you can attack. Good luck! Keep playing, and keep practicing endgames. You should practice basic endgames as well. Rook endgames are very common, and while most are drawish according to computers, most rook endgames will probably be wins for either side at your level. Use the rook to attack as many enemy pawns as possible, and use your king to not allow your opponent's rook to attack pawns. Be rock solid on mating with queen + king, and with rook + king. Pawn endgames are a lot trickier, but mostly just use your pawns to take away squares from your opponents king so it can't sneak behind any pawns. Other endgames are less useful, but you should know that king vs king + dark-squared bishop + light-corner pawn is a draw, as is king + light-squared bishop + dark-corner pawn.
#16

@myocarditis i tried to take a look in some of your games. You play well. You fight and try to use some tactics in your games. Thats good. Your openings are ok in my opinion. Ruy, Scandinavian are good openings. And you try to use the opening principles. But in the middle game somehow is where you are failing. But in principle „everybody“ fails there. Because it is where we play chess and where most of us make mistakes. A „botez-gambit“ or the „wrong rook“ and the game is over. In my opinion, somehow the middle game theory was missing. But it is ok. Everybody learns it with time.
What i would recommend:

  1. play chess for fun. Do not put so much pressure on yourself.
  2. ANALYZE YOUR GAMES. Without an engine. Write down what you thought and what you thought that the adversary would do. Ask always WHY the last move.
  3. take a look on good commented games. Dont be afraid to mess the position up. Play the sidelines as well. Maybe a second board in this case helps. But i would use only one, because : you are „forced“ to memorise the last position, or to play the game again and again so you can get the idea behind of the moves of the game till the position. This is a very good exercise. And before you make the next move try to find the next move as well.
  4. try to understand each position on the board. What is going on right now. That means you need to look for the imbalances, weak squares, tactical motives (pins, forks, ...), defended/attacked pieces/squares, and so on.
  5. don’t rush. Take your time. Look for the ccts on both sides before moving.

There are some good books in circulation

  1. logical chess
  2. master vs amateur
  3. basic chess
  4. 300 games
  5. ...

Have fun

@myocarditis i tried to take a look in some of your games. You play well. You fight and try to use some tactics in your games. Thats good. Your openings are ok in my opinion. Ruy, Scandinavian are good openings. And you try to use the opening principles. But in the middle game somehow is where you are failing. But in principle „everybody“ fails there. Because it is where we play chess and where most of us make mistakes. A „botez-gambit“ or the „wrong rook“ and the game is over. In my opinion, somehow the middle game theory was missing. But it is ok. Everybody learns it with time. What i would recommend: 1. play chess for fun. Do not put so much pressure on yourself. 2. ANALYZE YOUR GAMES. Without an engine. Write down what you thought and what you thought that the adversary would do. Ask always WHY the last move. 3. take a look on good commented games. Dont be afraid to mess the position up. Play the sidelines as well. Maybe a second board in this case helps. But i would use only one, because : you are „forced“ to memorise the last position, or to play the game again and again so you can get the idea behind of the moves of the game till the position. This is a very good exercise. And before you make the next move try to find the next move as well. 4. try to understand each position on the board. What is going on right now. That means you need to look for the imbalances, weak squares, tactical motives (pins, forks, ...), defended/attacked pieces/squares, and so on. 5. don’t rush. Take your time. Look for the ccts on both sides before moving. There are some good books in circulation 1. logical chess 2. master vs amateur 3. basic chess 4. 300 games 5. ... Have fun
#17

You confuse chess to being a memory contest.
I have looked at your games, and yes you do come out loosing out of the opening more often than not, but that certainly doesn't have anything to do with you opponents knowing theory, or having memorized any traps at all.
You just play without calculating.

https://lichess.org/iiapbd3C/black#8
like what is this, 4.d5??. I would like to hear your thought process on this, did you even calculate any of the captures or let alone found a single profound reason that such a move would be good? Really most of your mistakes come down to simply blundering material, or doing weird stuff for no gain, like moving a piece again to make a one move thread which the opponent can defend with a simple developing move developing.
This game also shows that you have a time management issue. Why do you play 30+0 if you play at blitz speed?

Opening prep doesn't even matter against titled players all that much.
I have beaten a CM and FM with the Sicilian Kan setup and got into a winning endgame against a GM (+7, but i still lost).
You'd think players of that level would know every one of their lines in and out, but that's simply not the reason why they are titled players. The truth is that they just understand chess much better and actually calculate, and sometimes even scarily deep. If you tell any GM that the endgame is unnecessairy because openings decide the game they are gonna die of heart attack.

The overall problem tho, seems to be that you do things only for your ego, to appear smart to your soroundings.
Until you figured that out, I don't think you can truly enjoy anything.

Don't take what i wrote as a personal attack. It's a bit sharp but i think thats what you needed to hear.

You confuse chess to being a memory contest. I have looked at your games, and yes you do come out loosing out of the opening more often than not, but that certainly doesn't have anything to do with you opponents knowing theory, or having memorized any traps at all. You just play without calculating. https://lichess.org/iiapbd3C/black#8 like what is this, 4.d5??. I would like to hear your thought process on this, did you even calculate any of the captures or let alone found a single profound reason that such a move would be good? Really most of your mistakes come down to simply blundering material, or doing weird stuff for no gain, like moving a piece again to make a one move thread which the opponent can defend with a simple developing move developing. This game also shows that you have a time management issue. Why do you play 30+0 if you play at blitz speed? Opening prep doesn't even matter against titled players all that much. I have beaten a CM and FM with the Sicilian Kan setup and got into a winning endgame against a GM (+7, but i still lost). You'd think players of that level would know every one of their lines in and out, but that's simply not the reason why they are titled players. The truth is that they just understand chess much better and actually calculate, and sometimes even scarily deep. If you tell any GM that the endgame is unnecessairy because openings decide the game they are gonna die of heart attack. The overall problem tho, seems to be that you do things only for your ego, to appear smart to your soroundings. Until you figured that out, I don't think you can truly enjoy anything. Don't take what i wrote as a personal attack. It's a bit sharp but i think thats what you needed to hear.
#18

@master_of_DARKNESS said in #2:

I didn't read all that you wrote but i tend to agree, chess fucking sucks. You win you only feel relief, you lose it's painful, and the only time you really laugh out loud is when your opponent stalemates you in a winning position.

The problem is not the game, it's the mindset.

@master_of_DARKNESS said in #2: > I didn't read all that you wrote but i tend to agree, chess fucking sucks. You win you only feel relief, you lose it's painful, and the only time you really laugh out loud is when your opponent stalemates you in a winning position. The problem is not the game, it's the mindset.
#19

@jesgluckner said in #17:

You confuse chess to being a memory contest.
I have looked at your games, and yes you do come out loosing out of the opening more often than not, but that certainly doesn't have anything to do with you opponents knowing theory, or having memorized any traps at all.
You just play without calculating.
like what is this, 4.d5??. I would like to hear your thought process on this, did you even calculate any of the captures or let alone found a single profound reason that such a move would be good? Really most of your mistakes come down to simply blundering material, or doing weird stuff for no gain, like moving a piece again to make a one move thread which the opponent can defend with a simple developing move developing.
This game also shows that you have a time management issue. Why do you play 30+0 if you play at blitz speed?

Opening prep doesn't even matter against titled players all that much.
I have beaten a CM and FM with the Sicilian Kan setup and got into a winning endgame against a GM (+7, but i still lost).
You'd think players of that level would know every one of their lines in and out, but that's simply not the reason why they are titled players. The truth is that they just understand chess much better and actually calculate, and sometimes even scarily deep. If you tell any GM that the endgame is unnecessairy because openings decide the game they are gonna die of heart attack.

The overall problem tho, seems to be that you do things only for your ego, to appear smart to your soroundings.
Until you figured that out, I don't think you can truly enjoy anything.

Don't take what i wrote as a personal attack. It's a bit sharp but i think thats what you needed to hear.
@jesgluckner said in #17:
You confuse chess to being a memory contest.
I have looked at your games, and yes you do come out loosing out of the opening more often than not, but that certainly doesn't have anything to do with you opponents knowing theory, or having memorized any traps at all.
You just play without calculating.
like what is this, 4.d5??. I would like to hear your thought process on this, did you even calculate any of the captures or let alone found a single profound reason that such a move would be good? Really most of your mistakes come down to simply blundering material, or doing weird stuff for no gain, like moving a piece again to make a one move thread which the opponent can defend with a simple developing move developing.
This game also shows that you have a time management issue. Why do you play 30+0 if you play at blitz speed?

Opening prep doesn't even matter against titled players all that much.
I have beaten a CM and FM with the Sicilian Kan setup and got into a winning endgame against a GM (+7, but i still lost).
You'd think players of that level would know every one of their lines in and out, but that's simply not the reason why they are titled players. The truth is that they just understand chess much better and actually calculate, and sometimes even scarily deep. If you tell any GM that the endgame is unnecessairy because openings decide the game they are gonna die of heart attack.

The overall problem tho, seems to be that you do things only for your ego, to appear smart to your soroundings.
Until you figured that out, I don't think you can truly enjoy anything.

Don't take what i wrote as a personal attack. It's a bit sharp but i think thats what you needed to hear.

I really don't understand what's wrong with the d5 move, I saw an advantage to break out of a closed position so I pushed it knowing I could travel all the way to the queen and equalise if the opponent took my hanging pawn?? Maybe I am missing something fundamental here but isn't pushing the centre and developing pieces the goal here?

@jesgluckner said in #17: > You confuse chess to being a memory contest. > I have looked at your games, and yes you do come out loosing out of the opening more often than not, but that certainly doesn't have anything to do with you opponents knowing theory, or having memorized any traps at all. > You just play without calculating. > like what is this, 4.d5??. I would like to hear your thought process on this, did you even calculate any of the captures or let alone found a single profound reason that such a move would be good? Really most of your mistakes come down to simply blundering material, or doing weird stuff for no gain, like moving a piece again to make a one move thread which the opponent can defend with a simple developing move developing. > This game also shows that you have a time management issue. Why do you play 30+0 if you play at blitz speed? > > Opening prep doesn't even matter against titled players all that much. > I have beaten a CM and FM with the Sicilian Kan setup and got into a winning endgame against a GM (+7, but i still lost). > You'd think players of that level would know every one of their lines in and out, but that's simply not the reason why they are titled players. The truth is that they just understand chess much better and actually calculate, and sometimes even scarily deep. If you tell any GM that the endgame is unnecessairy because openings decide the game they are gonna die of heart attack. > > The overall problem tho, seems to be that you do things only for your ego, to appear smart to your soroundings. > Until you figured that out, I don't think you can truly enjoy anything. > > Don't take what i wrote as a personal attack. It's a bit sharp but i think thats what you needed to hear. @jesgluckner said in #17: > You confuse chess to being a memory contest. > I have looked at your games, and yes you do come out loosing out of the opening more often than not, but that certainly doesn't have anything to do with you opponents knowing theory, or having memorized any traps at all. > You just play without calculating. > like what is this, 4.d5??. I would like to hear your thought process on this, did you even calculate any of the captures or let alone found a single profound reason that such a move would be good? Really most of your mistakes come down to simply blundering material, or doing weird stuff for no gain, like moving a piece again to make a one move thread which the opponent can defend with a simple developing move developing. > This game also shows that you have a time management issue. Why do you play 30+0 if you play at blitz speed? > > Opening prep doesn't even matter against titled players all that much. > I have beaten a CM and FM with the Sicilian Kan setup and got into a winning endgame against a GM (+7, but i still lost). > You'd think players of that level would know every one of their lines in and out, but that's simply not the reason why they are titled players. The truth is that they just understand chess much better and actually calculate, and sometimes even scarily deep. If you tell any GM that the endgame is unnecessairy because openings decide the game they are gonna die of heart attack. > > The overall problem tho, seems to be that you do things only for your ego, to appear smart to your soroundings. > Until you figured that out, I don't think you can truly enjoy anything. > > Don't take what i wrote as a personal attack. It's a bit sharp but i think thats what you needed to hear. I really don't understand what's wrong with the d5 move, I saw an advantage to break out of a closed position so I pushed it knowing I could travel all the way to the queen and equalise if the opponent took my hanging pawn?? Maybe I am missing something fundamental here but isn't pushing the centre and developing pieces the goal here?
#20

@myocarditis
@myocarditis said in #19:

I really don't understand what's wrong with the d5 move, I saw an advantage to break out of a closed position so I pushed it knowing I could travel all the way to the queen and equalise if the opponent took my hanging pawn?? Maybe I am missing something fundamental here but isn't pushing the centre and developing pieces the goal here?

I would fall for the same thing here. You are dev your pieces, fighting for the center. This is great, but here The problem is that:

  1. take a look where the white bishop is. Who is it attacking?
  2. Go a little bit deeper. Who is in the same diagonal?
  3. who was one of the defenders of the knight?
  4. can the pawn in d5 be taken? By who? Can you move the knight after that?
  5. how about the e5 pawn? Who is its defender? Can you move the knight after d5?

If you try to check the ccts, tactical motives especially forks and pins, you will avoid a lot of trouble.

@myocarditis @myocarditis said in #19: > I really don't understand what's wrong with the d5 move, I saw an advantage to break out of a closed position so I pushed it knowing I could travel all the way to the queen and equalise if the opponent took my hanging pawn?? Maybe I am missing something fundamental here but isn't pushing the centre and developing pieces the goal here? I would fall for the same thing here. You are dev your pieces, fighting for the center. This is great, but here The problem is that: 1. take a look where the white bishop is. Who is it attacking? 2. Go a little bit deeper. Who is in the same diagonal? 3. who was one of the defenders of the knight? 4. can the pawn in d5 be taken? By who? Can you move the knight after that? 5. how about the e5 pawn? Who is its defender? Can you move the knight after d5? If you try to check the ccts, tactical motives especially forks and pins, you will avoid a lot of trouble.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.