How far should you expect to get after about a year of studying/playing chess?

I started playing chess seriously about 3-4 months ago and my peak rating was 1550 or so, which I'm fairly content with at the moment. However I'm not sure if I am where I should be and how far I should expect to get within my first year. Would be quite nice to know what the bar is so I can work towards it.

How good should you be at drawing, or speaking another language, or tennis after 1 year?  It just depends on the individual, how hard they work, and what methods they use.

It's also hard to estimate due to your phrasing "started playing chess seriously" meaning you've had previous experience.

So really anything between 0 and, say, 800 rating points are possible for your first year (although either extreme is very unlikely).  You're clearly not a true beginner so personally I'd say 100 points a year is fine.  People may say this estimate is too low.  If you get a coach, work every day, and go to lots of tournaments (over the board tournaments) you can probably expect more.  But as I said in the beginning, it depends on the individual.

if you're really diligent about it, probably ~1900 or so. class a.  assuming you are starting from scratch. the initial jump is the largest. after ~2000 or so these jumps they get smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller......take longer and longer and longer and longer.....

I think anyone, if they so wanted, could take a couple months to get to about 1700-1900 strength and then utterly demolish all non-chess players/everyday people with whom they cross paths. this would not be difficult.

So... in other words, you've never coached anyone, known anyone whose ever been coached, and aren't 1700-1900 yourself.

Also, a rating of 1300 (USCF) would easily beat any casual players / people who only know how the pieces move.

didn't say anything about the minimum rating/strength needed to easily smash people who only how the pieces move. perhaps it is 1300. I do not know. nor care. 

just saying that I believe that most anyone can get to around ~1700-1900 strength in a few months time and then destroy anyone who only knows how the pieces move. and that this would not be difficult.

also you do not know who I am and I have not divluged any personal information to you have I?

Previous chess experience was simply learning to play chess nothing else. And with a rating of a 1000 you could easily beat a completely random person who knows how the pieces move unless they have incredible natural talent of course. And I highly doubt a hundred points a year is accurate, but seeing you have more experience I appreciate the insight.

You're right, you didn't say it was the minimum, my mistake.

I don't know who you are personally, of course.  Often people have argued on the forums that (more or less) if one person can do it, then anyone can do it.  9 out of 10 of these players are beginners who argue (for example) because Fischer or Kasparov got to 1900 in a few months that anyone can (I don't know how fast they got to 1900).

Because more experienced players almost universally disagree with this (and I've never seen a chess coach agree with this) I made some assumptions about you.

100 points a year accurate for what?  For "taking chess seriously?"  Taking it seriously will mean 10 different things to 10 different people.  Depending on what you do, sure, it may be a very low guess.

Looking at your profile I see you've played a ton of games for just a few months.  So yeah, probably a lot faster for you

Sorry I'm not being more specific.  Each person really is different.  Visit a local club and meet the 50 year olds who have read a dozen chess books and been playing for 30 years and have been perpetually rated 1300-1600.  You may also meet the 10 year old who got a 1600 rating in less than a year (youth helps, and talent helps more).

how bout' losing 100 points per year?

bcoburn2 wrote:

how bout' losing 100 points per year?

Why not, I lose points all the time.

yorygregovich wrote:

How far should you expect to get after about a year

Well, if you treat her nicely, take her out to eat and can dry her tears....I will say you have rounded third and are heading for home...I do declare.

I get it, but... What?

yes, what?!?!?!!?

If you play constantly for a year and go through chess books on opening/endgame/tactics/etc  and study with some diligence and play against GOOD players , not bums that you can easily beat, you will probably get to 70 or 80% of as good as you can ever expect to be. What that may be rating-wise could be anything depending on your aptitude.  After a few more years you'll level off at your peak, after which all the study and play in the world won't make you any stronger. 

Or at least that was my experience. 

How much you will be able to improve within one year of playing is hard to tell but you can surely expect a rapid improvement since you're new but the struggle is to stay dedicated when you're not getting stronger. You would need to find yourself a pace you can sustain over a long period of time. If you study too hard, you will fall into fatigue and then you will definitely not improve at all. 

Fastest way to improve would be to exercise tactics. This is a theme that it is important to have a solid grasp at since most of the games are decided in the middlegame. If you're not able to spot tactics, then you're likely to fall prey for it. 

Opening phase you should focus at sound moves such as developing your pieces to the best squares and try to gain control of the center of the board. Checkmate the enemy king would of course be the best solution however.. lol

I agree, claiming anyone could get to 1700-1900 in a couple of months is totally unrealistic, if memory serves, only about 10% of USCF players ever hit 1800, and that takes most of them a few years of competing, and that's as good as they can ever get.  

I believe the average rating in USCF is below 1500, there's a lot of people who are serious enough to play in tournaments that can't break 1400, but they keep playing anyway for the love of the game. 

2200 in three years is apparently the standard so I suppose 750 in one year must be about right.

second base

Absolutely, please study and practice. But, do not determine your improvement solely by the numbers. Rating points have many useful purposes, but growth and improvement should be reflected upon by much more. Perhaps, your study and practice should measure by this:

Have your openings, tactics, endgames, etc. grown more in depth and development?

Have discoveries to strategic moves, mating patters become more recognized and executed.

These are just 2 measurements, there are certainly many more. But, let's clear the (chess) table. Play, study, and practice to enjoy the game and the company of your opponents. We would all like to improve our ratings, yet, make certain you put first what was appealing when you began. I hope it was the simple naive statement, “This is fun."

But how are you going to know whether all those things have improved in your game unless your rating goes up?

The average player will achieve a rating between USCF 1500 and 1800 depending on how much hard work and study she/he is motivated to do.