ELO from IRL tournaments and ELO on these websites is pretty different. Tournament C players can pretty easily have expert ELOs online.
The OP feels like clickbait and should include "chess.com Blitz rating" in the title.
On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
21–30 of 342 posts
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would not be able, or rather willing, to spend two hours per day playing chess at this point. However, it is all about priorities. If playing chess and improving is valuable to you, everyone can make the time.
Would you be willing to spend 2 hrs per day on any type of game?
If you have the time, and it's fun, why not?
Many ordinary people spend more time every day watching TV.
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#23I started late too. Not as committed as him.
The most useful resource for beginner I found was "Chess King Learn" series of apps. The ones with beginner tactics puzzles - capturing pieces were invaluable. Those are simple drills, but when you do them you will be able to "spot" opportunities without effort. That made massive difference in my play.
That and Magnus trainer. I did not paid for subscription, but there are exercises focused on training your imagination, pathfinding and other similar skills.
Lichess people recommend is great for online play, but the above are much better for learning.
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#24Lately I have been enjoying chess with my SO, if you put aside stupid rivalries, it is another great way to bound over something simple.
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you be willing to spend 2 hrs per day on any type of game?
If you have the time, and it's fun, why not? Many ordinary people spend more time every day watching TV.
I do tv watching equivalent at times when I tired for focused activities or when I also do something else on the side.
It is just not the same. You play chess at your mental prime-time basically, to challenge and tire the brain. You watch tv/youtube to get rest.
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#26You should use lichess.org instead. You would have unlimited tactics per day which come from real games played on the website, endless number of studies made by other players on opening theories, free analysis of your games, and all these statistics about your progress and more! Like "do I win more often or not when Queens are traded?". Good luck!
I asked which Chess service to set my dad up with on his iPad a few years ago on here and someone recommended lichess. He's put hundreds and hundreds of hours in since and absolutely loves it. Amazing service.
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#27Congratulations that's a great achievement. I think that almost everyone should be able to achieve a solid 2000 elo rating, with enough dedication over the years. Doing tactics puzzles is one of the most important factors for fast improvements. > Some day, I want to become a titled player. A candidate master needs an ELO of 2200 2000 and 2200 are completely different skill levels. I have some friends who play chess f…
ignorant question time: isn't ELO relative not absolute? if everyone gets better doesn't that just make it a lot harder to get to 2k?
there is inflation (deflation too) and all kinds of fraudulent schemes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system#Ratings_infl...
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#28I did something very similar with an old strategy game called Age of empires II. Over the course of two years I went from a 1300 rating to 1850. I don't play chess, so it's hard for me to compare the scales, but I will say the highest players were rated around 2600. I think being 1850 put me around 90-95th percentile for active players-- there were less than 50 players over 2300, and only a few hundred over 2000.
My only real commentary is that trying to follow a progression like this can be profoundly, profoundly frustrating. You need to really make sure you're enjoying this hobby before you try to dedicate yourself to a trajectory like this. It can really make you feel like shit a lot of the time, as you find yourself continually repeating mistakes that other people breeze past without issue. It takes true love of the game and a great deal of patience and persistence to push through all the downspells.
Eventually I decided that I no longer wished to prioritize the game over other things. The enormous time investment was no longer a worthwhile trade-off for me, and I stopped playing almost all together. I haven't regretted it since. There's just so many things to do in life. I gave it thousands of hours of my time, and now the door is closed on that. Now I'm learning Ruby on rails!
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#29Cool that the author does this, and has found a method that works for them! However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me. And the quote about netting about 1.5 ELO per day sounds like a linear growth is assumed, which I can assure will not be the case past the initial massive improvements one gets from "not knowing the rules" to "actually starting to get it". I love solv…
> Cool that the author does this, and has found a method that works for them! However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me.
Why? Even full-employed Americans spend 4 hours per day on average on leisure and sport. (https://www.bls.gov/charts/american-time-use/activity-by-emp...)
Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years
#30ELO from IRL tournaments and ELO on these websites is pretty different. Tournament C players can pretty easily have expert ELOs online.
At an Elo level of around 2000 they converge. (I.e. both lichess and chesscom calibrate their algorithm to match on-the-board standards around that region.)
For various reasons, online Elos are inflated by 100+ points if you go above 2500+ or below 1500. A progression from zero to 1750 rating is just as instructive if you assume he went from zero to 1650...