Sometimes, its just genetics. Either you have the trait needed to break past 1600, or you don't. Keep in mind that 1600 is still a very high score, and better than most of the human population.
How to overcome 1600 level and reach 1800?
Sort:
togaquest wrote:
Sometimes, its just genetics. Either you have the trait needed to break past 1600, or you don't. Keep in mind that 1600 is still a very high score, and better than most of the human population.
I can appreciate your honesty. But I really hope that is not the case for me and I have still enough potential to improve. I am in middle/late twenties so I missed the train for having understanding come easily, but maybe I can still somewhat compensate by working harder. I really doubt that I couldn't improve no matter what I try.
Note I only said 'sometimes.'
Hardwork and preparation are another element.
Or you can try to find a book from the library, go to a chess club, or start going to otb tournaments and do postmortems. You will break 1600 someday.
Destroyer_Mark_1420 wrote:
One seriously underrated training method is to simply play players that are better than you. Play players that are 100,200,300, and even 400 hundred points higher than you. I think there is a setting on chess.com that allows you to only play players higher than you, or barely under your rating. I remember when I was small, I went to OTB tournaments. I always played in 2 sections higher than what I could qualify in so for example, if the sections were
“Under 1200”, “Under1400”, and “Under1600”, and I was 1000, I would play in the under 1600. This way, I am playing players significantly better than me, and afterwards, when I review the game, not only am I seeing what I did wrong, I am seeing what my opponent did RIGHT. I can learn from their successes. When you play people on your level, they often make the same mistakes you do and it’s tough to learn from them. Even if you don’t review the game thoroughly, your brain will (over time) take in and observe the patterns they are using and what makes them better than you. Your opponents will use tactics on you you would’ve never considered before and your brain will (once again, over time) save that and put in your mental toolbox for YOU to use one day.
Of course, your rating may actually go down a bit, from playing players significantly better than you, and you will lose a lot more games than you win, but those games that you do win, will be sweet, juicy victories.
I recommend you set your chess.com settings so that you only play players a lot better than you (or as close as possible to it), play a 1-3 rapid games every day (try to review if possible), and just do this for 2 weeks or even a month. Then set your settings back to people on your level, and see how much better you’ve gotten.
If this doesn’t work, I’m sorry, it’s just one major tool I used to get better. Currently I am 1818 USCF and 1750 FIDE. Good Luck!
“Under 1200”, “Under1400”, and “Under1600”, and I was 1000, I would play in the under 1600. This way, I am playing players significantly better than me, and afterwards, when I review the game, not only am I seeing what I did wrong, I am seeing what my opponent did RIGHT. I can learn from their successes. When you play people on your level, they often make the same mistakes you do and it’s tough to learn from them. Even if you don’t review the game thoroughly, your brain will (over time) take in and observe the patterns they are using and what makes them better than you. Your opponents will use tactics on you you would’ve never considered before and your brain will (once again, over time) save that and put in your mental toolbox for YOU to use one day.
Of course, your rating may actually go down a bit, from playing players significantly better than you, and you will lose a lot more games than you win, but those games that you do win, will be sweet, juicy victories.
I recommend you set your chess.com settings so that you only play players a lot better than you (or as close as possible to it), play a 1-3 rapid games every day (try to review if possible), and just do this for 2 weeks or even a month. Then set your settings back to people on your level, and see how much better you’ve gotten.
If this doesn’t work, I’m sorry, it’s just one major tool I used to get better. Currently I am 1818 USCF and 1750 FIDE. Good Luck!
That is a very valuable advice. I will try to play against stronger opponents and analyze the games. It certainly makes sense.
Play against higher rated players and when you lose talk to them without getting annoyed or frustrated. I'm sure they'll enjoy pointing out your mistakes and help you improve as humans generally love pointing out other's mistakes 😂
#1
No, it is not genetics.
Lasker said each player can reach 2000 by doing the right thing for 200 hours.
Most fail because they do the wrong thing.
"I tried solving tactics" ++ That is good, but it is not all. Try to get a tactics puzzle rating over 2000. Solve 4 tactics puzzles per day as a warm-up.
"my improvement came mostly from playing games and solving tactics."
++ That is spot on. The key to improve is to play, to lose and to analyse your lost game so as to learn from your mistake.
Another good thing is to study annotated grandmaster games.
Jan 21, 2022
0
#9
gamesfan wrote:
. I am in middle/late twenties so I missed the train for having understanding come easily, but maybe I can still somewhat compensate by working harder. I really doubt that I couldn't improve no matter what I try.
I started chess when i was 21 may be almost 22, so theres definitely alot of room for you too. I reckon age is a factor when you are shooting for GM/IM anything less than that can be achieved by sheer dedication and workhard.
For quite some time, I've been stagnating at the level around 1600. I tried quite a few methods but I did not succeed at improving. I am not saying these methods don't work, just that I was not able to make them work for me.
I tried solving tactics but I don't think my tactics knowledge increased. I tried to get some more positional ideas but it didn't work out. I also tried to improve my endgames, which I maybe slightly did, but it does not seem to show in my rating. The thing is, knowing what to study is not enough, if you don't know how. I am more or less clueless about how to effectively study since until certain point, my improvement came mostly from playing games and solving tactics.
Instead, I will ask how you overcame 1600 level and reached 1800. Not only what you studied, but how you studied it. What do you think would be a good advice for me?