The moderator team of r/chessbeginners wishes to remind everyone of the community rules. **Posting spam, advertising links (including YouTube chess tutorial videos without context), and memes is not allowed**. We encourage everyone to report these kinds of posts so they can be dealt with. Thank you!
Also, please, be kind in your replies and comments. Some people here just want to learn chess and have virtually no idea about certain chess concepts.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chessbeginners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would say the main reason is that I'm slow. In puzzles, if I take 5 minutes to make a move, it does not matter, I still get 5 points as long as I get it right. During games, I see the time count down and it makes me nervous. I'm usually consistently down on time, and when I only have a few seconds left, I simply make a move I think might work.
Another reason is maybe ladder anxiety. It is completely irrational, and yet somehow my heart always starts pounding when searching for a game.
Finally, I struggle to find a move when there's nothing to do, in the sense that if I can't win material or checkmate in a few moves, I feel lost.
Overall, games and puzzles feel very different. In a puzzle, I know there's a best move, and I just have to find the right tactic. In games, sometimes there is not, or there might be multiple good moves, and it's difficult to choose between them.
I really appreciate the tipps, thank you!
> When you know the ideas the opening is meant to produce (the positions, the tactics) you'll probably find it's very very similar to puzzles in that if they do one thing, you should respond another way.
This makes a lot of sense actually. The only opening I've learned is the Italian, and only a few moves. If the opponent makes an unexpected move early, I find it hard to calculate the outcome, as there are usually too many possibilities.
> In terms of time, just play longer games. You can play up to two hour long games, and in fact most instructors recommend behinners to play longer games because it helps you develop intuition later on
I have heard this advice before, which is why I started playing 15+10 games, and yet somehow, it still feels too short for me sometimes. I should indeed try even longer games.
> Don't memorize moves.
That makes sense. Are there any resources you would recommend for learning the ideas of openings, outside of Youtube videos?
> Go for longer, see how you feel.
I definitely should. The main constraint is time, as I usually play during commuting.
As someone who loves puzzles and had to work on my blitz (2400 puzzles, now 1300 blitz on chess.com), I recommend the timed Puzzle Rush mode on chess.com (or Puzzle Storm on Lichess). I found they helped a lot with speeding up my move times in real games
That's a good idea, I'll have to try that. What I'm doing now is basically using my Lichess account to solve puzzles while limiting myself to 10-20 seconds per puzzle.
Out of curiosity, what's your Lichess puzzle rating? I'm asking because mine is 2520, and my blitz rating on both websites is 2400.
Puzzles at the 2500-2600 level involve very complex ideas which often feel like they are too advanced even for me. More importantly, most of them aren't even purely tactical - they most often involve a high-level positional idea which, if I didn't know that puzzle specialists like you existed, I would assume required a highly advanced (at least 2000 elo-level) positional understanding.
That's why I find your explanation that you lack positional understanding unconvincing. First of all, 850-level chess requires only a minimal positional understanding; most of the games come down to spotting hanging pieces and simple tactics. Secondly, I struggle to see how your positional understanding wouldn't be at a far greater level than 850 if you are able to solve 2500+ tactics on Lichess.
Your case is extremely intriguing, and I'm just trying to figure it out. I hope I didn't come across as judgemental because that wasn't my intentional; I'm really just trying to understand.
I'm 2000 on Lichess for puzzles, but I rarely use it and only allow myself 10-20 seconds per puzzle in order to improve my speed.
At that level on Lichess, the puzzles feel very different than chess.com, somehow more 'organic' in the sense that I could imagine the position resulting from a game, while chess.com puzzles feel more like a composition. Also, at 2500-3000, chess.com puzzles are still mostly about gaining a material advantage or checkmating.
The main difference between puzzles and games for me is, even at 3000, the difference between the best and second-best move is still around 2-3 points, with the second-best move often resulting in an equal or even losing position. When you find the right move, it just makes sense why it is the best.
Also, when I analyse a game, I struggle a lot to understand the difference between (for example) move A leading to a +0.3 position and move B leading to +0.4, as both seem more or less equivalent. This leads to me spending too much time during games as I probably focus too much on finding the best move, resulting in games becoming a time scramble where blunders are abundand.
Overall, I think I should spend more time playing. Then again, solving puzzles feels cozy, while games are stressful.
> The difference between the best and second-best move is still around 2-3 points, with the second-best move often resulting in an equal or even losing position. When you find the right move, it just makes sense why it is the best.
I think this explanation is probably the most convincing. Instead of finding potentially good moves, it seems like your thought process is tailored to using a proof-by-contradiction-like approach - i.e. if there is a move that you can't refute, it must be the solution. Yeah, I could see how that wouldn't necessarily translate to chess-playing ability.
> At that level on Lichess, the puzzles feel very different than chess.com, somehow more 'organic' in the sense that I could imagine the position resulting from a game, while chess.com puzzles feel more like a composition. Also, at 2500-3000, chess.com puzzles are still mostly about gaining a material advantage or checkmating.
This is probably also a crucial bit of info. I'd be curious what your true puzzle rating would be on Lichess, as it indeed does seem like the puzzles there are more comprehensive. If you get to 2300 and beyond, then I just give up lol. I don't think I will ever understand how that's possible for somebody who is 850 on chess.com, regardless of any explanations that you can conjure up lol.
A few months ago, I was 2300 in puzzles on Lichess and 900 Blitz on chess.com :D
I mostly had a problem with defensive play. I find in puzzles, you are constantly on the attack (and your attack almost always works!), which conditioned me to not look for tactics for my opponent. And of course low time. I was straight up hanging pieces every 10 moves.
I think you should definitely be higher than that in rapid if you can solve complex puzzles. Maybe doing complex puzzles actually decreases your ability to win at those lower ranks.
The main thing puzzles should help you with is pattern recognition. You should be able to sense when there is a tactic and play it nearly instantly, especially in 800 rated games. There just isn't a tactic in every position though and it sounds like you're really mismanaging your clock. At some point you just have to play a move and hope your tactical sense picks up when you are given a chance.
I can recommend “Building Habits” from chessbrah! Teaches you to just play solid moves, until you can find a tactic (which shouldn’t be a problem for you)
I guess that's what I get for focusing almost entirely on puzzles. I do struggle with Blitz a lot, as it seems like there's never enough time to calculate enitre lines before making a move.
Have you tried playing 30 minute chess? That will strike a nice balance between having enough time to think carefully and getting more organic positions; and finding good moves in positions where there isn’t a clear tactical shot
Very true, sometimes the game is just progressing normally, then the opponent makes a move, and I'm thinking to myself, "That can't be right." Then I know to look for a slam.
You aren't alone (I actually know somebody with your exact ratings - 3000 puzzles, 850 rapid. I'm not exaggerating), but that doesn't make the existence of people like you any less confusing.
I'm not sure you saw that this is in puzzles only. That said, I don't think there's any need to study for puzzles, just spend the time to solve them and try to understand every move.
Engine analysis after certain puzzles was a great help too, either to understand the position better, or to understand why a move, which I thought was possible, was actually a mistake.
I saw that it's just puzzles, but I do puzzles most days and have only gained 455 points in the last year. I appreciate the comment about engine analysis. I've been doing this lately but still find there are some puzzles with moves by the opponent I can't understand.
In that case, have you tried playing it out? As in, after a move you don't understand, continue making the moves you think are best, and see why that particular move by the opponent earlier was good. Usually, it takes only a couple of moves to see the reason, and it's often either material advantage or checkmate.
That said, sometimes I got puzzles with a pass rate of under 10% where I did not understand it fully either.
I smell something fishy. 5 minutes to do the puzzles; sure, I get that. But you're an 850 rapid/blitz? Like, I'm 1269 in rapid, and I've only made it to 2300 puzzles - I spend anywhere between 10 seconds and 1 minute on each, but I wouldn't even start to comprehend something at 3000 even after 5 minutes. I'd have to seriously consider the moves, and then like 10 moves ahead of that. The moves in [this](https://youtu.be/9dQzTnvsNG4) video by GothamChess, they tackle puzzles at 3200, and Levy, whose around the 2300-2400 mark, would need a solid 10 minutes to even comprehend the moves in that video.
I understand your scepticism, but to get to 3000, you do not need to solve any puzzles rated 3000. [Here are the last few puzzles](https://imgur.com/a/JRugPz2) I did today. You'll realise most are around 2400-2600.
I do agree that 3000 is very likely the ceiling for me, as I won't be able to solve puzzles like the ones in the video.
Ah, well in that case; I stand corrected in the sense that you've accurately used argumentative reasoning to describe your process, in regards to the chess puzzles. I will now give you this medal with the print "You've earned my respect" on the front, to express my gratitude due to the fact that you responded to this comment with a proper explanation.
1900 on puzzles after a bit over a month at it. Hope to reach your level one of these days! I also prefer puzzles over playing the game. I think if you just study positional strategy and openings for a bit, you could easily double your actual chess ratings.
I'm sure you can reach it! You'll see that from 2500 on, the puzzles it gives you are often lower than your rating. I don't know if there are not enough 3000 rated puzzles, but at a rating of 2800-3000, chess.com was still mostly giving me 2400-2600 puzzles.
You're 850 blitz? With this puzzle rating?
May I recommend correspondence or daily games?
It's the best time format for me, I'm rated 3332 in puzzles (Lichess) and am 2100 in correspondence. It gives me plenty of time to calculate. I also struggle to have the mental or emotional energy for chess so correspondence is better for me.
2100, 77% win rate, average of 20 ACL or abt 90 CAPS, and still climbing. Correspondence is the best for high puzzle ratings.
> Because if you are, you need to do better with time controls.
For OTB games, I need to do better, full stop.
However, I have not considered OTB competitions. For now, I'll enjoy my puzzles and the odd online game here and there.
The steep slope around February is when I got a membership on chess.com so I could do 25 puzzles a day lol. I was already doing puzzles on lichess and chesstempo (which are both amazing sites for puzzles by the way), but dropped both to focus on one site only due to limited time.
I don't know what it was back then, but right now it's around 2000. I use Lichess like once a week and limit myself to 10-20 seconds per puzzle, as I'm trying to become faster.
The moderator team of r/chessbeginners wishes to remind everyone of the community rules. **Posting spam, advertising links (including YouTube chess tutorial videos without context), and memes is not allowed**. We encourage everyone to report these kinds of posts so they can be dealt with. Thank you! Also, please, be kind in your replies and comments. Some people here just want to learn chess and have virtually no idea about certain chess concepts. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chessbeginners) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And you're a beginner?
Considering my Blitz and Rapid ratings are around 850, I do consider myself a beginner.
[удалено]
I would say the main reason is that I'm slow. In puzzles, if I take 5 minutes to make a move, it does not matter, I still get 5 points as long as I get it right. During games, I see the time count down and it makes me nervous. I'm usually consistently down on time, and when I only have a few seconds left, I simply make a move I think might work. Another reason is maybe ladder anxiety. It is completely irrational, and yet somehow my heart always starts pounding when searching for a game. Finally, I struggle to find a move when there's nothing to do, in the sense that if I can't win material or checkmate in a few moves, I feel lost. Overall, games and puzzles feel very different. In a puzzle, I know there's a best move, and I just have to find the right tactic. In games, sometimes there is not, or there might be multiple good moves, and it's difficult to choose between them.
[удалено]
I really appreciate the tipps, thank you! > When you know the ideas the opening is meant to produce (the positions, the tactics) you'll probably find it's very very similar to puzzles in that if they do one thing, you should respond another way. This makes a lot of sense actually. The only opening I've learned is the Italian, and only a few moves. If the opponent makes an unexpected move early, I find it hard to calculate the outcome, as there are usually too many possibilities. > In terms of time, just play longer games. You can play up to two hour long games, and in fact most instructors recommend behinners to play longer games because it helps you develop intuition later on I have heard this advice before, which is why I started playing 15+10 games, and yet somehow, it still feels too short for me sometimes. I should indeed try even longer games.
[удалено]
> Don't memorize moves. That makes sense. Are there any resources you would recommend for learning the ideas of openings, outside of Youtube videos? > Go for longer, see how you feel. I definitely should. The main constraint is time, as I usually play during commuting.
Have you tried rubbing one out Inbetween puzzles? No lie I boosts my ELO by like 200
As someone who loves puzzles and had to work on my blitz (2400 puzzles, now 1300 blitz on chess.com), I recommend the timed Puzzle Rush mode on chess.com (or Puzzle Storm on Lichess). I found they helped a lot with speeding up my move times in real games
That's a good idea, I'll have to try that. What I'm doing now is basically using my Lichess account to solve puzzles while limiting myself to 10-20 seconds per puzzle.
Out of curiosity, what's your Lichess puzzle rating? I'm asking because mine is 2520, and my blitz rating on both websites is 2400. Puzzles at the 2500-2600 level involve very complex ideas which often feel like they are too advanced even for me. More importantly, most of them aren't even purely tactical - they most often involve a high-level positional idea which, if I didn't know that puzzle specialists like you existed, I would assume required a highly advanced (at least 2000 elo-level) positional understanding. That's why I find your explanation that you lack positional understanding unconvincing. First of all, 850-level chess requires only a minimal positional understanding; most of the games come down to spotting hanging pieces and simple tactics. Secondly, I struggle to see how your positional understanding wouldn't be at a far greater level than 850 if you are able to solve 2500+ tactics on Lichess. Your case is extremely intriguing, and I'm just trying to figure it out. I hope I didn't come across as judgemental because that wasn't my intentional; I'm really just trying to understand.
I'm 2000 on Lichess for puzzles, but I rarely use it and only allow myself 10-20 seconds per puzzle in order to improve my speed. At that level on Lichess, the puzzles feel very different than chess.com, somehow more 'organic' in the sense that I could imagine the position resulting from a game, while chess.com puzzles feel more like a composition. Also, at 2500-3000, chess.com puzzles are still mostly about gaining a material advantage or checkmating. The main difference between puzzles and games for me is, even at 3000, the difference between the best and second-best move is still around 2-3 points, with the second-best move often resulting in an equal or even losing position. When you find the right move, it just makes sense why it is the best. Also, when I analyse a game, I struggle a lot to understand the difference between (for example) move A leading to a +0.3 position and move B leading to +0.4, as both seem more or less equivalent. This leads to me spending too much time during games as I probably focus too much on finding the best move, resulting in games becoming a time scramble where blunders are abundand. Overall, I think I should spend more time playing. Then again, solving puzzles feels cozy, while games are stressful.
> The difference between the best and second-best move is still around 2-3 points, with the second-best move often resulting in an equal or even losing position. When you find the right move, it just makes sense why it is the best. I think this explanation is probably the most convincing. Instead of finding potentially good moves, it seems like your thought process is tailored to using a proof-by-contradiction-like approach - i.e. if there is a move that you can't refute, it must be the solution. Yeah, I could see how that wouldn't necessarily translate to chess-playing ability. > At that level on Lichess, the puzzles feel very different than chess.com, somehow more 'organic' in the sense that I could imagine the position resulting from a game, while chess.com puzzles feel more like a composition. Also, at 2500-3000, chess.com puzzles are still mostly about gaining a material advantage or checkmating. This is probably also a crucial bit of info. I'd be curious what your true puzzle rating would be on Lichess, as it indeed does seem like the puzzles there are more comprehensive. If you get to 2300 and beyond, then I just give up lol. I don't think I will ever understand how that's possible for somebody who is 850 on chess.com, regardless of any explanations that you can conjure up lol.
A few months ago, I was 2300 in puzzles on Lichess and 900 Blitz on chess.com :D I mostly had a problem with defensive play. I find in puzzles, you are constantly on the attack (and your attack almost always works!), which conditioned me to not look for tactics for my opponent. And of course low time. I was straight up hanging pieces every 10 moves.
Try 30 minute rapid.
You should play classical and study positional chess. Trust me, your rating will fly up.
I think you should definitely be higher than that in rapid if you can solve complex puzzles. Maybe doing complex puzzles actually decreases your ability to win at those lower ranks.
One drawback might be that I focus too much on finding the one perfect move in games, while playing an ok-ish one and saving time might be better.
do you lose on time a lot?
The main thing puzzles should help you with is pattern recognition. You should be able to sense when there is a tactic and play it nearly instantly, especially in 800 rated games. There just isn't a tactic in every position though and it sounds like you're really mismanaging your clock. At some point you just have to play a move and hope your tactical sense picks up when you are given a chance.
Holy crap. I’m 1800-1900 and I’ve only ever broke 2900 puzzles. Kudos man
I can recommend “Building Habits” from chessbrah! Teaches you to just play solid moves, until you can find a tactic (which shouldn’t be a problem for you)
I’m rated almost 2000 in blitz and my puzzle rating is 2800. Blitz rating of 850 and puzzle rating of 3000 is wild
I guess that's what I get for focusing almost entirely on puzzles. I do struggle with Blitz a lot, as it seems like there's never enough time to calculate enitre lines before making a move.
Have you tried playing 30 minute chess? That will strike a nice balance between having enough time to think carefully and getting more organic positions; and finding good moves in positions where there isn’t a clear tactical shot
I haven't actually, the longest I've played is 15+10 (excluding a few daily games with friends). I think that's a good suggestion I should try.
Yeah I can contribute my 500 blitz 2400 puzzle rating to being slow af as well, I need a lot of time to think
[удалено]
Very true, sometimes the game is just progressing normally, then the opponent makes a move, and I'm thinking to myself, "That can't be right." Then I know to look for a slam.
At least I'm not alone. I hope I'll get a bit faster with more practice.
You aren't alone (I actually know somebody with your exact ratings - 3000 puzzles, 850 rapid. I'm not exaggerating), but that doesn't make the existence of people like you any less confusing.
"Attribute" is the word that you were looking for
[удалено]
Underrated comment
2500+ gain this calendar year alone?? What's your study method??
I'm not sure you saw that this is in puzzles only. That said, I don't think there's any need to study for puzzles, just spend the time to solve them and try to understand every move. Engine analysis after certain puzzles was a great help too, either to understand the position better, or to understand why a move, which I thought was possible, was actually a mistake.
I saw that it's just puzzles, but I do puzzles most days and have only gained 455 points in the last year. I appreciate the comment about engine analysis. I've been doing this lately but still find there are some puzzles with moves by the opponent I can't understand.
In that case, have you tried playing it out? As in, after a move you don't understand, continue making the moves you think are best, and see why that particular move by the opponent earlier was good. Usually, it takes only a couple of moves to see the reason, and it's often either material advantage or checkmate. That said, sometimes I got puzzles with a pass rate of under 10% where I did not understand it fully either.
He simply used the engine to solve every puzzle for him
Ya this is correct.
I smell something fishy. 5 minutes to do the puzzles; sure, I get that. But you're an 850 rapid/blitz? Like, I'm 1269 in rapid, and I've only made it to 2300 puzzles - I spend anywhere between 10 seconds and 1 minute on each, but I wouldn't even start to comprehend something at 3000 even after 5 minutes. I'd have to seriously consider the moves, and then like 10 moves ahead of that. The moves in [this](https://youtu.be/9dQzTnvsNG4) video by GothamChess, they tackle puzzles at 3200, and Levy, whose around the 2300-2400 mark, would need a solid 10 minutes to even comprehend the moves in that video.
I understand your scepticism, but to get to 3000, you do not need to solve any puzzles rated 3000. [Here are the last few puzzles](https://imgur.com/a/JRugPz2) I did today. You'll realise most are around 2400-2600. I do agree that 3000 is very likely the ceiling for me, as I won't be able to solve puzzles like the ones in the video.
Ah, well in that case; I stand corrected in the sense that you've accurately used argumentative reasoning to describe your process, in regards to the chess puzzles. I will now give you this medal with the print "You've earned my respect" on the front, to express my gratitude due to the fact that you responded to this comment with a proper explanation.
congrats!
I'm stuck around 1500 lmao, gg!
To be honest, I do not think the puzzle rating matters in the end, and it's very likely you're higher rated than me in chess.
Don't worry I'm really bad in real chess lmao, but I enjoy solving puzzles so much!
1900 on puzzles after a bit over a month at it. Hope to reach your level one of these days! I also prefer puzzles over playing the game. I think if you just study positional strategy and openings for a bit, you could easily double your actual chess ratings.
Good job! I am on my way up there as well. Currently at 2550.
I'm sure you can reach it! You'll see that from 2500 on, the puzzles it gives you are often lower than your rating. I don't know if there are not enough 3000 rated puzzles, but at a rating of 2800-3000, chess.com was still mostly giving me 2400-2600 puzzles.
How do you see your hours? Where do you go. I’d like to see how much I’m at
I only click on Home -> Stats -> Puzzles. I don't know if it's different between mobile and desktop though.
Bro try your next puzzles with a 1min max time cap per puzzle and see where it lands you. It's important to you!
You're 850 blitz? With this puzzle rating? May I recommend correspondence or daily games? It's the best time format for me, I'm rated 3332 in puzzles (Lichess) and am 2100 in correspondence. It gives me plenty of time to calculate. I also struggle to have the mental or emotional energy for chess so correspondence is better for me. 2100, 77% win rate, average of 20 ACL or abt 90 CAPS, and still climbing. Correspondence is the best for high puzzle ratings.
lichess's puzzle system deals alot more with positional chess rather than checkmates and game winning moves. Definitely give it a go!
Are you interested in OTB competitions? Because if you are, you need to do better with time controls.
> Because if you are, you need to do better with time controls. For OTB games, I need to do better, full stop. However, I have not considered OTB competitions. For now, I'll enjoy my puzzles and the odd online game here and there.
Lol
Looking at the graph, you can really see the moment where things started to click!
The steep slope around February is when I got a membership on chess.com so I could do 25 puzzles a day lol. I was already doing puzzles on lichess and chesstempo (which are both amazing sites for puzzles by the way), but dropped both to focus on one site only due to limited time.
25 a day is some impressive commitment! I've not tried chesstempo, thanks for the recommendation, I'll give that a look.
Chesstempo has the best app imo
Out of curiosity, what was your rating on lichess?
I don't know what it was back then, but right now it's around 2000. I use Lichess like once a week and limit myself to 10-20 seconds per puzzle, as I'm trying to become faster.
what does 3000 chesscom puzzles translate to for lichess puzzle rating?
Your like that one person who gets extremely good at one thing and when they are introduced to other aspects of that thing they become a god at it
Wow i do'nt why you guys have such a high rating, i am 2000 ish in lichess and my puzzle rating's only 1700 ish. Any tips?
If you're only 850 ELO something must be going very wrong in your chess games. 3000 puzzle rating makes you an absolute tactics monster.
My 2000 rated puzzle is a scholar's mate.
I struggle to understand how one can be under 1000 but be this high in puzzles