Originally posted by scoop122Yes get yourself up to 1600+ and hold it there.
any hints for now?
Read Thread 39309 and Thread 49595 by User 114275 as there is a lot of good advice in there.
As soon as I get myself to 2000 I will post here how I did it!
Originally posted by BLReidOK a few more pointers and these really are simple.
Hey DF, I'd settle for a how to get to 1900 tip sheet if you never get to 2000.
BLR
I believe everyone has a latent level of ability to which you will rise and then reach a plateau. You reach this latent level once you have a reasonable grasp of opening strategy, tactics, middle game strategy and how to force the most likely wins in the end game. In fact you know enough about how to win in the end game to avoid most situations that are likely to lose or give draws, (for example you tend to avoid getting down to 2Ns or a Rook pawn blocked by opponents King and you understand opposition. Hell you can even force the win with a lone B & N if you really have to). This latent ability you never forget - its like riding a bicycle (you don't use one for 25 years then get straight back on and off you go). In my case that level is between 1700 and 1800. I have good years and bad years but never drop out of this range. When I did not play chess for 10 years I was back there from my very first game.
OK now you must get up to your level of latent ability before you even try to progress further so work on the basics as outlined in previous threads. If you are struggling with basic opening principles, tactics and how to win a simple end game then you have no chance. So get there first. After that its hard work, like studying for your degree, and a certain level of commitment is required. Of course if you a lucky one your level of latent ability will be 2000+ anyway so it will be easy for you and this thread will be irrelevant. The bad news is the further away your latent ability is from your target the harder work it is to get there .
Of course this tread is not all about me telling you how. I am not that conceited to think I can even do it but if I stick to my plan I think I will. It is, however, also for players currently rated 2000+ to tell us how they got there.
Some thoughts... despite my RHP rating struggling badly... 🙂
Find your own path. There may be some common advice that applies to many players, but the more one progresses, the more their training has to be specific to their needs. Thorough and honest analysis of one’s own games should provide what the weaknesses/needs are. It’s possible that in terms of weaknesses, a given 2200 and 1900 player can have more in common than two 2200 players or two 1900 players.
Consider a coach. Yes, they are usually costly. I can’t suggest any way round the cost, but I will say that working with a good coach revealed many fundamental flaws in the way I play and train. For the last year I’ve not really used a coach. Prior to that I had consistent help for a couple of years. My OTB improvement has recently halted and part of my plan to tackle this issue is to use a coach again (via ICC and e-mail).
Don’t fool yourself regarding what hard work actually is. Long hours is not necessarily proof of hard work. Reading many books is not definite proof either. Playing higher rated players can be done without applying full effort. Etc. etc. Real hard work is when you genuinely stretch your abilities and push your limits. You should feel strained during the training, and probably tired afterwards. Compare doing a hard physical run as opposed to a walk in the park; duration alone means nothing.
Don’t equate “improvement” with “learning more”. More often the real problem is fixing our current assumptions, prejudices and habits regarding what chess is and what it requires to play well. However, it’s far easier to pick up a book than try to change a habit which has existed for years. But the latter is often more important.
Try to forget about ratings. If you want to assess your ability or improvement, rather than look at ratings, pick out your recent games that you are proud of. Imagine you have to present these to an audience. When you start using this attitude, it encourages you to take pride in every move that you make, rather than thinking about the end result.
Originally posted by VarenkaI can fault absolutely nothing you have said there. All 100% valid and as a player already above 2000 you suggestions must be taken seriously.
Some thoughts... despite my RHP rating struggling badly... 🙂
Find your own path. There may be some common advice that applies to many players, but the more one progresses, the more their training has to be specific to their needs. Thorough and honest analysis of one’s own games should provide what the weaknesses/needs are. It’s possible that in terms ...[text shortened]... urages you to take pride in every move that you make, rather than thinking about the end result.
Anyway a view little tips:
1. Always take your opponents seriously. Assume they all are stronger than you and play accordingly. I have lost dozens of games against much weaker opposition because I thought the game would be easy.
2. Don't play blitz. This is a correspondence chess site so use your time. If the position is difficult put it aside and come back to it again later. Even if you think you know the best move it is surprising what you see on a second look.
3. Try and play stronger opposition, i.e. opponents rated within about 150 points of you, preferably above. Lets say you are rated 1800 and play 30 games against players rated 1400. You should win most of them but not all. Each win gains you 1 rating point, each loss loses you 32 and a draw loses you 16. You will lose or draw some but at the end of it all even if you score 95% your rating will not rise. But what happens if you play 30 players graded 2200 and score 85%. Your grade will probably rise by about 50 points. But it goes behond this as, playing weaker players you get complacent and don't play seriously, your wins usually occur because they blunder and you don't learn anything, in fact you learn to get careless - you lose rating points. Stronger players you have to take seriously, you play better and learn from their more accurate play. You learn, improve and play even better next time.
Come on you 2000+ players lets hear your advice on how to do it, after all I am not there yet and judging by the number of lost games I have backing up I may never make it.
Anyway my next pointer
4. Study your games, learn from your weaknesses and adjust your play accordingly.
Does that make sense? I hope so and there are a number of ways that you can put this into practice. In the middle game if you mess up complex tactical positions then avoid those opening lines that take you that way. You already know a number of openings well and get good results with them against players rated under 1800 but you may not be achieving the same results against players rated higher than that.
For example I have been playing the Morra Gambit (1. e5 .. c4, 2. d4 .. cd, 3. c3 .. dc, 4. nXc3) for years with good results but lately I have found that against stronger players I am struggling and simply going into the middle and end games a pawn down. My last 7 Morra Gambits were W3 D1 L3 (not a great result with white). Its time for a change - a more solid opening perhaps that doesn't give away a pawn. My first 2 games since this decision are 2. c3 and are in progress. We will have to see how it goes but there is no point in continuing with openings that don't get positive results.
Similarly, I looked at my games as white against the French Defense and found, contrary to my expectations that my results with the advance variation were far better than the exchange variation so I have stopped playing the exchange as we will see how it goes.
Of course if you don't know your openings well now is the time to study them.