Beginner [currently 178 elo] needs help…badly!

I’m trying to improve to what once was a 450 elo rating in 2015. Maybe a few years out of the game has legitimately done this to my skill level or maybe there are way more good players stuck at 200-400 than when I began learning in 2015.

Either way I’m a few weeks back and it is very frustrating to lose so badly to a player claiming to be 200 elo yet seemingly moving at blitz speeds. Surely they are much better and I’m not just imagining this.

Anyway, I’m looking for some advice for my last two losses. The first one is the most recent (slight rant above):

[1]
Check out this #chess game: baDriRaghav vs KaiiRhys - https://www.chess.com/live/game/102882668655

[2]
Check out this #chess game: KaiiRhys vs HTownTXns - https://www.chess.com/live/game/101275480344

No excuses. These are both terrible games and my frustration clearly shows but I need to improve and these were 2 annoying ones I need to address!

Thanks, and if at all possible could you also advise on my skill level… if I’m really awful or should be a higher elo etc. I’m confused as I can beat the computer at 1100 but getting destroyed by 200’s online. I’m trying to get a grasp of where I am, what I need to do next and how long to achieve this so I can make realistic goals. I need to make small goals or I will end up quitting and I really want to achieve over 1000 elo.

Game one started of good then you just hung 3 pieces, working on reducing one move mistakes will greatly help you

Game 2 was just filled to the brim with one move blunders, try to think of your opponents possible moves before playing yours and look for threats they have

How did I hang 3 pieces? I was covering my defenses but lost due to them bringing out queen. Should I be researching defense to offensive queen players? Every move they made after I blundered seemed well thought out yet they moved really quick. Thoughts? Tips?

Regarding game 2, any tips on looking for threats or working out what the player is trying to do. Other than going for CM, taking hung pieces, what should I be learning? I don’t understand forks or much theory etc so maybe I need to do something related to this?

reducing one move blunders and working on opening principles

The easiest way to increase your rating at your level:

1. Slow down between moves. Make sure you are not making mistakes before you make a move. Don't blunder.

2. learn the scholar's mate and fried liver. At your rating most people won't know them.

3. Always try cover your pieces. Never leave a piece hanging, if you can help it.

really it's just a time thing the more you play the better you'll get and you have to play consistently I would also watch Gotham chess he's a YouTuber who if you watch his videos will really change how you play I promise.

you're over thinking it: Play better, learn some opening theory, and don't overthink it! You're not at the level where you have to learn theory (though doing so would help) or get a coach. Play games and you'll progress. Don't worry about elo, just play.
Also I watch games by Hikaru, and they're pretty instructive, though hard to follow. Maybe check his channel out and see if you're interested.

all tricks i know:

Fried liver

ICBM gambit

Englund gambit as black

(if e4 then just play openings you know)

When you play 6. ..Nxe4, even ignoring the queens, they can just take your knight. This is bad: after that the score would be +2. Try not to trade down like this.

Not ignoring the queens, after a move like 6. Qg5 you should take time to see what is attacked. Moving the queen out early is bad, so to play against it you just have to play calmly and not drop pieces. In this case, the only piece the queen attacks which isn't defended is the pawn on g7, so you need to protect this (for example, castling is probably the safest move here). Then after everything is safe you can try to attack the queen and get them to waste time moving it.

Nobody wants to know what you were doing when you left your pieces undefended. I mean YOU don't want to know that. It's irrelevant.

What you need (and, hence, WANT) to know, is what you should have been doing prior to play your move.

Which is a thing that has got, actually, nothing to do with chess, but more with your perception of reality.

There is no way around it, no tips, just plain nothing at all, but accept and integrate once and for ever that you MUST check on pending material prior to play EACH of your moves.

If you can't do that, for a reason or an other, then you should not even drive a vehicle nor do anything that could end up in an accident.

So, forget about tips, forget about "chess", focus on self control.

I had a quick look at your first game. You were doing ok until you took the e4 pawn with your knight.

Don't worry about "openings" just yet, most likely your opponent isn't going to follow "book moves" just yet. During the initial phase of the game, focus on a few guidelines.

Get a pawn in the Centre (you did that with e5).
Develop a Knight before your Bishop (you got your Knights out, at developed your Kingside Bishop).
Get your King Castled (you didn't get your King to safety. That left your Kingside Knight Pawn undefended, which your opponent targeted with their Queen. So when you took their e4 pawn with your knight, you you revealed an attack on their Queen, true, but White could escape by taking your g pawn (as in the game), or even trading the Queens and then capturing your Knight on e4). Had your King been safely tucked away by castling, then your g pawn would be protected, and you could focus on getting your other pieces into the game. Castling on move 5, rather than playing d6, for example, would have been a good time for that.
As Black, when a game starts 1. e4 e5, generally your primary goal is to try and win White's e pawn by getting to the point you can play d5. Have a look at that game, but pretend you castled on move 5. Now, stop and look at the position. Something to note would be how White's pawn on d3 leaves a "hole" on d4. Their Knight on f3 covers d4, but you have a pawn, a bishop, and a Knight aiming at that square, so you are the one who controls d4. Also, White's Knight on c3 means White can't push their c pawn to influence d4. That d4 square would be a nice spot for your c6 Knight, and even if White trades their Knight for yours, you can recapture with your bishop. That would free up your own c pawn, so you could think about advancing that one square, with the idea of then moving your d pawn to d5, which means you can now either take White's e-pawn or recapture if they play ed by cd.
Generally, with the Black pieces, your goal in the opening is to get your pieces developed and to "catch up". White has a small advantage because they get the first move, so with the Black pieces you're really just trying to get everything into the game, by which point the first move advantage usually disappears. And again, in 1. e4 e5 type games, as Black, focus on developing and getting castled, all with the general idea of working out how you can get rid of White's e-pawn, and that's usually done if you can get to play d5.
Ideas are general principles, but you also have to remember what immediate opportunities are on the board - not just for you but more importantly, what opportunities does your opponent have? Once their queen came out, I think you had a particular sequence of moves in mind when you took the e4 pawn, probably involving them moving their Queen back to safety. But your opponent didn't follow your idea, they followed their own and took the free pawn! Always double check that a sequence of moves that you think works really well for you is a sequence that your opponent has to follow. Calculations is tricky, it can be hard to keep all the positions in mind, but that comes with practice. But, just look at "what new moves can my opponent make now?" after they've moved a piece. Where were all the squares their queen could go once it came out? By moving a piece, did they also open up new moves for another piece? and so forth. Only after having thought about the effects of your opponents move should you then start thinking about what move you should make.

Honestly I have never seen games as bad as those you posted in my life. Even when I played the game as a 7 year old I was far better than that. I'm not exaggerating either. I don't know how you can be serious and be that bad at this game.

If your goal is to make 600 elo it's possible... probably. If your goal is to be a good player... it will never happen. It's better you know that than be under any illusions otherwise.

Lookup William Hung on youtube, that's kind of the situation with you and chess.

For example, in your second game you played 41 moves with a 9% accuracy rating. In other words you did almost nothing that made sense.

dude wtf are youu doing

- not helpful

- downright wrong

When you're starting out, you basically play random moves that look good. This is chess without prior knowledge, this is normal, and a key stage of a good or ANY player.

Disregard what he's yapping about. Keep trying, and guess what, you won't play good moves because you're new! That's normal! Keep going, play chess, and you'll improve.

Actually this information is helpful because it potentially saves him an enormous amount of time he could be wasting on chess hoping to be good at it.

In reality it's not normal - you aren't in the phase where you're learning the moves, you've played over 100 games and solved 50 puzzles. By now you know the way pieces move. You're in the bottom 4% of chess players... but if you actually look at the performance rating of the 2nd game it was 100, which is in the bottom 2%.

Most chess players on here - the vast majority - are patzers who don't play that seriously. So it's not a matter of you being unpracticed. The reality is you just are not cut out to be a decent chess player. You can still learn the game if you enjoy it, you might be able to make ~600 elo or so if you try hard, but don't expect to get much better than that.

Its wayyyy to early on to tell whats a good chess player. It's like seeing a toddler failing math and deciding that they're never going to be successful. All you're doing is depriving them of the opportunity to succeed, under the guise of being "realisitic"

You don't need talent for chess, not much, anyway. Hikaru's IQ test was 102, nothing exceptional, and he's not TRYING to be Hikaru. He's playing chess for fun, like the rest of us. The arbitrary number dosen't matter as long as they're improving. That's what you need.

"oh no a new player is... bad"

Also for context: XQC is 1100. XQC. He can't string a sentence together and he's farrr over 600 elo. Your unbelief in his chess skills does not mean he can't become a good chess player, or over 600 elo, for that matter.

Not interesting, not helpful, not relevant, not true. If you like telling people they are bad at chess try somewhere else. Roald Dahl was one of the worst student in his class for his first ten years of school and look what happened to him.