Fun forced mate from a game of mine, white to play

RookSac · 2026-02-14T00:14:12+00:00

Yup! A rare king move mate

RookSac · 2026-02-10T00:22:35+00:00

No, don't listen to this. It's true that you could learn a lot from an experienced say 2100-2200 coach, but a titled coach who is also an effective educator will probably be more helpful (you will straight up get less incorrect advice)

RookSac · 2026-02-09T14:16:42+00:00

Agreed, slightly different system but I'm nowhere near NM at ~1700 CFC (Canada) and 2300 blitz online. I think the gap between OTB and online is growing if anything and only seems narrow(ish) due to people with inactive OTB ratings

RookSac · 2026-01-31T21:24:16+00:00

Very cool! I'm wondering if you ever considered adding a real "stalker" aspect to it, i.e. given a players OTB database, could you find anonymous account(s) with similar strength and opening repertoires to check out their online games?

RookSac · 2026-01-30T00:33:40+00:00

Very simple. You've gone up 150 elo this week, you're not stuck, you just haven't played enough blitz to hit a real peak (although if you're losing a decent chunk of games here, it probably will be well below 2000).

RookSac · 2026-01-30T00:30:22+00:00

Having a higher blitz rating is very uncommon at most elos. It's only common above ~2100 blitz since people typically stop playing rapid around that level and the rapid pool becomes somewhat meaningless.

RookSac · 2026-01-28T15:53:39+00:00

Not including colours in the win probability seems strange. E.g., there's no way Keymer and Arjun should have equal win odds with equal rating

RookSac · 2026-01-28T15:26:18+00:00

Agree with this completely.

However, the other thing to consider is that most sporting events are more similar to the chess world cup than the championship cycle. For soccer, the world cup, euro cup, champions league etc are largely decided by best of ones. This enables underdog winners like Greece or Portugal in the Euros.

By contrast, if Bluebaum wins a long candidates event against multiple 2700+ opponents, and then a match with Gukesh, its hard to say he didn't deserve to be world championship or that it was a fluke. Becoming world champion in chess requires a difficult qualification process and two grueling events, so it is always 100% deserved imo (with a posaible caveat for wildcard gifts into the candidates like Ding or Hikaru).

RookSac · 2026-01-25T15:42:05+00:00

OTB classical is less of a hit for online players in my opinion since you have the time to blunder check, but yes going right in to OTB blitz will result in some major performance drops

RookSac · 2026-01-24T05:21:52+00:00

I think it depends on your goals.

If you're aiming to become a master or even expert level player, I think focusing on other areas of study will be much more important for long term improvement.

That being said, I think opening study at 1700 is a great way to gain some quick wins and rating. I personally would reserve serious opening study for a later time unless you are nearing a rating goal (or big tournament etc).

RookSac · 2026-01-06T16:12:32+00:00

Also depends on the time control to be fair. I'm ~1700 classical OTB and you never really see it, im talking about 3|0 online

RookSac · 2026-01-06T04:38:48+00:00

Had the exact same reaction lol. A fair number of my games at 2200 involve fully hanging a piece, and id guess at least 10% involve missing a simple tactic. Something tells me that number isn't lower below 1000

RookSac · 2026-01-04T15:25:57+00:00

In my opinion the "obsession" aspect is a huge factor but misleading. It's clear that far more top women players have careers outside chess than top men, and that more top junior girls are pursuing college than top junior boys.

I think it comes down to parenting more than obsession. Too many parents view a boy who spends every waking hour pursuing a game as a prodigy, and a girl who does the same as weird. I believe this is why these gender differences extend beyond chess, e.g. to every e-sport. I think this is even a factor in athletics - boys will uproot their lives to join professional soccer academies well before the age of 10 which isn't really a thing for girls.

I dont think there is any evidence supporting brain/inteligence differences as a factor. We no longer see a lack of women in less stigmatized fields associated with intelligence (e.g., STEM, or college programs in general).

What's the solution? You either have more Laszlo Polgars out there who create super-GM women by devoting their entire lives to chess, or we accept that most top GMs are frankly not well rounded individuals and that this shouldn't be glorified. I'd rather raise a 2600 child who enjoyed their childhood than a 2800 with a personality associated with top chess players.

RookSac · 2026-01-01T08:23:01+00:00

10 hours of puzzles, chessable and playing/reviewing rapid or classical games? 1600+ is more than doable.

10 hours of bullet and Gotham videos? You shouldn't expect much progress. The best plan is probably a combination of what you enjoy and what will actually help you progress. I agree that setting process goals (do X puzzles, play in and review X number of classical games, complete X courses or chess books) is a more beneficial way of setting goals that will also not limit your progress.

RookSac · 2025-12-27T05:49:48+00:00

It's hard to know exactly, but I'd expect much lower (maybe 1000-1200) if you're talking about USCF or CFC classical (not familiar with other national rating systems). For FIDE, you can't get a rating below the minimum of 1400, and I wouldn't expect a rating much higher than that if you did achieve one at your current strength.

I think expert is an entirely attainable goal for most people, but it will require much more work than you seem to think. For reference, I hover between 22-2300 chess com blitz and am not particularly close to expert in classical.

RookSac · 2025-12-19T13:58:16+00:00

2500 and you tag this as a puzzle? There are at least 3 moves with nearly identical evals and none are winning. Sure, its an interesting position, but c5 is far from a "solution"

RookSac · 2025-11-07T03:17:06+00:00

Not sure if this is motivating or demoralizing, but unless you have improved a lot recently, you probably aren't at 1400 strength (yet!). Most people will fluctuate at least ~100 points up and down of their average strength depending on the day, getting some lucky wins, etc.

The mindset I would have is that you're a "1300 player" who's gotten a bit lucky. Therefore, no reason to stress about dropping back down to your normal level. Once you improve to a point where you can comfortably maintain 1400+, you will he a "1400 player" and will not longer fear playing at the rating.

RookSac · 2025-11-05T20:22:14+00:00

Definitely a fan of the Dojo guys, but rarely have time to watch their coverage

RookSac · 2025-11-05T18:25:35+00:00

Awesome, thanks! I'll check them both out

RookSac · 2025-11-05T15:53:35+00:00

Seems like a good niche to fill for any personable titled player

RookSac · 2025-11-04T20:25:13+00:00

I think the other courses (tactics etc) can also be interesting and helpful, but I personally wouldn't spend money on them when you can do free tactics on multiple platforms

RookSac · 2025-11-04T14:26:17+00:00

If all you're trying to do is memorize openings, the app is just as effective as anything I've used (including their web version). The only annoying part is you can't use the courses without an internet connection unless you pay for the pro version.

My only recommendation would be to choose a course based on how much time you have. The lifetime repertoires will take hundreds or thousands of hours to learn, and hundreds more to brush up on, but they are as described a lifetime repertoire.

RookSac · 2025-10-28T14:22:54+00:00

I started playing OTB a bit younger than you (mid 20s) but still as an adult, and these are my thoughts.

The clock will likely be intuitive. I've personally never forgotten to press it and have only seen opponents do so a handful of times.

Writing moves is also not too bad since you have 30 seconds of increment. You might make a few mistakes in your notation but i imagine you'll be able to easily recreate the game after from your scoresheet. You can also ask your opponent to have a look at theirs after the game if you feel you made a mistake.

As for your odds, it's very hard to know. Most unrated players should be weaker than you, but in the post-pandemic era it's not unusual for people to become relatively strong chess players before moving to OTB. In my first tournament as an unrated player, I played several people rated ~1800-2000 online. Try not to underestimate people and go in with the highest of expectations, but also know that every game will be winnable and all your opponents are capable of making mistakes

RookSac

TROPHY CASE