I am Useless! EDIT-4K

Chess changer...me

It's the one moderator who doesn't know how the site works. He edited the title, but the url remained the same.

Never playing again. Going back to Snakes and Ladders. Hahaha

People rated under 1 000 blunder a lot. That is understandable. You said it yourself that you started playing again after a long time.

Plus, it is one thing to play casual games against your friends and family, and the other to start playing against people, where some of them have been playing chess for quite some time.
It is only natural to not be in the upper echelon of such community rating wise, if you didn't really play for years and actively trying to improve.

Looking at that last game now, I have to ask a question though. Why didn't you take the free queen when he took the pawn in front of that rook?

Two things, I see that in some games you are playing too fast. You have 10 minutes but you lose a game with 8, 7 or 6 minutes on the clock.

Second, if you wish to improve, 10l0 games are probably too fast for you (in real life, 10|0 is still blitz). Try 15l10, or even longer if you find the time, but try to use that time.

This will take time to improve as well, but aim to finish a game with less than half of your time on the clock.

Perhaps you wouldn't make such a blunder if you took more time, or at least it would happen less.

Maybe you would enjoy your games a bit more as well. I certainly know that I get frustrated a bit when I am losing on the clock, and I generally enjoy longer games.

there is a misconception here; 1) your old experiences among friends 2) your new experience here on chess.com.. and you are comparing your success between these two places but these two have completely different player pools.

so there is no actual change probably, you were always like this. you just look tall among shorter people and vice versa

That is most likely close to truth. Though, he was probably at least a little better as he might have blundered less in the past, if he played chess on a semi regular basis.

If he keeps at it, perhaps a short term boost of like 200 to 300 points is not unrealistic (this is of course just my guess, it could be less than that as well, or slightly more), depending of how rusty he really is.
But for more than that, he would have to work hard, and it would be a slower climb from there.

Wow your ratings are so high! I’ll follow your advice. Btw my rating dropped because of my sister (see my latest post).

Thanks for your comments. I agree about losing the enjoyment. Playing on the app, even at the start, I am thinking "pawn , knight bishop... AGAIN!" and it is getting very boring and predictable to the point where everything seems to be aimed at the central squares and as soon as one side has less pieces involved in the "pile on" there is a lot of exchanging.

I know I may be coming across as a bit of a whiner, but I do not object to losing at all, and I always go back and look through m games to see where I made mistakes, more so when I lose, because that is a good way to learn. My concern is that I am not learning from my mistakes and not able to utilise what I am seeing. That is my issue. I am not chasing ELO points, but I am using that as a measure of my "ability" and it seems to be getting worse. Maybe I have been away from it for too long.

You're welcome.

If you need some concrete help, and you don't understand why a certain move was a mistake, you can always post in game analysis part of the forum. There will usually be someone to help.

Good luck with your chess.

That is just a hypothesis, but could it be because you're playing on the app ? Maybe you need to "feel" the board, the experience on chess.com is limited. To me it feels like a different chess, in a way ? Anyway that doesn't mean you won't gain that elo back, but it might take time

You completely confirm my own experience-- online chess is entirely built for sweaty players, and instead of acknowledging there's something wonky with the rating and matchmaking system, they tell you to "git gud" pretty much. I experienced a similarly drastic rating stomp-- you should NOT be so quick to assume that the problem is you. The level of psychologically-sleezy unfair play on this site is appalling. You can make 0 mistakes 0 blunders 0 misses and still get forced into mate without ever seeing it coming. They'll often blunder a few times too so it doesn't look too perfect. A normal non-suspicious person just thinks they need to get better, which is what us casuals tend to be. I literally just posted a thread about this; it seems so stupid to not actively go out of your way to cater to the casual player, in favor of niche hyper-sweats.

With respect, if one is under 1 000, it is on merit. The same goes for us under 2 000 as well. Cheating is a bigger problem for people on a highest level, because they are much better at it. Someone who is a novice level player and cheats will usually be caught easily.

Are there some cheaters on sub 1 000 level? Yes, but they are either caught quickly, or they don't stay on this level, and usually still get caught a little later. In October over 60 000 people were banned.

On this level they can't affect your rating that much, as grand majority of them are fair players.
I realize this will not be able to convince you, so I am proposing something that might, plus might help you out with your chess a bit, if you are interested.

Look at your first page of games, so say last 2 days. Send me in inbox (no need to put them here as it would be a bit off topic) 5 games you lost and you want me to analyze. I will try my best to give a thorough analysis why something was bad and what should have been done differently.

I know I am not a GM, but view it as a fellow student of the game trying to help out another.

The offer stands today.

Don't worry about the ratings, just enjoy the game Unless you aim to go pro, you are only really playing against your own rating anyway!

Hi.

i have several recommendations for adults who are returning to chess.

1. play slower time controls. Give yourself time to think, plan, and double-check to avoid obvious blunders.

2. Review some instruction books to relearn basic opening and middle game principles. Kids don’t like studying books. motivated adults should be able to benefit from training manuals more than kids. Use this advantage over kids to your benefit.

3. in games, focus on achieving basic principles. In the first 10 or 15 moves, don’t look for tactical wins. Instead, develop every piece, castle, and bring your rooks to the center.

4. in the middle game, don’t weaken your pawn structure (avoid doubled, isolated, backward pawns). Identify these pawn weaknesses in your opponent’s position. Develop your middle game plans around these.

5. When you review your games, don’t be discouraged by a tactical blunder. Rather, focus on the principles that you followed successfully.

j know it may sound boring to focus on general principles more than on tactics. But it will pay off in the long run.

Good luck.

I went through the EXACT same thing over this past week. I'm a natural high 400 low 500 player against legit opponents. After being waffle stomped by an algorithmic cascade of flagrant cheaters, I start coming up from 230 to 300s and now I'm playing legit opponents at the 300 level, and I FEEL BAD FOR THEM! They shouldn't have to deal with cheaters OR underrated opponents. They have no chance whatsoever, so I play easy, more experimentally, and ultimately stupider. It's a dangerous way to build a sense of false confidence in the underrated player when they're beating everyone at "their" level. 
Something changed in the past day or so, and now it's all legit newbies again for me. 
And now, as I inevitably climb back to my natural rating, am I gonna have to deal with this ish again as soon as I beat the first person who's higher than my natural level? Definitely, because it twice already lmfao.
It correlates that new players who gain hundreds of elo rating in a short period of time with 10-15 streaks could possibly be flagged for potential unfair players, and algorithmically matched up with others who fit in that category; because it's easier to pit cheats against each other instead of really trying to remove them. And there's potential higher play-level shenanigans that could could be imagined, should one have access to these matchmaking algorithms. 
I think chess as a whole stinks like shyte and no one wants to be the one to smell the fart because then they'll be the one who dealt it. Computer analysis has killed the enjoyment of the game entirely, and I think it's likely an open secret that at the super-"elite level", there is a very large edge gained by players using engines for prep and studying, and that to play without using them, would be for them to throw their shoes away before a foot race.

there is a huge gap between casual players and serious players. A person may play a lot with friends and do well. But if they have not studied chess, they are still likely to be two or more standard deviations (rating classes) below an average club player.

when a lower-rated player loses a series of games, there is no need to look for conspiracy theories to explain it. The more likely explanation is that they just made blunders that their fellow low-rated player punished.

Well in the last game you opponent just gave up their queen on the move 3 and you didn't take it! Why?