TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

How long does it take ordinary people to get good at chess?

240 pointsby rococodeover 3 years ago

33 comments

Lordarminiusover 3 years ago
I have been a serious chess player for over 20 years.<p>Improvement in chess is not directly proportional to the number of games played - that is one factor. Amateur park players and hustlers rack up many hundreds of games per week, and thousands per year, but are usually beaten by masters who have played fewer games for shorter periods of time. Botvinnik famously recommended that a professional chess player should only play 80 tournament games a year and leave himself&#x2F;herself time to <i>think</i> about chess.<p>Improvement is a function of <i>directed study</i> of chess : analysing one&#x27;s games with the aim of eliminating weaknesses in one&#x27;s play, becoming familiar with common patterns (and anti-patterns) of strategy and tactics, learning the fundamentals (and advanced aspects) of openings, middle games and endings, and conquering psychological barriers.<p>I say this because we need to take this into account as we study perfomance else we get skewed results.
评论 #29054083 未加载
评论 #29056086 未加载
评论 #29056466 未加载
评论 #29054893 未加载
评论 #29054135 未加载
评论 #29059321 未加载
评论 #29054460 未加载
mchusmaover 3 years ago
This is not really related to what this author means as &quot;good&quot; at chess. But I found spending about 8 hours working through lessons and chess.com and Magnus Carlsen&#x27;s app (I preferred the chess.com one personally), and maybe another 8 hours playing online was about what I needed to have the occasional &quot;good game&quot;. Relatively speaking.<p>It was eye opening for me learning some basic strategies and tactics. Mostly controlling the center, a couple of openings, and techniques for checkmate.<p>Too much beyond that and most players are doing a lot of memorization and pattern recognition. Which I don&#x27;t really want to do, but I am super happy I learned the basics because now chess is fun and I understand it.<p>I&#x27;d recommend taking lessons online if you want to learn chess. Skip many games.
NewEntryHNover 3 years ago
&gt; calculating the monthly average<p>This abstracts away a fundamental property of skill improvement that is true for any game, but intensively true at chess: any ELO you win during a gaming session will be lost soon by a new gaming session in which you play the game tired, or unfocused, or angry, or feeling under the weather. You still improve from one session to the next, so there is a little delta because your average ELO win is greater than you average ELO loss, but it makes the overall process extremely slow.<p>What I&#x27;m saying is that 100 ELO doesn&#x27;t make that much of a difference in skill. You probably regularly play at +200 ELO of your actual ELO. However, maintaining a clean game hygiene and actually accumulating the ELO points to reach this level of &quot;estate&quot; is a whole other story.
评论 #29056164 未加载
评论 #29056747 未加载
评论 #29056159 未加载
ummonkover 3 years ago
Great analysis! I wonder whether you can also incorporate puzzle usage in this.<p>&quot;But while I have the data here, let&#x27;s take a moment to answer the question everyone&#x27;s asking: does playing more games make you a better chess player?<p>Intuitively, the answer seems like it should be yes. Seems like experience should be a huge factor in someone&#x27;s chess strength. It also seems like the go-to answer many of the top players recommend for improving at chess.&quot;<p>That&#x27;s actually not what I&#x27;ve seen top trainers recommend, at least for improvement at classical time controls. They recommend playing something like one or two games a day but carefully analyzing each game afterwards.
评论 #29055576 未加载
评论 #29055309 未加载
arxanasover 3 years ago
This was interesting to me. I played chess seriously for about 4 years and gained about 400 Elo points. Apparently that&#x27;s rather above the expectations for an &quot;ordinary&quot; person!<p>I spent around 1000 hours practicing chess during that time, 3&#x2F;4ths of which was spent on tactics training (writeup here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.waleedkhan.name&#x2F;hours-invested-vs-percentile-rank&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.waleedkhan.name&#x2F;hours-invested-vs-percentile-ra...</a>). I&#x27;m guessing that&#x27;s a significant differentiating factor, and that the majority of players only spent time playing games.<p>Of course, you can&#x27;t tell from the Lichess data in the post how much time was spent practicing via <i>not</i> playing. And I would argue that 250 hours per year, like I accomplished, is not actually that much.
评论 #29054399 未加载
dhosekover 3 years ago
On a vaguely related note, any suggestions for books for a 7½-year-old who&#x27;s fascinated with chess? It seems like there&#x27;s kind of a gap between books that are geared towards total beginners and those which will have you analyzing games. I&#x27;m looking for something that will help him develop his skills beyond the basic moves. (I will say, that having introduced him to loser&#x27;s chess and finding a free iOS app for him to play, he as able to consistently beat the app within a couple weeks, but regular chess is still hit or miss for him and I suspect the AI in the loser&#x27;s chess game might have been limited).
评论 #29055355 未加载
评论 #29054482 未加载
评论 #29055413 未加载
评论 #29054957 未加载
评论 #29054935 未加载
评论 #29055242 未加载
评论 #29054507 未加载
pastrami_pandaover 3 years ago
I just started playing maybe 4 weeks ago and have found it quite funny how high you can climb by mostly just moving your pawns and memorizing ways you lost (blitz and bullet).<p>It&#x27;s sort of a mini game for me now where I try to climb as high as possible by only using memory and pawn structure. I&#x27;ve climbed to 1200 ELO using just this strategy, but it&#x27;s probably going to stop working soon.
评论 #29056479 未加载
mappuover 3 years ago
I&#x27;m interested in the choice to use Airflow to download and munge the files. The author is clearly highly skilled with python for analysis&#x2F;charting so i imagine another short python script could have done it with less ceremony. Why was Airflow used, can it do more interesting things?
评论 #29055274 未加载
michaluover 3 years ago
I got into 1400-1600 on lichess relatively quickly but I did that by taking about 15 private lessons with an IM and doing a lot of puzzles. He taught me a solid opening that I played going forward which allowed me to beat opponents in that 1400-1600 range and then I basically staled playing the same thing over and over with anyone in the higher ratings not having hard time to counter. Getting past that required significant investments in time and effort.<p>With that I found that it&#x27;s about that range when playing chess reaches diminishing returns. Everything useful it can teach you about life at a reasonable cost you&#x27;ll probably know by then. Going forward is more about, well, getting good at a board game. Plus, there&#x27;s a risk of loss as chess can screw with your head.<p>I&#x27;s much rather invest time into something like Brazilian Jiu Jitsu which contains all components of chess, has real life application and keeps you fit, social and sane.
评论 #29154249 未加载
Rauchgover 3 years ago
Cool tidbit from the post:<p>&gt; For reference, the most improved player is (as of oct 2021) an 11 year old world chess champion from the Ukraine. His rate of improvement averaged out to 33 points per month over a period of 6 years.
评论 #29054326 未加载
评论 #29054209 未加载
chegraover 3 years ago
There is definitely a sweet spot in learning to play chess; too much, your performance declines. My training protocol for maximal improvement(empirically derived): Practice 25 tactics, play 5 games reviewing after each game... Repeat 3 times daily. When you are reviewing the key thing for your opening is to ensure you get out perfect. Your first 10 moves should be absolutely flawless...Your next objective should be gain a tactical advantage which tend to arise by your opponent making a mistake... be patient don&#x27;t force it. Once you have the advantage, rapidly trade off pieces.<p>My claim to fame... I drew a FIDE Master in the 2020 online Olympiad[1].[the most unlikely draw based off of ratings.]Also, had the 11th most unlikely win in that Olympiad. [2] Also, wrote tactics app that I am kind of embarrassed to share on HN. But, here it is:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;play.google.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;apps&#x2F;details?id=com.chestergrant.tacticsdojo" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;play.google.com&#x2F;store&#x2F;apps&#x2F;details?id=com.chestergra...</a><p>Why would I need to write a tactics app? Well, I teach it. Not all tactics are created equal. Some tactics you will not see it again in your lifetime in a real game, so why practice it. My app focuses on the common patterns. Also, I wanted a reporting function to see how much my students are practicing their tactics in one view.<p>[1] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;_apayzDTIZo?t=9532" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;_apayzDTIZo?t=9532</a><p>[2] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;replit.com&#x2F;@ChesterGrant&#x2F;Olympiad2020#main.py" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;replit.com&#x2F;@ChesterGrant&#x2F;Olympiad2020#main.py</a>
评论 #29061598 未加载
Buttons840over 3 years ago
&gt; According to 5.5 years of data from 2.3 million players and 450 million games, most beginners will improve their rating by 100 lichess elo points in 3-6 months. Most &quot;experienced&quot; chess players in the 1400-1800 rating range will take 3-4 years to improve their rating by 100 lichess elo points. There&#x27;s no strong evidence that playing more games makes you improve quicker.<p>There is obviously some minimum number of games required. I haven&#x27;t played chess for 6 months, should I expect to be 100 points higher next time I play? Probably not, but I have watched some streamers and thought about the game a bit, so maybe. I have a goal to improve to at least 1400 in chess, and I&#x27;d like more analysis of how many games I&#x27;ll have to play.<p>Edit: These graphs are nice: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;jcw024&#x2F;lichess_database_ETL&#x2F;blob&#x2F;main&#x2F;README.md#does-playing-more-games-make-you-a-better-chess-player" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;jcw024&#x2F;lichess_database_ETL&#x2F;blob&#x2F;main&#x2F;REA...</a><p>Total number of games played has more correlation with rank than games per month it seems.
评论 #29053949 未加载
georgeoliverover 3 years ago
It seems like a significant confounding factor in analysis like this could be the &quot;natural floor&quot; of a beginning player. Some people signing up for Lichess have never or barely played a game, others have lots more experience. Wouldn&#x27;t this affect their rate of improvement but be invisible in the data set? The OP touches on this a bit; what would be good ways to filter for it?
评论 #29058595 未加载
zw123456over 3 years ago
A weird observation for myself, sometimes I wake up at around 3AM for no apparent reason and can&#x27;t get back to sleep. Sometimes I reach for my laptop and figure why not play a few games of chess. Weirdly, my strength of play is 400 - 600 higher than normal. This observation is a little off topic I know, but just made me wonder if anyone else has a similar experience.
评论 #29054530 未加载
评论 #29054385 未加载
评论 #29056088 未加载
评论 #29055227 未加载
评论 #29055769 未加载
评论 #29055245 未加载
评论 #29054373 未加载
isenhaardover 3 years ago
Depends what you mean with ordinary people. It might take a construction worker around 1 billion years or so ;-D On the other hand, I have to admit that it would take me with my fragile body also 1 billion years to build a house.<p>I’ve played club level chess in my teenage times between being 15 and 20 years old. I’ve even won a regional youth team title, but only at the 8th board (out of 8). But hey, still glorious times! :-) :-)<p>After learning the first rules, I became interested about chess. I think it took me half a year up to 1 year of studying by myself (reading a basic book about chess and re-playing multiple games) before I decided to enter a chess club. Then I pretty fast was playing tournament chess. And I believe this title I got finally maybe two years before learning my first chess rules. So that’s not too long.<p>My basic recommendation is: If you’re really interested in chess, you must buy a basic chess book asap or learn from similar resources. A basic book which covers all the basic topics will be enough. I’ve got a book of 200 pages only. That’s enough. With that knowledge along with studying other players’ games (those games will be in that book, too), you’re ready to be a club chess player.<p>There’s a huge difference between someone who has read that book and someone who has not I can tell you. Without learning about basic strategy and tactics and principles, it will take you years before you really get a certain playing strength. There&#x27;s really a HUGE difference between someone who has read that book and someone who has not. Theoretically of course, you could learn all this by yourself. But it would take you ages. So you can really forget about that.<p>You must of course be willing to invest some time. I think in my first year after learning the first rules, I’ve read this book and re-played really a lot of games of other people. It became a dominant hobby at that time. But you also need not to do it the whole day or so. If you’re interested, you will do it anyhow regularly. Just like a normal hobby that you’re interested in.<p>Finally, just to mention, before entering that club, I actually had nobody to play with (that was in the 90s by the way, so no internet chess available). I bought a basic chess computer, but I didn’t play with it too often. Actually I was most of the time studying theory and re-playing games within that first half a year or year before I entered the chess club. But despite having not much own playing practice, I at once defeated a lot of (weaker) club players there. So basic knowledge and analyzing games seems to help a lot, even as a beginner.
DeathArrowover 3 years ago
The article said that there are some players who gained 500 or 1000 points in about two years and that they are outliers, they represent 1% of the total number of players.<p>I would think that it would be far more interesting to consider these people as a percentage of the number of players which started from zero and dedicated two years to playing chess. I would suspect that the percentage would be much higher.<p>I won&#x27;t import and ETL the data myself just to answer to that but maybe the author can help.
ineedasernameover 3 years ago
<i>There&#x27;s no strong evidence that playing more games makes you improve quicker.</i><p>That&#x27;s pretty interesting. I guess some types of learning can&#x27;t be rushed by grinding practice.
评论 #29054093 未加载
评论 #29054134 未加载
评论 #29054086 未加载
DeathArrowover 3 years ago
In most human activities requiring learning and training it takes a short time to go from the bottom to average but a very long time to get from average to the top. Unless you are a genius and have a different way to think then the most people, learning becomes exponentially harder after a point. Chess, or math, poker or chemistry, software or physics, go or biology it does not matter. Getting to medium level is easy, becoming really good is really hard.
Madmallardover 3 years ago
Improve physical fitness and get professional coaching and you&#x27;ll improve faster than any other way.
matreyesover 3 years ago
I’ve learned piano basics when I was a child. Then almost completely stopped playing (I devoted myself to learning IT). And a couple months ago I decided to start again (Im 36 now). I was searching for a book like this, and didn’t found anything. thanks a lot!!!!!
ofouover 3 years ago
Is it possible to create an AI-chess partner that optimizes for improving your own Elo-rating?
评论 #29054283 未加载
jmkniover 3 years ago
Honestly, I&#x27;ve never played a game of Chess, I actually have no idea how it works (I&#x27;m 32 years old lol)!<p>I&#x27;d love to learn though, I might write a blog post some day detailing how long it took for me to &#x27;get good&#x27; (or I might suck at it).
评论 #29056127 未加载
评论 #29055799 未加载
punnerudover 3 years ago
A good selftest: “Show a valid game for 1second, and try to place all the pieces”<p>If you are pro you can do this easily, even for games with a long game play.<p>A good chess player will not be able to do the same if the pieces is in random order, not connected to the rules of the game.
评论 #29055265 未加载
thanatos519over 3 years ago
I definitely need some directed study. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;vole.wtf&#x2F;kilobytes-gambit&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;vole.wtf&#x2F;kilobytes-gambit&#x2F;</a> beats me handily.
contravariantover 3 years ago
Weird choice to put everything into 1 airflow run when they could have just instructed it to schedule runs for all months from 2013 up to now.
rayrrrover 3 years ago
Perhaps a more fitting title for this article would have been &quot;How many games does it take to establish an accurate ELO rating?&quot;
platzover 3 years ago
would love to see a similar breakdown for <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;online-go.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;online-go.com&#x2F;</a>
DantesKiteover 3 years ago
One of my favorite posts so far. Loved this breakdown. I think you could extend the insights learned here to other domains too.
geonicover 3 years ago
Maybe I’m reading the plot wrong but doesn‘t it show people getting worse after some time of improvement?
fnord77over 3 years ago
when I was a kid, I had fun playing chess. other than opening moves, I didn&#x27;t know any strategies nor did I think ahead more than a move.<p>later when I found out &quot;serious&quot; chess was about memorization of classical moves and thinking in trees, I kinda lost all interest.
synergy20over 3 years ago
what does chess really serve the human?<p>is it just a way to enjoy time well-spend or personal improvement? or does it help to evolve our gene somehow? I always feel smart people spending so much time and part of their life on chess, is like a waste of talent, that could be well put into other things that are more meaningful to the society, such as, inventing new system, improving existing design, fixing some real issues, or even teaching coding to the public etc.
评论 #29057599 未加载
randomunameover 3 years ago
based on my anecdotal observations on various hobbies (from a variety of computer games to more physical hobbies), i find these are mostly true, regardless of hobbies.<p>- say level 0 is an average performance of a complete beginner with &lt;1 hour experience on the subject (not just counting the experience from the hobby in question. count every experience from similar hobbies). if there are some players that mostly win against level 0 players(at least &gt;80%), mark them as level 1 players. keep doing the same on level 1, 2, ..., n. you usually ended up with nmax of 10-30.<p>- obviously, not all players starts at level 0. some starts below 0 and some do better. it&#x27;s possible for someone to have a starting position of level nmax * 0.8-0.9. for example, #1 CS GO player will be pretty good at any other fps games on their first play, probably better than the average people will ever be (no matter how hard the average people is trying). however, a true beginner starts anywhere near that. if nmax is 20, then i would say level 5-10 is the highest starting position for a complete beginner.<p>- first few level up occurs naturally from experience. you could somewhat boost this process up, but you don&#x27;t need to as they happen pretty fast(it usually takes 100-1000 hours of experience on the subject, to completely exhaust those easy level up opportunities). as such, a complete beginner with an average performance (level 0), or somewhat above average performance (level 1-2) is no match to a beginner with some experience (who became level 3-6 after spending 100-1000 hours). but there are rare breed of beginner who just starts right up at level 5-10, even though they don&#x27;t have any experience on the subject or anything related. these rare breed could beat a beginner with 100-1000 hours of experience, when they only got minimal experience (a few hours).<p>- after reaching the plateau of hobbyist (around level 5, who easily beat most beginners without much experience, but still nothing on the entire spectrum), you don&#x27;t get much of auto level up by playing more games mindlessly, at least not as fast as you&#x27;d hope for. as such, if someone just mindless play more rounds without any study, it won&#x27;t get them very far. even if they spend tremendous amount of time (like &gt;10k hours), many of them won&#x27;t even reach level 10.<p>- however, if you study about the game, you would level up significantly faster than mindless playing (though this is still a lot slower than the first few auto level ups). there are many approach, including a) watch a replay of a better player and try to mimic their play, b) study about the basic fundamentals that are not required to just play, etc. there is no single approach that can cover everything, so you&#x27;re almost required to do all of them at least for some bits, if your aim is high (such as level 15+ on nmax 20 game).<p>- usually the main driver is analyzing the play of better players. if you don&#x27;t exactly know why they make such move (this should happen a lot if you go into detail), then just memorize and and try to mimic their movement exactly. one day, you might understand (but not guaranteed), or at least try to play exactly the same on the same situation (also not guaranteed).<p>- but this doesn&#x27;t get you to the nmax. people have their own ceilings. no matter how hard they tried, or what methods they&#x27;ve used, their ceilings stay the same. there is no way to break the ceiling, hence ceiling. also, it&#x27;s extremely unlikely that you have a ceiling of nmax. usually, if you have a ceiling of 80% nmax, that&#x27;s pretty high. average people often have 50% nmax ceiling<p>- usually, your ceiling is formed based on your nature + nurture. but there are some other elements, which is not directly related to your ability about the subject, but still act as a ceiling. for example, there are some hobbies that you need to spend $1k for one hour of experience, which translates to $100k spending for the basic 100 hours of experience (and this could be prohibitively expensive for many people). these type of hobbies usually have lower nmax (since much fewer people have ever stepped a foot into this type of hobby), as well as lower level requirement to become a professional player.
mikewarotover 3 years ago
Define &quot;good&quot;, I started LiChess 2 days ago.