@ #8 + #11
Thanks for the replies. Yeah, now that you've pointed it out, it seems like most of my losses have been from silly blunders that must have been due to the lack of sleep anb/or most likely also under the influence of alcohol or drugs ;)
I used to be around the 1600 range for a long time(like 10-15 years, until i started this second lichess account that i currently am on, i was like 1500~ on yahoo for a long time at long timed games too, i feel that yahoo/chess.com rating is 'lower' than lichess, ie 1500 on yahoo would prob be around 16-1700 on here.. unless of course, i'm just that strong now and yahoo has more cheaters n stuff, but i digress heh), and i basically made it to 2000 just by playing at times where i know i'm in the mood and have sufficient focus and sleep.. like in
en.lichess.org/A2qTLYs2You asked me why i played 16.Qa4 and 17.b6.. I have no idea now that i look back on it. lol. I must of had some preconceived notion(incorrect one) based on some plan of Qa4+ and stopping him from castling, and then playing b6 after he went nc6 or something like that, when a simple 12.Qe2 like you said or a 12.Bg5 would probably be 'automatic' for me these days. You can also tell that i wasn't really at my best(to put it mildly heh) when i then played Qxb6 a move or two later, basically trading my queen for a bishop for no reason..
As for
lichess.org/HapDuIVa/black#21 "(You had 11... Na5 saving your position)", yeah that was a game where i did miss the knight clearance/fianchetto'd bishop on my rook, but i also had multiple chance to save it, even without Na5 IIRC, i also played 12.c5 because i just wanted to play down the exchange for 'fun' i guess, that's probably not a good idea to test out OTB speculative exchange sacs without any real compensation, but dunno, sometimes i snap in 'interesting positions' and just decide to play moves that i know are 'sub par', but yet i still want to make it work.. perhaps not vs another 1950 guy eh :P
@
lichess.org/nVfDEcFC#8 "(You had 8. Qb3, this is a very basic theme. Then you start to move your pieces backwards without a plan, ending with a Bishop and pawns of the same color. In the next moves Black self-destructed but you returned the favor more efficiently.)"
Perhaps 8.Qb3 was a typo, because i had already played 6.Qb3. But yeah, i played pretty 'illogical' opening and moved my queen to b3 then back to d1 and played a3/b4, but yeah. Looking back on it, i think i played 6.Qb3 without really understanding the ideas behind it and in the concrete position in the game, i just saw the Qb3 idea from pro games and decided to try it out, but looks like i tried it out in the wrong time/position, i shoulda probably also developed my LSB to d3/e2 instead of playing 8.Ne5(is that what you meant instead of 8.Qb3?), and if i was going to play Qb3 stuff, i should of probably had a followup plan but i didn't, which is why i played back to Qd1 and Ne5 back to Nf3 lol.
But yeah, thanks for all the replies, i think the main thing i should keep doing is only playing games when i've had sufficient rest/sleep, and i shouldn't be losing those 3 games that you mentioned, they weren't losses due to missed tactics(except 1 of them, the discovered check one in the 2nd link but even after that, you pointed out i had na5 and i had more opportunities to save the exchange, but i gave that up on purpose for 'fun' to try and practice 'saving a position down the exchange' like i said). Was basically testing out whether or not my assessment/ability would be enough to win(yes win, i thought i could win, but obviously i was wrong and realized this as i played on and was happy to play for a draw a move or two after lol).
So basically, i think i have to play when i'm well rested and in the mood(that got me from 1500 to 2000, ie just playing solid/positional and letting opponent make mistakes), and i think to go from 2000 to 2100, i need to play higher rated(i have been playing the 'same' rating as me as i kept on improving from 1500 to 2000, i wasn't already 2000 and i don't just beat up on 15-1600 dudes.. lol. I usually just set game as white for me and put the range from 150 below to 100 above me). But most people who accept the random challenge are usually below 2000 when i play now, even if i have the range at like 1850-2100..
I've been trying to find a 'sweet' range', one that i can still learn and still get a good game, but that won't completely crush me and still let me be able to get ratings. Like if i'm beating up on 1500's still, i get like 1 rating from a win, and like 20-30 rating from a loss, there's just no point playing vs these people.
And yeah. I guess i need to practice tactics, but i think my tactics are pretty decent and i just need to not be sleepy and/or TOO stoned/drunk ;)
I think my weakest part is most likely the endgame, because i do not study books or do endgame studies/puzzles etc. Also because i think that endgames requires the most 'precision' and 'hard calculation', and usually by that phase of the game i'm playing on increment, and then i usually let slip my advantage or even blunder in time trouble.. I have watched basic stuff and know basic rules like opposition/triangulation and certain endgames(like opposite bishop and all that), but yeah.
I'm still really weak at all the various single/double rook endgames and like i said, i play slow, so i need the 15 second increment because usually by that time even if i'm ahead +2/+3 etc(depends on position though of course, some positions you know theres no chance for errors but other +2/+3's are one wrong move and it will switch back to -2/-3 instead etc), i'm in time trouble and playing on increment, while my opponent is not and has plenty of time to play the endgame still, and then that's where i blunder the most(like if it's not a silly one move blunder like me saccing my queen for bishop for no reason like in the 2nd linked game).
But yeah. I guess i probably don't even need to work that much on endgame, i think i could probably get 2100 just getting rid of those 3 losses, since they were all pretty dumb and losses that i don't think i would of lost if i had taken it 'seriously' like a tournament game.
And some more info about my history, i've been into chess for like 15-20 years now, and of course it started with OTB and not online/internet chess. In fact, i prefer OTB but i just don't have the time and clubs are not convenient for me in my area and with my lifestyle. Also, once you reach a certain level, it's really hard to find a 'decently skilled person' to play vs OTB in real life unless you join an actual chess club, and like i said, that's not an option where i'm from.. playing online is just more convenient both geographically/financially and just more of an 'all round pragmatic option' for me.
So yeah, instead of joining a club and getting FIDE rating etc, i've started to kind of take online rating more seriously and tried to actually 'improve'(by using my online rating as a reflection of my current skill level, and i wanna see how high i can get it, even if i have to grind players of my own rating level, rather than playing only those higher than me, which i should be doing if i wanna learn the most like you guys said, but i think i'll make another account for stuff like that or do casual games, guess you can say i'm bitching out and trying to fluff/pad my rating, but yeah.
For those more experienced/higher rated, do you think i shouldn't care and that i should play rated games vs higher rated players, because if it's casual and i'm 'low rated'(ie smurfing on another account), that those higher rated players won't play a 'serious game' vs me because they think i'm low rated(provisional etc) and it's just a casual game? Will i even be able to find games at 15/15 as a provisional 1500 and get casual games vs 2000+ opposition?
And i played a game last night vs 1550 guy(friend of mine in real life, else i won't usually play people that rating now, he's like 17/18-0 vs me and still challenges me, so i have to accept as a friend lol). It was the first game i played in months, and i have to say even though it's vs 'low rated opposition', i played a good positional game that i'm proud of, didn't rush anything and played solid/consistent moves, i think if i can play like that everygame i could probably get 21-2200 'easy', but yeah. We'll see.. haha
Thanks for the replies guys, and if any of you guys want to help me or chat or have practice games etc(ie if you think i can help you), let me know. I don't play that much these days, but if i had someone high rated who likes to analyze and help be a 'rival' to me to help me grow(imho that's what i'm missing, since i used to have a friend when i first started chess 15-20 years ago and we used to play OTB and want to show off our new 'tricks' and 'traps' etc, these days i'm older and don't really play with anyone IRL/OTB so i will have to settle for online).
But as you guys know, most people don't like to play longer games, or even have a post mortem discussion about games and just start game after game and play like 30 blitz games everyday. That's not how i roll, and i don't play chess for that.. i want to improve and learn more and/or rather, at least FEEL like i'm still learning/improving since i don't have chess coach or any objective judge other than myself and lichess rating(heh), not just play 30 blitz games a day and stay at the same level forever and play just 'for fun'(although i do do that sometimes in my long rated games like the exchange sac one, but like i said, i probably shouldn't have since i'm trying to use this account to see 'how far i can go' in terms of rating).
Thanks for all the replies guys, thanks for keeping it constructive and taking the time to look through a few of my games! If any of you want some commentary from me or advice, i will be more than happy to return the favour :)
ex0 out.
EDIT: oh yeah, during the 1600 to 2000 phase, i just made sure to have sufficient sleep, play more solidly, but most importantly, i played FASTER and tried to never get into hardcore time trouble which was my main problem before, because i used to be a 'perfectionist' and want to win with 'beautiful' romantic era sacs n shit, and of course wanted to play the 'best move 100% of the time'(regardless of how long it took me to find it, and even back then i didn't care if i lost on time, long as i found/played the best move all the time.. but yeah, i think that's what allows me to be 2000 right now, because i took the time in my initial chess development and worked on the basics with no time control or at classical time controls..) but yeah. I don't think you can play like that these days, the competition is just too good/booked up now. So i changed my style to more solid and 'boring'(ie consistent), but yeah, probably not consistent enough since my last 3 losses were dumb ones like you guys pointed out. So to get from 2000 to 2100, i probably just need to play when im well rested, and then from 2100-2200 i probably need to work more on endgame studies/theory etc since imho that's my weakest phase and then improve more and more on playing faster, which i think is also my weak point as like i said, sometimes in certain positions after a few drinks/joints i tend to just get lost in thought and forget that i'm playing timed games(like i said, i'm more used to and i like playing OTB with longer time limits, or even NO TIME LIMITS!!!(lol), while we have a drink/smoke/trash talk etc during the game. That's what initially got me into chess, and why i still play it.
Never been into bullet, and even blitz, this is as fast as i like to play. It considers 15/15 as long on lichess, but i still consider that blitz or maybe rapid(but imo i think for FIDE rating purposes, rapid starts at like 20-30m total time, not sure about increment)
