requesting advice on improving from players >1700

I've been stuck between:

bullet: 950ish

Blitz: 1200ish

standard: 1450ish

I've done some tactic training via the site, some mentoring as well, and computer analysis.

I do not write down moves (should I?)

I can't point to a random square and tell you the square notation (should I be trying to learn that?)

If I begin doing these 2 things, do you think my rating will rise? how much? time frame?

What other things should I work on to bump it up a few hundred points over a few months? 

I usually play 10-20 bullet or blitz games per day, I play standard games online infrequently, but I do play long, untimed, games in person several times/week. they usually last 2-3 hours total time.

Learning square names and colors isn't something people try to do, it's just after tournament games (where you're required to record moves) and studying it just automatically happens.  For example you attack f7 so many times you just remember right where it is and that it's white... or maybe  you play the KIA and you know the h1-a8 diagonal is white.

Practicing these things on their own shouldn't increase your rating at all.

I improved by playing slow games with opponents stronger than me, doing tactic puzzles, and reading books.  Listening to others that seems to be the way to do it.  I played blitz every day for years, but that sort of thing just built bad habits.  Not that speed games are completely bad, but they're not really going to help you improve.

The time frame for a few hundred points is more usually counted in years.  True it's easier the lower your rating is, but it's not something to focus on.  Instead the focus should be what can you learn from your games, and the mistakes worth learning from happen in long games where you play seriously.  Compare to mistakes in blitz where it's usually "I was low on time so I made a risky move that didn't work out."

Well, I will begin writing down moves and self analyzing them in a few days. I am going to begin a 1 year chess match with my best friend with whom I've played for 20+ year...we take it very seriously even though we are not highly ranked nor have played competitive organized chess. I will write down the moves for the first time, so will he...we actually decided this months ago, after a discussion on how to improve. We will also be analyzing them together, perhaps with computer assistance (do you advise using a computer?) we just finished a 1 yr match, playing 404 games in 365 days, all in person, most lasting 2+ hrs. I won:) 190-184-20...it was fun.

So now we will play 1 game per week for a year and record them.

I must win, and that's why I am trying to "up" my skills set. (lots of trash talking between old chess friends!)

Typically, I tend to play the same openings until I begin losing at a greater rate...then I switch them up. I use chess.com as practice for new openings and that's why I gravitate towards quicker games...I think I will stop that and begin playing more standard games.

I feel like learning a system is something I should do to prepare for this match (starts 1/3/15), I also know he plays primarily the Queen's Gambit as white, he mixes it up as black, but his choices are preditctable depending on my opening as white. 

Do you think a system is a good place to start? I'd like every advantage in this!

In the meantime, I will play a few longer games with tougher opponents, while writing them down and then self analyzing...also gonna hit the tactics trainer a bit.

Any advice to help me whoop his tail this coming year would help.

You managed to make yourself sound like an old married couple, playing the same game over and over. Except for the last line. Is that kink or is a divorce coming?

Maybe you could try an open relationship, where you play games against random opponents that you have never met and compare notes on how you went against the other players. Or you could start games against unfamiliar players and transfer the position you have reached after 15 or 20 moves onto a board between the 2 of you and see how you go from there.

LOL, The vast majority of my games are against unknown players on this site, but beating a friend at something they take pride in is always fun. you make some good suggestions though.

You probably want to play a larger pool of players.

There are two slow chess groups here on chess.com, which will match you with someone within fifty points or so of your rating. I'm in the DHLC SLow Chess League and give it a big thumb's up.

Wow, the score was pretty even, wish I had a chess buddy like that.  Win too many and it's not fun, lose to many and same problem!

Sure, there are certain things that improve results faster than others.  Adopting an opening system is one of them.  I think most would agree regularly solving tactic puzzles is another.  Remember always look for and calculate forcing moves!  Other than learning patterns that's what tactic training helps reinforce.  I suppose also the habit of trying to disprove your move. 

Playing quick games to get a feel for a new opening is good by the way.  Not sure what you're comfortable with, I'm thinking along the lines of 5/0 or 10/0.

Using a computer isn't bad.  Mostly good for catching any tactics you missed.  Other times the moves it agrees or disagrees with can be difficult to understand.  Sometimes there's a fundamental positional lesson lurking there, and sometimes it discovers a long forced line justifying something that would normally be bad.  If you're curious about a certain move or idea you had consider posting it on the analysis forum here to get some human explanations of what's going on in the position.

Some popular systems are the colle-zukertort and botvinnik.  These are for white and you can google them easily.  A pirc type is one for black, also easily google-able.  Another option that's quite solid and quick to learn is either called a philidor or old indian defense (same setup, name depends on what white does).  Not sure if it's as easily googled, but here's what it looks like.

And I'll end with although opening study tends to give peace of mind, what really affects results is tactics.  Endgames and general strategy are good too... openings, a bit unintuitively, rank near the bottom!

Also, you might want to shift your chess time more to study than play. One of the few academic papers I've seen on chess, "The Role of Deliberate Practice in Chess Expertise," claims that studying is six times more effective use of time than playing in terms of rating.

You don't say anything about books. Have you read any chess book? Are you reading any?

Wow, interesting, will have to look at this later.

Just scanning it a bit, seems to say in some analysis (particularly young players) cumulative hours of play was an independent predictor and that when they're talking about serious study alone they're talking about over a 10 year period.

What I've heard doesn't necessarily disagree with this, which is, that the newer you are, the more time should be devoted to playing, and the better you become the more time should be spent studying.

We all want to see our ratings blast 200 points skywards but that doesn't happen much and when it does it's because someone talented is spending 4+ hours per day studying.

There's a player going by "ziryab" here who has steadily gained 100 points per year. That impresses me.

shell_knight: The most relevant quote from p.162:

For instance, for the combined sample in Table 3, each log unit of serious study alone yields about 200 rating points compared to 33 rating points for log tournament play. Hence, players ought to devote the majority of their time to that activity. However, for a younger player, tournament play does make an independent contribution to current skill level.

Yeah, but Ziryab's no newbie!

Well, this probably means I'll have to decide not to be so depressed about not getting to go to as many tourneys as I'd like :D

I can't deny that after a year's break from tourneys, and some book learnin', that my most recent performance was ~300 points above my rating haha.

There's a guy named Newshutz with a blog Newshutz Chess Journey who decided he wanted to pick up chess again in his fifties after being an indifferent 1400 player in college.

He studied hard for a while then returned to tournament chess and blasted his rating up to 1800. (He had worked for decades as professional programmer which I think is part of the story.) Then his curve slowed. In the next 2-3 years he pushed up to 1900 and is plateaued there.

I find it an inspiring story.

ipcress12, that link for Newshutz is not working for me, and a search returned no result...was looking forward to that story.

Maybe ipcress12 means this: http://newshutzchess.blogspot.com/

that works...thanks aneesh2312

Link fixed.