How to realistically improve at chess in 53 seconds

Hope you enjoyed. :)
Music by Den from Pixabay

[@gokulhemanthkumar4556]

Chess needs an intense amount of practice in order to apply what you learnt in your previous games as well as videos/books etc into the situations you find yourself in, in a random game. No two chess games are the same. Sadly, this required amount of practice is vastly under estimated by the majority of people who want to improve at chess, and hence they would never improve beyond a certain point.

[@juno7760]

@@gokulhemanthkumar4556 no two chess games are the same? 😂😂

[@gokulhemanthkumar4556]

@juno7760 provided you go for like 10 moves or so, pretty much yeah 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@jonshive5482]

@@juno7760 That's a slight exaggeration as masters sometimes repeat lines of known opening variations to get a draw. But by and large most openings lead to middle games which lead to unique positions. It's said there are more possible games than there are atoms in the known universe. And even supercomputer programs haven't been able to discover the "perfect" opening from which White always wins from the first move.

[@juno7760]

Ill teach in 5 seconds then 1) Review mistakes 2) Play longer formats

[@chessmaxxing398]

lmao

[@Ciaolo]

1) Play longer formats and move carefully

[@Salmon10111]

Its different for everyone im 2000 and only started playing puzzles and checking analysis at 1900 but the long time control is a must have

[@ashocck8065]

You want to get better? 1. Learn openings. First the main lines, then the variations, then the exotics. I don't mean the first 2-3 moves. I mean a *bare* minimum of 10. 2. Learn the principals of endgames. 3. Get yourself a few books analyzing famous tournaments. Read them with a chessboard in front of you and try your best to understand what the players were doing. My favorite when I was learning years ago was "Zurich International Chess Tournament" by David Bronstein. 4. Using the top 3, play. I guarantee that if you learn at least 8-10 openings, you will automatically be a lot better just from that.

[@kobz2862]

With openings i disagree, learning "8-10 openings" takes more time than learning tactics and gaining the "know how". When you master 1 one opening for each side and just have the knowledge about position weaknesses etc then you don't need so many move orders. And besides, learning a opening isn't just memorizing 10 moves ahead and the variations, it's to know what is the position and what do you want actually. It's good to make a experiment to learn first a beginner friendly opening like Giuoco Piano than teaches you how to develop peaces and then try idk, Alekhine (or any other hypermodern) that has a totally different concept. When you deal with such different ideas, you learn new things and progress instead of mindless memorizing tons of move orders

[@ashocck8065]

@@kobz2862 You are incorrect. When you memorize, you start to understand. That is why you need to have the board in front of you to analyze the logic behind the moves. As far as 1 opening for each side, that is simply not enough. You play E4, Black has many different replies. If you only know 1 opening, what do you play as White if Black plays the Sicilian or French or a number of other replies. You play D4 and Black has a dozen replies that lead to completely different positions. If your openings are weak, you will never beat even a semi-decent player and will never get out of 12-1300s.

[@snxw69420]

you came up in my recommendations, good job with youtube ig :)

[@Anon_581]

Nice video, you came up on my feed, so the algorithm definitely is working in your favor. You kinda reminded me of the guy from the channel "Ben S Chess" with your humor. You got yourself another subscriber, cheers! :)

[@chessmaxxing398]

@@Anon_581 never knew who Ben s chess was until then. His videos look good though, I got most of my inspiration from other niches.:)

[@Mayo-ow5lb]

Great video and very real advice ,keep it up dude!

[@wallywest9257]

I'm been hard stuck at 1700 for like a year lol. I feel this is the max I can achieve without applying serious practice, I peaked at 1739 elo, I get paired up with people anywhere from 1600 to 2000, mostly 1800's. Its difficult to rank up more with the minimal effort I put in, I only play for fun, but I feel i've peaked, any further improvements will require actual effort of studying lines etc. If I put in more effort I fee like I could climb to like 1800-2000 elo in a couple years but I just cbf.

[@EG-bz1ig]

Great vid!

[@JannisSicker]

on lichess, puzzles and every study is free!

[@kobz2862]

15+10 time format is your key. Opponents become way more stronger even on low elo (most of the time they don't blunder pieces in one), you have time to think and the quality of moves on both sides are sky rocketing. Of course it's still the beginner level so you can still break someone with simple tactics, but it makes you T H I N K and imagine what the piece is gonna do on a different square and what outcome is it gonna have on the board in the next 2-3 moves or you can just turn 10+0 with minimum time management and wait till your opponents breaks his own neck because he's playing like it's a bullet dunno (protip: lichess has free puzzles, don't buy diamond when you're 800 elo or below imo)

[@HDQuakelive]

You need a strong faculty of mind to do that, what I mean is a strong memory and strong visualisation/imagination to see the future. If you're someone with aphantasia and bad memory like myself then doing this analysis stuff never sticks unless I repeat the same simple mistake a million times till it becomes second nature. And seeing the future, LOL, nearly impossible.

[@chessdragon007]

I dunno if I'd say it's properly, but I'd skip to the parts of the analysis where the mistakes/blunders/misses happened and look for alternatives. Also, have been creating myself opening using lichess studies. Rinse and repeat, my elo rose. Sadly, I've been getting better using 3+0 rather than 10+0, but hope to change it soon. Cool vid too 🔥

[@baskeplaye009]

I don't think analyzing is strictly required at all (Maybe on higher Elo's), but up to ~1700 Rapid on cc you don't really need to analyze. Just practice all types of tactics over and over again until it's engrained in your brain.

[@ThatsCoolFootball-cr7]

nice deserves a sub

[@literallylegendary]

Use lichess when necessary

[@IsmailFarooquiF7]

ben s chess vibes

[@alexphenex8]

Thank you

[@-Alarion]

I was expecting a shitpost, now I feel scammed :(

[@jonshive5482]

Heh-heh. Chess in a nutshell indeed. But chess is a game which is relatively easy to learn (the moves and general idea that is) yet extremely difficult to master. Basically you need exceptional memory, visualization and calculation skills to reach the National Master level, and even more of same to reach IM and GM. Most IM's can play games in their heads without sight of a board and GM's are known to play multiple games simultaneously that way (it's called blindfold). For most of humanity simply getting to an Elo rating of 2000 would be considered a major accomplishment, and the vast majority reach a rating plateau below that from which they can hardly advance.

[@JS_Precision]

Another nice skill to have is spelling.

[@behmquentin2197]

Yeah Nah, i'll go for bullet and win on time

[@mikemellor8972]

Play more OTB.

[@TheChees1996]

listen chess is more fun when you are in the lower ratings. just one dumb dude vs another dumb dude

[@OvejaGD]

What is your elo

[@chessmaxxing398]

1700 rapid. :)

[@papaproduction]

920 rapid

[@notbukas4296]

emmmmmmmmmmmmmm actually... its 52 seconds...

[@prodawgg]

how bro felt - ☝🤓

[@notbukas4296]

@ real

[@tonyhart2744]

just learn puzzle Tyler1 literally go from 400 elo to 2k in 1 year, dont need bullshit course just do puzzle

[@hoangquanpham-l4t]

I have a better method just in 5 sec 1.Cheating done

[@yesno-videos]

Bruh a gm even said bullet is better than a 30-minute game for improvement (hikaru) even as a 500 rated player in bullet i literally started to read patterns way faster sense I played bullet because it trains your mind to think faster and less rationally. rational mined is bad because you want an open view of what's happening not what you should do so study more, learn theory and play bullet blitz is sort of better but not cutting it like bullet

[@chessmaxxing398]

most high level players recommend rapid, also when I started playing rapid I instantly got better.

[@TiberiusClarkwastaken]

I agree, I think that if you think longer on your moves it will help you a lot more. Maybe up to some level around 1k bullet is better but above that definitely rapid

[@yesno-videos]

@ yeah bullet got me to 300 to 500 in 2 days

[@yesno-videos]

@ and tbh bullet does make the mined work better with blitz and blitz makes your mined work better in rapid/classical

[@TheCyanKiller]

never play bullet unless increment, an even play of blitz and rapid is probably much better.