Newb's Gambit

I'm a Netflix sucker like 90% of you watching this For Beginners thread.  How long before we lose interest and move on to the next fad?

Like most newbs who take the game seriously, my rating rises steadily -- just passing 4 figures I believe I play around 1200.  Is that about where the curve flattens?  I beat 1400 bots.

Bots strength , especially weaker bots, is overrated by a few hundred points. When I was around 1 300+ I was able to beat 1 800 bots which wouldn't normally happen with 1 800 rated humans.

Try to enjoy the process of improving. Learn about chess, either from books or , for now, from free resources of YouTube. Play games, try analyzing them afterwards, solve tactical puzzles and all that... You have a gold membership, do puzzles here, some drills as well. 

These tips might be of use as well:

https://www.chess.com/blog/nklristic/the-beginners-tale-first-steps-to-chess-improvement

Thanks, precisely my experience with bots.  Please see my other question for context.  I found this list, which suggests players emerging from novice (poor) to beginner (trying) basically reach 50% percentile.  As I inferred, this seems about where the learning curve steepens. 
http://www.uschess.org/archive/ratings/ratedist.php

What do you mean by flattens? You mean like the point where the progression is much slower? Well yeah, after initial improvement it gets a bit slower, and on really high levels, I presume it is even slower.  It is only logical.

I am not sure how can I analyze the link in that regard, but as far as I can see, up to 1800 USCF, there are over 3 000 people in every category. But you can say that it starts declining a lot from 1 700 upwards. That is probably the time where more serious amateurs continue to improve, and the others just plays more casually. Now, we don't know what is their average time of improvement, but it is not that important for our individual cases anyway. 

In any case, you can surely improve a lot from where you are now, depending on the time and effort you are willing to spend on it. 

Indeed, which seems to agree with published numbers and my experience to-date.  I expect to reach 1200 with the skills you describe.  1700 will require deeper study and anything beyond that, for me, seems a bridge too far -- no one can master chess and fly fishing.  My basic question is: at what point do the Netflix fadbait players lose interest; will be interesting to see.  I notice chess.com is hiring, so maybe mass attrition is still some time off.  I'm betting most quit between 1200-1700.  Thanks again.

No problem. And you know, there will be those who stays in that range, but will continue playing without the incentive to improve. Chess improvement is great, but chess is fun (at least for me) on lower levels as well. But yeah, a lot of people will quit eventually. 

Full disclosure:  I am more likely to achieve IM than fly fishing mastery.  No tougher match than a 3 pound trout on #6 tippet!

This just in:  multiple matches vs two novice players got abandoned, likely disillusioned QG NFLX foes.  This would make for a good attrition metric.

There is no set place where the curb flattens. Some people have an analytical nature, and advance much higher than others. 

However, there are two plateaus.

The first is when you need to actually put some time into your chess and learn positional ideas, checkmate patterns, 2 ~ 4 moves into each opening and what each one is trying to accomplish. You are going to have to memorize sharp lines of the openings you like to play. 

The second one is the 1800 graveyard.  You make it to the chess 1%, but you are still garbage compared to a title player, and the only way to advance is to study master games all day, every day. 

Haha well put.  I'm getting to 1200 pretty easy -- skillset articulated deftly above -- but anecdotal evidence suggests a large set in my class is abandoning game.  I might study more and play less while pushing toward 1700.  I'll either get there and get divorced, or abandon the game in the process.  In any case, I'll probably go back to chasing fish at the poker felt before I swim with the 10% -- 1% was a typo?  I would love to know how chess.com is modeling future demand.  Thanks again.

Found website that lends insight.