chess.com reinforces bad chess, there’s a better way to improve

Let’s say you spend the next 3 or even 6 months ONLY playing chess players rated 1800 and above (as a, say, 1200 rated player). After those 3-6 months, wouldnt it be logical to assume that you would be playing at an 1800 level, or at least near 1800?

Why wouldnt you? You would quickly pick up on how the 1800 rated players expose you, and if you played enough you would just simply stop making those mistakes.

You would start learning what the best replies to openings are, so without even sitting down and studying theory, you know begin to know how to defend and use advanced theory.

Is this thinking flawed? Or is it correct?. it got me thinking……. If I’m playing 1200 all day every day, won’t I just stay a 1200, slowly and gradually having a winning record and become a 1300? Then stay at 1300 and repeat the whole process?

Wouldnt the process of chess development be much quicker if I just played anonymously on other websites or here unrated against only 1800+ players?

it got me thinking…… chess.com’s algorithm is flawed. Of course it’s completely designed to make you play games all day and even pay for their premium membership to do puzzles. And in reality, they use chasing improvement of your virtual rating the thing that gets you addicted. In reality, playing anonymously against good players would probably skyrocket your chess skill compared to what chess.com offers, playing game after game against opponents of your own strength.

thoughts? 

I guess? Although if you spend those 3-6 months getting destroyed over and over again, although you might improve like 200 rating I don’t think you would become 1800. While if your actually analyzing games thoroughly there might be a chance you become 1800 level

well if it is designed to make you face only people 600 higher then you then who do the 1800s play? your algorithm will make then play 2400s. it makes sense to put it as the same rating system, because you obviously didn't think this out. not that I am against playing higher opponents, that is kind of what the "open challenges" are for, because you can choose what person you play. You probably should use that instead if you don't like the pairing system

I mean you learn when you play high rated players or low rated players just you need to analyse

that is true

Do it and let us know how you get on. !

Seriously, why would you be less inclined to learn about improvement when playing a same rating player than a higher one ?

I fail to see the logic.

ps. your improvement is down to you alone, not the website.

yeah