So, I only know the basic rules and moves of chess. I play with my friend, and I usually lose within 16–20 moves, but he did that shit just for fun.... 🙃

Competency of chess player

Took a long time of absolutely no studying, and losing a ton. The 1400 from a few months ago is because I took a year long break, won my first 2 games, so my rating shot up. This is the first time it's legit.

It is only after the game I realized how badly I was losing

And with a bonus rook sacrifice too.
1190 ELO

The opponent ran out of time and I still have legal moves to play, but the game ended in a draw by insufficient material vs timeout.

Edit: b6 was a knight defending Rc8

I'm curious what high-level games look like. Right now I try to set up tactics and hope they don't see it. When I'm really tilted I give up material in order to set up tactics (which usually doesn't work out). I feel like all my wins are basically fake since they can literally just avoid everything I'm trying to do. I wonder how high level players win games when you both see the matrix and don't lose material to stupid 1-move blunders/tactics.

Do you even try to set up tactics or do you just accept that they are going to see it and do something else?

Genuinely curious what is there so brilliant about this move.

(cell was empty)

I play 3-0 blitz the most because...ADHD. I've been seriously playing daily for about 6 weeks.

ELO:

• Chess.com = 143
• Lichess = 755

I play Chess.com the most, but still get in 3-5 matches a day on Lichess. I understand that Chess.com starts you at 100 vs Lichess starting me at 1500 (?!). But my elo on Lichess has stabilized. I'm staying in the 700s, where I can't break 200 on Chess.com

For 3 min games, MOST of my wins are flagging the opponent. I'm often down material, but I just play the clock better. My losses are 60/40 time vs checkmate. Ironically it's the games that are the closest or I have a slight advantage that the clock gets me.

For some odd reason I actually care about my ELO on Chess.com the most, and I'm far more like to play lichess if I've had a few beers.

What do you think is the cause for the drastic difference in ELO?

How did you guy improved the ability to calculate/seeing the long lines without playing it on the actual board?

It can be improved during game play for sure, but sometimes, when I look at the engine lines, I have no idea how to visualize it too far, and usually just lost.

I've been playing chess for a few weeks/months, mostly on my computer, and I've noticed something strange.

Even when I'm not playing, I sometimes see a faint pattern of chessboard squares over whatever I'm looking at, even on surfaces that don't have any kind of grid pattern. It's similar to how you might keep seeing the shape of a light source after looking away from it.

What's particularly strange is that it can happen even after a full night's sleep, and I can still see the pattern with my eyes closed.

I play for around 3 hours a day, but not continuously.

Has anyone else experienced something similar after playing chess regularly? I'm curious whether this is something other chess players have noticed, too.

Has anyone tried this Youtuber's courses? What about other course recommendations? I play at around 900 rapid.

First one, intentionally hung my bishop to see if he’d bite with the rook and he did!

I am struggling to see any benefits to this move. Can the puzzles have blunders halfway through the puzzle?

Original Game: (https://lichess.org/mj0HV4nS)

So much for my brilliant attack. DDDD

I was playing White in a rapid game, and honestly, I was pretty happy with how it ended.

19.Qg4#. A nice little king hunt. The kind of finish that makes you feel like you actually know what you're doing at chess.

For about five minutes, anyway...

But when I went back through the game, something bothered me.

Earlier, Black's queen had taken my rook on h1. After 10.dxc6, Black responded with 10...dxc6.

That gave me just enough time to get my pieces out.

The game continued 11.Nc3 Qxg1 12.Be3 Qh1 13.O-O-O, and somehow I ended up chasing Black's king around the board until checkmate.

Looked great in the final position.

But I started wondering: What if Black hadn't given me that extra time?

Simulated game (https://lichess.org/study/FsFsDZQo/XhGn3ZaR)

So I went back to move 10 and changed one thing.

Instead of 10...dxc6, I tried 10...Qxg1, taking the knight immediately.

Then I turned off the engine lines and played the position myself.

Same me. Same ideas. Same confidence (unfortunately).

I tried developing, castling queenside, and getting an attack going.

The new line started 11.Be3 Qh1 12.Nc3 Bb4 13.O-O-O Qxc6.

Except this time, Black recovered the pawn, developed normally, and eventually castled.

And I was sitting there trying to make my beautiful king hunt happen again.

Black, rather rudely, refused to cooperate.

I got checkmated on move 33.

Now, obviously, one replay doesn't prove that the original position was lost. I could have played better. Black could have played worse.

But it made me realize something I hadn't noticed while celebrating the win.

My attack wasn't just about the good moves I made. It was also about the time my opponent gave me.

And I'd completely overlooked that part.

Since then, I've started asking myself a different question when reviewing games I win.

Not just "Where did I play well?"

But "What could my opponent have done to make my whole plan fall apart?"

If you have a game you're particularly proud of, try finding one moment where your opponent let you off the hook. Replace their move with something stronger, hide the analysis, and play from there.

You might still win.

Or you might discover, like I did, that your masterpiece needed a little help from the other side.

A small note to myself xD Winning a game and understanding why you won it are two very different things. I'm apparently still working on the second part.

P.S. I used Zen for this little experiment. It's a tool focused on exploring chess positions and seeing what happens when you try different moves. You can give it a try, or use any other tool that lets you play from a position. The lesson is the same. My ego probably would've taken the same hit either way. zen.reinit.net

Got my first brilliant move today can someone explain the logic behind it?

What a wonderful sacrifice

I know it's basic, but It was hilarious how It worked for me haha

Okay, I'm a real beginner. I know the basics, but I'm just starting to learn how to put those together into a PLAN. These two screenshots are from the placement test at KnightSchool.com.

In the first, I've been instructed to fork the king and the rook. My initial thought, Qd8+, was rejected, and this shows the solution they wanted, with the queen on d5. The note says that "after any king move, Qxa5". Am I missing something? Why would the king move at all in this position? Wouldn't black just capture my unprotected queen with Rxd5?

In the second one, I've been given three options and told to find checkmate and avoid stalemate. I chose Qh8, which sure looks like mate to me. I was told this was wrong, and the king could move to a7, but isn't a7 protected by my king and therefore an illegal move for black? I was told that Qb8 was the correct move, but to me that looks like the king can just get out of check by capturing my queen. The site says that my king protects b8, but... it doesn't, does it?

I'm so confused. Is this me just being clueless and missing something that is obvious to any decent player, or are these actually flaws in the test? Halp please.

(I just noticed and find it funny that the notation in the options actually gives away the answer they want)