So... I've improved but now realize I don't know what I'm doing

Between Chess.com and here I've gone from around 1050 to 1500 ish. (not too sure the different ratings systems are comparable, but this post is about the stuff I don't know... so...) I've spent some time doing the tactics puzzles which really seemed to help, and I only play two different openings... if I can help it.

Most of the improvement is just not giving games away by blundering material, or actively remembering to look for the best move, but when I have the computer analyze my games, even my wins, it finds so many mistakes and blunders... and sometimes I can't even understand why my move was worse...

It's fun to win more I guess, but the most fun games are really intense and not slaughters. Then there is the fact that no matter whether I win or lose, there is always the computer analysis reminding me how badly I'm actually playing.

I guess I'm trying to decide if I want to take the time to do the study necessary to understand what is actually going on during a Chess game.

But I do sort of wonder... Playing Chess is kind of like trying to figure out how water flows. You know eddies, and foam... temporary structures in a very complex system but which repeat over and over again.

If you are analyzing your game, you should be able to spot and correct anything that the engine classifies as a blunder fairly easily. Blunders involve significant losses of material (basically a minor piece or more). Mistakes are not always so clear, but usually there is a definitely better move available.

Just as a note, IMHO, it's better not to use the computer to analyze your game until you've actually tried to analyze it yourself. You should be able to spot the major blunders or turning points in the game, and should try to work out on your own what would have been better.

I took a peek at your most recent game:



19. This is a blunder because your opponent left the knight on e7 hanging and you didn't take it. This move is pretty crushing since you will probably win the other knight as well, actually.

22. This move puts your knight on a strong, active square and will be fairly difficult for your opponent to dislodge it easily. The move you made ends up losing you a pawn.

30. The computer's suggest Rd1 means that you either win the opponent's knight outright, or exchange a knight for a rook.

@BlogintonBlakley

You definitely came to the right spot.

-

"...temporary structures in a very complex system but which repeat over and over again."

This seems like it's a fairly accurate assessment.

The fact that you would assign this metaphor including words like "structure" and "system", instead of thinking about chess as being a strictly academic and tactical exercise in calculation, is already a very good sign.

You are asking about a very specific topic matter.
You are wondering about how deep the 'fundamental' rabbit hole actually goes.

This playlist is dedicated to digging deeper and clarifying the depth and bredth of chess.

It is dedicated to giving a lower-rated player a much broader view of the game by examining and showcasing various chess fundamentals.

Outside of winning pieces directly, or not losing pieces directly, chess fundamentals are the bedrock at the heart of chess.

-

Fundamentals provide the possibility, opportunity, and potential for advantageous offensive/defensive tactics in a position.

Without the pieces on the appropriate squares, nothing good, offensively or defensively, is possible.

This is what the chess fundamentals and computer evaluations are all about.

-

Keep us posted on your progress!

-

www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwoSSBBPePE3kvVA_PLIXmrBuP3hhwhKz

Nobody knows they are doing. the higher ranked you get the more you will feel like you don't know anything