Answers.Body: <p>If you can play three games blind-folded, it is unlikely that your problem is calculation. I dare say that there aren't many 1900 USCF players that can do that. </p>
  
  <p>You say you "lose a lot of games due to poor evaluation, time pressure, and erratic blunders". That also doesn't cry out "calculation problems" to me. </p>
  
  <p>In my experience ratings first and foremost reflect positional understanding. Calculation skills make a much smaller difference, at least above a certain threshold.</p>
  
  <p>To be clear, positional understanding isn't knowledge as much as a good feeling for the position. I.e. whether you can precisely estimate how good your position really is and quickly come up with sensible moves and plans.
  If you are lacking in that department you tend to calculate a lot without achieving much. That results in time pressure and blunders just as surely as having calculation deficits. </p>
  
  <p>So I would rather recommend a book like <a href="https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/2/155/grandmaster_preparation_-_positional_play_by_jacob_aagaard/" rel="noreferrer">Positional Play by Jacob Aagaard</a>. If you can easily solve the problems in this book, you can always go back to pure calculation. </p>
  
  <p>By the way, there is a big difference between training calculation and training tactics. Solving tactics depends on seeing motives, training calculation depends on the ability to think far ahead without confusing yourself. So if you do go back to pure calculation, maybe you should try the <a href="https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/2/157/grandmaster_preparation_-_calculation_by_jacob_aagaard/" rel="noreferrer">Calculation</a> book by Aagaard, or similar books by Dvoretsky. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-04-15T09:51:03.047Z
Answers.Text: I think aagaard books are too difficult for 1900 uscf imo.
Answers.UserDisplayName: CognisMantis
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T12:11:01.133Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-12T12:11:01.133Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: BlindKungFuMaster
Answers.Body: <p>I am in a similar situation, so I can't really give advise from the perspective of someone who has been to the mountain top, and seen the promised land, but.. I suspect the key here is that to immerse oneself in chess, pursuing knowledge and skill, trying to find answers to questions etc, rather than this or that study program.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-14T20:23:00.180Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-14T20:23:00.180Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: acye
Answers.Body: <p>I'll tell you what I did to go from 2000 to 2200. At least 10 chess tempo tactics a day, completing these endgame books (silmans complete endgame manual, dvoretsky's endgame manual, endgame strategy by shereshevsky), went over a few thousand gm games (1-2 guess the move games a day on chesstempo and 6 games a day on 2700chess.com from classical time control games), and played and analyzed at least 1 15+ minute game a day.</p>
  
  <p>If you're 1900 you likely haven't seen enough middle game or endgame patterns (plans and piece maneuvers ), your evaluation abilities aren't strong enough (feeling who is better in a given position), your tactics aren't up to par, you may have trouble recognizing critical moments, and there are probably holes in your black preparation against e4, d4, or c4. </p>
  
  <p>The regimen above will greatly help fix these issues, but it'll take about 3 hours a day. Good luck. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-14T05:29:05.753Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-14T05:29:05.753Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hockeyfan19
Answers.Body: <p>1900 uscf is still too low of a rating for positional understanding to mean anything. Most likely your tactics are still too weak. 2200 should not be a problem for players with sufficient tactical abilities but weak positional understanding.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-13T05:28:18.317Z
Answers.Text: If your positional understanding is severely lacking better tactics just don't help you. You won't get the positions, where there is anything to be gained by calculation. I know that because I started out playing against a board computer getting very strong tactically, but lacking positional understanding. I lost for years against people who where tactically much weaker. You probably can't see that because you take a certain positional understanding for granted.
Answers.UserDisplayName: BlindKungFuMaster
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-13T05:40:13.883Z
Answers.Text: To give you an example what that means: When I started playing tournaments I routinely outperformed my rating by 200-300 points in rapid tournaments. Because in rapid calculation skills are just much more valuable. Of course that is an extreme case, but almost all young(-ish) players have a mismatch between tactical and positional ability.
Answers.UserDisplayName: BlindKungFuMaster
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-13T00:41:46.570Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-13T00:41:46.570Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Matthew Liu
Answers.Body: <p>Practice, practice, practice. Go on ChessTempo or Chess.com and do as many tactics exercises as you can. Performing calculations over and over gradually builds your intuition. When your intuition improves, your implicit calculations abilities improve (meaning you'll be able to play better without consciously trying).</p>
  
  <p>If you want to go further, pick up the Grandmaster Preparation Calculation book. It's excellent, and designed to train players to improve calculation and intuition. The book is useful for anyone trying to reach up to GM level, but it's also fine for your goals.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T20:24:47.987Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-12T20:24:47.987Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Inertial Ignorance
Answers.Body: <p><strong>This sounds like a combination of problems.</strong>
  If you are losing due to "erratic blunders" and "time pressure" you are either lacking focus or are thinking incorrectly (or as you say "inefficient calculation").</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>You should read "Think Like a Grandmaster" by Kotov</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>This book teaches you how to enumerate candidate moves and tackle branching variations in the most efficient way.</p>
  
  <p>"I lose a lot due to poor evaluation".  And it is your difficulty in evaluating positions that is probably leading to your time pressure.  Blitz and tactic puzzles are not going to help your evaluation skills.  </p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>You need to read over GM games annotated by the players</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>Getting GM insight into how they evaluate their games will do wonders for your game!
  I recommend "Symslov's 125 Selected Games", "Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953".  "Fire on Board" by Shirov, etc.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-17T17:06:28.300Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-17T17:06:28.300Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ywapom
Body: <p>I'm rated about 1900 USCF and have been stuck between 1800-1900 for a few years not really knowing how to break through to 2000+. I have a good amount of positional understanding and solid foundation in tactics, i.e. I've gotten quite good at solving tactics problems.</p>
  
  <p>That being said, I lose a lot of games due to poor evaluation, time pressure, and erratic blunders. I think that essentially everything in chess goes back to the skill of calculation, including things like time pressure, which is due to inefficient calculation.</p>
  
  <p>So then, how do I further improve my calculation? More visualization exercises? Playing blitz until I can't see straight? Mental exercises? I feel like my visualization is already decent, as I can successfully play 3 blindfolded games at the same time (that's the most I've tried at least). I just don't understand what I've been missing out on that improves my calculation. And if it matters, I'm 20 years old.</p>
  
  <p>Thanks!</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T03:01:47.520Z
Comments.Text: How do you know that calculation is your problem?  Can you post some typical games?
Comments.UserDisplayName: AS3Noob
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T03:19:05.070Z
Comments.Text: I have various games already posted on here, so feel free to look at those via my profile. Also, I don't "know" that calculation is my sole problem in chess but I know that improving it will take me far, as I believe it's the single most important chess skill.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Ciabatta_USA
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T04:41:30.243Z
Comments.Text: Do you have an account on chess.com?  If it would be helpful, I'd be happy to share a little of my time to point you in a productive direction.  My uscf rating is close to 2300.
Comments.UserDisplayName: AS3Noob
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T05:50:21.213Z
Comments.Text: @AS3Noob:  I'm in a similar position and would like to reach 2200.  On Chess.com I'm mike jonesmikechess and on lichess.org I'm jonesmh.  I know that I move too fast, but I run out of things to calculate.  Thanks in advance.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Fred Knight
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T06:12:57.987Z
Comments.Text: Ok, @Fred Knight, sent you a message on chess.com
Comments.UserDisplayName: AS3Noob
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T09:54:17.397Z
Comments.Text: This question has been asked in different forms several times before on this forum with lots of answers which you could find useful. Here are two such - https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/9919/studying-chess-for-the-ambitious-intermediate and https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/2771/most-effective-way-to-achieve-a-2000-rating-in-one-year-starting-as-a-1600
Comments.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T09:55:04.903Z
Comments.Text: Possible duplicate of [Most effective way to achieve a 2000+ rating in one year, starting as a 1600?](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/2771/most-effective-way-to-achieve-a-2000-rating-in-one-year-starting-as-a-1600)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T19:49:45.460Z
Comments.Text: @AS3Noob I have been recently playing on chess.com, but if I told you that it would publicly give away my name. I would gladly add you from your username if possible, otherwise I could have you email me
Comments.UserDisplayName: Ciabatta_USA
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T19:57:20.993Z
Comments.Text: @Ciabatta_USA I understand.  My username on chess.com is my real name too.  Can you post a throwaway email address and I’ll send you a message?
Comments.UserDisplayName: AS3Noob
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-12T23:43:10.320Z
Comments.Text: @AS3Noob email me throwawaythrowaway2400@gmail.com
Comments.UserDisplayName: Ciabatta_USA
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-07-13T00:09:38.183Z
Comments.Text: Ok@Ciabatta_USA, i sent you an email.
Comments.UserDisplayName: AS3Noob
Tags: <learning><calculation>
Title: Calculation skills to 2000 and beyond
ThreadText: # Calculation skills to 2000 and beyond
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2018-07-12)
  
  I'm rated about 1900 USCF and have been stuck between 1800-1900 for a few years not really knowing how to break through to 2000+. I have a good amount of positional understanding and solid foundation in tactics, i.e. I've gotten quite good at solving tactics problems.
  
  That being said, I lose a lot of games due to poor evaluation, time pressure, and erratic blunders. I think that essentially everything in chess goes back to the skill of calculation, including things like time pressure, which is due to inefficient calculation.
  
  So then, how do I further improve my calculation? More visualization exercises? Playing blitz until I can't see straight? Mental exercises? I feel like my visualization is already decent, as I can successfully play 3 blindfolded games at the same time (that's the most I've tried at least). I just don't understand what I've been missing out on that improves my calculation. And if it matters, I'm 20 years old.
  
  Thanks!
  
  **Tags:** learning, calculation
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: How do you know that calculation is your problem?  Can you post some typical games?  
  > **username_0**: I have various games already posted on here, so feel free to look at those via my profile. Also, I don't "know" that calculation is my sole problem in chess but I know that improving it will take me far, as I believe it's the single most important chess skill.  
  > **username_1**: Do you have an account on chess.com?  If it would be helpful, I'd be happy to share a little of my time to point you in a productive direction.  My uscf rating is close to 2300.  
  > **username_2**: @username_1:  I'm in a similar position and would like to reach 2200.  On Chess.com I'm mike jonesmikechess and on lichess.org I'm jonesmh.  I know that I move too fast, but I run out of things to calculate.  Thanks in advance.  
  > **username_1**: Ok, @username_2, sent you a message on chess.com  
  > **username_3**: This question has been asked in different forms several times before on this forum with lots of answers which you could find useful. Here are two such - https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/9919/studying-chess-for-the-ambitious-intermediate and https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/2771/most-effective-way-to-achieve-a-2000-rating-in-one-year-starting-as-a-1600  
  > **username_3**: Possible duplicate of [Most effective way to achieve a 2000+ rating in one year, starting as a 1600?](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/2771/most-effective-way-to-achieve-a-2000-rating-in-one-year-starting-as-a-1600)  
  > **username_0**: @username_1 I have been recently playing on chess.com, but if I told you that it would publicly give away my name. I would gladly add you from your username if possible, otherwise I could have you email me  
  > **username_1**: @username_0 I understand.  My username on chess.com is my real name too.  Can you post a throwaway email address and I’ll send you a message?  
  > **username_0**: @username_1 email me throwawaythrowaway2400@gmail.com  
  > **username_1**: Ok@username_0, i sent you an email.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 6 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2018-07-12. Score: 6
  
  If you can play three games blind-folded, it is unlikely that your problem is calculation. I dare say that there aren't many 1900 USCF players that can do that.
  
  You say you "lose a lot of games due to poor evaluation, time pressure, and erratic blunders". That also doesn't cry out "calculation problems" to me.
  
  In my experience ratings first and foremost reflect positional understanding. Calculation skills make a much smaller difference, at least above a certain threshold.
  
  To be clear, positional understanding isn't knowledge as much as a good feeling for the position. I.e. whether you can precisely estimate how good your position really is and quickly come up with sensible moves and plans.
  If you are lacking in that department you tend to calculate a lot without achieving much. That results in time pressure and blunders just as surely as having calculation deficits.
  
  So I would rather recommend a book like [Positional Play by Jacob Aagaard](https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/2/155/grandmaster_preparation_-_positional_play_by_jacob_aagaard/). If you can easily solve the problems in this book, you can always go back to pure calculation.
  
  By the way, there is a big difference between training calculation and training tactics. Solving tactics depends on seeing motives, training calculation depends on the ability to think far ahead without confusing yourself. So if you do go back to pure calculation, maybe you should try the [Calculation](https://www.qualitychess.co.uk/products/2/157/grandmaster_preparation_-_calculation_by_jacob_aagaard/) book by Aagaard, or similar books by Dvoretsky.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: I think aagaard books are too difficult for 1900 uscf imo.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2018-07-14. Score: 1
  
  I am in a similar situation, so I can't really give advise from the perspective of someone who has been to the mountain top, and seen the promised land, but.. I suspect the key here is that to immerse oneself in chess, pursuing knowledge and skill, trying to find answers to questions etc, rather than this or that study program.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_7 on 2018-07-14. Score: 1
  
  I'll tell you what I did to go from 2000 to 2200. At least 10 chess tempo tactics a day, completing these endgame books (silmans complete endgame manual, dvoretsky's endgame manual, endgame strategy by shereshevsky), went over a few thousand gm games (1-2 guess the move games a day on chesstempo and 6 games a day on 2700chess.com from classical time control games), and played and analyzed at least 1 15+ minute game a day.
  
  If you're 1900 you likely haven't seen enough middle game or endgame patterns (plans and piece maneuvers ), your evaluation abilities aren't strong enough (feeling who is better in a given position), your tactics aren't up to par, you may have trouble recognizing critical moments, and there are probably holes in your black preparation against e4, d4, or c4.
  
  The regimen above will greatly help fix these issues, but it'll take about 3 hours a day. Good luck.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_8 on 2018-07-13. Score: 0
  
  1900 uscf is still too low of a rating for positional understanding to mean anything. Most likely your tactics are still too weak. 2200 should not be a problem for players with sufficient tactical abilities but weak positional understanding.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_4**: If your positional understanding is severely lacking better tactics just don't help you. You won't get the positions, where there is anything to be gained by calculation. I know that because I started out playing against a board computer getting very strong tactically, but lacking positional understanding. I lost for years against people who where tactically much weaker. You probably can't see that because you take a certain positional understanding for granted.  
  > **username_4**: To give you an example what that means: When I started playing tournaments I routinely outperformed my rating by 200-300 points in rapid tournaments. Because in rapid calculation skills are just much more valuable. Of course that is an extreme case, but almost all young(-ish) players have a mismatch between tactical and positional ability.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2018-07-12. Score: 0
  
  Practice, practice, practice. Go on ChessTempo or Chess.com and do as many tactics exercises as you can. Performing calculations over and over gradually builds your intuition. When your intuition improves, your implicit calculations abilities improve (meaning you'll be able to play better without consciously trying).
  
  If you want to go further, pick up the Grandmaster Preparation Calculation book. It's excellent, and designed to train players to improve calculation and intuition. The book is useful for anyone trying to reach up to GM level, but it's also fine for your goals.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_10 on 2018-07-17. Score: 0
  
  **This sounds like a combination of problems.**
  If you are losing due to "erratic blunders" and "time pressure" you are either lacking focus or are thinking incorrectly (or as you say "inefficient calculation").
  
  > You should read "Think Like a Grandmaster" by Kotov
  
  This book teaches you how to enumerate candidate moves and tackle branching variations in the most efficient way.
  
  "I lose a lot due to poor evaluation". And it is your difficulty in evaluating positions that is probably leading to your time pressure. Blitz and tactic puzzles are not going to help your evaluation skills.
  
  > You need to read over GM games annotated by the players
  
  Getting GM insight into how they evaluate their games will do wonders for your game!
  I recommend "Symslov's 125 Selected Games", "Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953". "Fire on Board" by Shirov, etc.
  
  
  ---
  
  