Can't get above 1400 in rapid, is it helpless?

@MrPushwood said in #10:
> The record shows that you have been above 1400 several times already. (Oh yeah, and Please STOP nagging people on your Profile page!)

I think I just got lucky those several times. But you are right about my negative profile message, I shall change it now :)

Thank you everyone for your responses and advices, I really appreciate it.

Hi,

I completely understand the frustration of not seeing progress in your chess rating, despite your efforts. As someone who has also gone through similar phases, I'd like to share a few personal tips:

1. **Don't Give Up Too Soon**: Chess is a game of perseverance. Every loss provides a learning opportunity. Try to continue playing even after losing a pawn; you might be surprised how often the game can still turn around.

2. **Analyze Your Games**: Take the time to review your games, especially the ones you lose. There's always something to learn, be it a tactical misjudgment or a strategic misplay.

3. **Focused Training**: Tactics and endgames are key areas. Daily tactical puzzles can significantly improve your game strength. Likewise, endgame training is crucial for converting winning positions into victories.

4. **Maintain Balance**: Chess should be enjoyable. If you find it's causing more frustration than joy, allow yourself a short break. Often, a little distance can help you return with renewed motivation and a fresh perspective.

Please remember, chess is a journey and every journey has its ups and downs. Every player has faced such challenges. The important thing is to continue finding joy in the game and learning from each match.

Keep at it, and best of luck!

Warm regards,
Tobi

@Enlightenmania2022 said in #1:
> ... I've been trying for months now (just playing the 10+0s), ...
@AlexiHarvey said in #6:
> Well giving your Classical rating your Rapid rating will
> improve if you play 15+10s - albeit you may have to wait
> more between games. The longer the time format the less
> likely you are to meet players who play to flag, and little else! ...
"... Most internet players think that 30 5 is slow, but that is unlikely slow enough to play 'real' chess. You need a game slow enough so that for most of the game you have time to consider all your candidate moves as well as your opponent’s possible replies that at least include his checks, captures, and serious threats, to make sure you can meet all of them. For the average OTB player G/90 is about the fastest, which might be roughly 60 10 online, where there is some delay. But there is no absolute; some people think faster than others and others can play real chess faster because of experience. Many internet players are reluctant to play slower than 30 5 so you might have to settle for that as a 'slow' game." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
web.archive.org/web/20140627010008/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman12.pdf
Perhaps, back in 2002, it was realistic to try to "settle" for "30 5", but, these days, I suspect that one is obliged to accept "15+10s". Perhaps, some people improve on a steady diet of "10+0s" games, but it seems that progress is often slow with that approach. In that "10+0" httpscolon//lichessperiodorg/Bxd8RLxB game (1 e4 c5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 Bc4 g6 4 f4 Bg7 5 Bxf7+ Kxf7 6 Nf3 Bxc3 7 dxc3 d6 8 O-O Bg4 9 Ng5+ 1-0), 8...Bg4 was played after about 12 seconds. Tactical mistakes are harder to avoid, playing at that pace.

Absolutely not, do not quit chess! Check your DMs.

When I was below 1500 last March, here's what I did almost every single day:

1. Played at least 10 games of rapid on Lichess.
2. Requested computer analysis for every game that day.
3. Inputted every blunder into ANKI.
4. Reviewed ANKI before tomorrow's game.

Keep in mind that chess can be very personal. What works for other people can be not working for you.
Just find some training routines that :

1. you are able to do everyday in the long run and
2. you can more or less enjoy it.

@kindaspongey said in #14:
> 8...Bg4 was played after about 12 seconds. Tactical mistakes are harder to avoid, playing at that pace.

Pity the insights do not offer graphs of accuracy/ACPL depending on time control. It might be interesting to see how game speed affects the quality of one's moves.

There is accuracy/ACPL depending on move time but that can be quite misleading. For example, I was quite surprised to see that I have accuracy over 97% for moves played in 0-5 seconds (99.9% for 1-3s) and way worse for 10-30s (74%) or >30s (80%). (The ACPL values were similar.) Does it mean that the more I think, the worse I play? Not really... the three intervals 0-1s, 1-3s and 3-5s in fact cover only less then 15% of all moves in the set so most likely the causal connection works the other way: I only play fast when I'm completely sure about the move and it's either obvious or was already precalculated.

@Enlightenmania2022 In addition to what @D1visionByZer0 wrote, I already posted some suggestions and hints in other forum threads - you may check some of them out...

lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/cheaters-and-cheating?page=3#28

lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/what-should-i-do-to-prepare-for-an-otb-tournament#3
lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/what-should-i-do-to-prepare-for-an-otb-tournament#5

lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/not-understanding-this-puzzle?page=2#11

Good luck on your lifelong chess journey!

@mkubecek said in #17:
> Pity the insights do not offer graphs of accuracy/ACPL depending on time control. It might be interesting to see how game speed affects the quality of one's moves.
...

There isn't much data on this effect. However if you go back a few decades there are graphs of how time per move effects old chess computers of various strengths. Put simply the stronger a chess computer is on, say 30s per move, the less it benefits from more time, and the weaker the more it benefits. Pretty much all chess computers of that era can play at ~1800 if you are prepared to wait around for a response, a strong chess computer is more a question of convenience than anything else.

I am pretty sure the weaker a human player is the more they will be penalised as time formats durations reduce. Even 15+30s is a bit dodgy in my experience - pretty much all entertainment with the illusion of 'improvement'. Of course it depends on who you are and what your playing strength is, mine is around the 1500 OTB mark.

Again in my own experience I have more or less given up on on-line games for improvement, instead playing old chess computers giving myself infinite time to filter out errors due to time constraints - errors I do make are defective thinking. Although I have no evidence that this is best I am certain beginners and weaker players - who are aiming to improve rather then entertain - should avoid playing on-line altogether. On-line is purely entertainment and as such on-line ratings are of little empirical value. Certainly variations in on-line ratings should never be taken seriously for the vast majority of players.

PS: For what it's worth. The very early 4-bit chess computers relied only on pure tactical calculation for there playing strength - no opening books etc - against human players in tournaments they got ratings approaching 2000 OTB. If you are under, say 1800, then pretty much tactics should be your major priority to improving your game results. You could argue differently but there is little objective evidence to support alternatives.

"... This book is the first volume in a series of manuals designed for players who are building the foundations of their chess knowledge. The reader will receive the necessary basic knowledge in six areas of the game - tactics, positional play, strategy, the calculation of variations, the opening and the endgame. ... To make the book entertaining and varied, I have mixed up these different areas, ..." - GM Artur Yusupov
www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/Revision&Exam1-excerpt.pdf