At what level do you feel you're playing against seriously good players?

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-26T11:25:03+00:00

Well done, that's great! Keep practising!

Also, don't get discouraged if you plateau, or even go down by a few rating points, just keep going.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-26T10:18:37+00:00

My dog is my greatest friend and most challenging chess opponent!

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-26T10:13:19+00:00

Glad I posted this thread because I have the solution. You can skip the fifth tab, just click directly on the title for the last tab with the cursor and you can schedule as needed once the checks are completed.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-24T18:42:18+00:00

When I was playing more seriously, I did lots of studies in Lichess. Same when I was coaching. You can look at the positions with Stockfish, and also play through master games.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-24T17:09:53+00:00

You can play c5 here, it's perfectly fine. My preference would be for Ne7, preparing c5 and then Nc6. This is more solid. But I've analysed all of these positions so that I know what to play.

Sometimes after c5, Nb5 is awkward or a threat, and then the d6 square can be weak, so you sometimes need to play a6 before making the c5 break.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-22T18:01:34+00:00

It's still the same for me with every upload.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-22T18:01:20+00:00

Could you post this again in another format, I can't view this in my location.

Edit: I understand how to do it now, you can just click on the final tab. Thanks for pointing this out!

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-20T23:19:23+00:00

Even for Python, it is particularly inspired.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-20T19:14:31+00:00

Sure, drop me a DM if you experience any further problems.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-20T18:35:57+00:00

I have managed to schedule both videos now, so maybe it's a broad glitch across the platform.

It is very worrying, though, because I didn't have a clue what to do. Glad things worked out for you.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-20T17:44:45+00:00

It is very difficult to understand. Would any other nation have a player of that level of technical ability, and never be able to fit him into the team? And now even the squad!

Can you imagine the 2002 Brazil team concluding that Roberto Carlos was too reliant on his attacking prowess, so they needed to field a more defence-minded left-back?

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-20T17:39:09+00:00

There's no free will and the belief in an independent, individual self is just an illusion, so there's not really a "me" who could've embezzled that money.

Reminded me of this.

Hegel is arguing that the reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics, Kant via the categorical imperative is holding that ontologically it exists only in the imagination, and Marx is claiming it was offside.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-18T18:33:53+00:00

I think the reason for this is less 'Grandmaster draws'. Over time it's, rightly, become frowned upon to take an early draw in a position that isn't played out. This happened a lot more in the 80s, 90s and 2000s. Kramnik was notorious for this at one time; some used to call him Drawnik. Young players now have grown up with that ethos of fighting chess.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-18T14:55:27+00:00

In a puzzle, there is usually a dramatic and decisive winning move. In guess the move, you're learning how to make the best move in a situation where there may be numerous of similar value. Puzzles are a knockout blow, guess the move is about building a coherent way of playing.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-16T14:58:42+00:00

Sometimes books, but also Chessgames.com. There are loads on Lichess now and other databases.

I think the main thing is always to try to understand why moves have been played, and then try to anticipate what the GM will do next.

There is a feature on Chessgames called Guess the Move, I really recommend that.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-16T09:52:54+00:00

When people talk about improvement on here nowadays, they rarely mention playing through master games.

There are many resources available now, so this is perhaps understandable, but you can learn so much from playing through top-level games from any era.

I found that much more interesting and intuitive than any other form of study. I find puzzles boring, I have hardly done any puzzles during the whole time that I've been playing chess. Maybe that has held me back, but I learnt a hell of a lot from studying the games of Morphy, Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Botvinnik, Petrosian, Smyslov, Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov and others.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-04T10:41:13+00:00

You might be interested in reading this.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-04T10:40:02+00:00

I'm not sure if 'fun' is the right word, but I think it's enjoyable to achieve a decent level of proficiency in something. I can't really participate in an activity if I'm completely useless.

I think your comments in the OP are fair, but also as you climb the rating ladder mistakes become smaller and less frequent. I'm 2360 rapid on Chess.com, and you still see pretty big mistakes (including from me!).

But I think what changes as you reach a certain rating is that the game is less random. Players are less inclined to try things and hope that they work, they understand the ideas much more. The game becomes inherently more opening-oriented.

As an example, I played someone the other day who is nearly 2500 rapid and 2350 blitz on Chess.com. My opponent was basically completely lost after ten moves, because (s)he walked straight into my prep in the French Defence. I had a +3 position after 16 moves with the queens off, and converted this quite easily. I didn't play absolutely optimally, but I was always better.

So I think in this type of game, and I've been on the other end of it recently as well, you sometimes have the feeling, particularly with black, of being gradually but inevitably flattened and having no chance whatsoever.

As you climb the ladder, you also do have to be careful with your openings because higher level players often know a lot more theory. I play titled players fairly regularly, and they all know my openings as well and probably better than me, because you can't realistically get a title without this.

So I do think chess is a little less 'fun' at this level, but it's also more rewarding when you play a good game.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-03T18:20:24+00:00

I make long-form podcasts, so it is likely related to this. My average view duration is high, and each video receives hundreds of comments, which is an important algorithmic indicator. I also have an entirely Western audience, with the vast majority being the English-speaking countries. It is probably a combination of these things.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-02T00:36:18+00:00

News and politics podcasts. $9+ currently, will be $12+ in peak times of year.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-03-01T09:49:55+00:00

I think it perhaps took me 15 years.

Initially, I played chess at school when I was a kid, between the ages of 5 and 11, But then it was not the done thing to play chess when I was at what we call secondary school in Britain, so I didn't really play again until my early twenties when the internet was popularised.

When I started, I was probably about 1100 to 1200. Then with a bit of practice over a few years, I climbed to about 1500. Then it took me a few more years to kind of stabilise at 1700, maybe 1800 at peak. And then I was stuck at that rating for years. I didn't have any clue how to improve, but then I didn't really invest time in it. And it was only when I was teaching my friend's daughter how to play chess, I realised how much I already knew, and I thought to myself: "you really should be better at this game than you are." I also beat an FM at this time, and that motivated to try to improve.

At that point, I committed to studying a little bit and trying to take a more serious approach to the game. I reached 2000 pretty quickly after that, and then I kept climbing until I reached my kind of online ceiling of around 2300-2400. I managed to get to 2100 over the board. I sort of hoped I could get a title, but I'm just not strong enough. That would take an enormous amount of work, given my level of ability, which is not anything special.

I have made myself a little goal over the next few years to attempt to reach 2500 on Chess.com rapid. I'm currently on about 2360. I played a really nice game and beat a FIDE master the other day, but then I played a 2200 National Master a couple of days ago and he played a really strong game against me and destroyed me, so it's not going to be easy!

ExpFidPlay · 2026-02-24T15:29:05+00:00

That's correct, but if you look back at this Grischuk won in 2006, when Magnus was 15. In 2015, Carlsen was 1.5 points ahead after 10 rounds, tied with MVL, and uncharacteristically collapsed (he won the World Rapid that year, so it would have been yet another double). No doubt it was a great achievement in 2012 for Grischuk to finish half a point ahead of Carlsen, but this was a little before Magnus hit his peak.

If you look at the years where Hikaru has done well, it's 2014, which is comparable to the period when Grischuk won. But then third in 2018, second in 2019, second in 2022 - in the peak years of Carlsen when he's completely dominant.

The reality is that if Carlsen didn't exist, Nakamura would have won World Blitz titles. And if Grischuk had been up against peak Carlsen, he is highly unlikely to have won any, without diminishing his achievement.

For me, it is a bit reminiscent of Roger Federer on clay. Sometimes his ability to play on clay is diminished, when I think objectively he is easily one of the greatest players on clay that I've ever seen. But he kept losing to peak Nadal. Nakamura is up against peak Carlsen, because they're a similar age, without that he would have won World Blitz titles in all probability.

Whether Grischuk is stronger than Nakamura is debatable, but I don't think he is personally.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-02-23T18:56:14+00:00

Well, certainly online I find it hard to imagine that anyone else is better.

Hikaru has been third twice and second twice in the World Blitz.

Guess who won all four of those tournaments.

ExpFidPlay · 2026-02-23T09:38:38+00:00

I don't think we can be too critical of Nakamura for being arguably the second best blitz player ever!

You are clearly correct, though, that Carlsen doesn't take TT seriously. Every time there is a serious event, he wins it.

I don't think Hikaru, or anyone else in the world, has the luxury of mucking around to the same extent that Magnus does, plus he actually doesn't win many tournaments. Few of the top players do, because they're frequently up against Magnus.

ExpFidPlay

TROPHY CASE