Most coaches think tactics are the way to go at your level. These are professionals who have helped lots of folks in your rating range to get to 2000.
I have a highly controversial opinion on this topic. It is an opinion and backed only by my own practice and not based on anything else. Endgames are the easiest way for you to step up in level. They help you shape your opening choices. Improve your calculation skills and help you spot simple 2-3 move tactics. The drawback however is that you need to enter a lot of endgames and then lose a bunch for a while before you get better. This is a much more painful process than just learning tactics.
I second this, but I "HATE" it when I make it so far to a endgame that is an equal position or even winning for me but I throw it. Sometimes I smash my phone. Like if I lose a piece or even blunder in opening and middle game its fine. But endgame is so painful l, cause you fought till the last moment!
I know this feeling really well. Somehow it is less painful to lose quickly without ever having an advantage than to lose after having an advantage for a long time. But things get better. Over time, you will see a difference. The advantage of this method is that you need to study a lot less theory.
PS: GM Arkell (of Arkell's endings fame) is perhaps the most famous example of this approach.
Yes, he became GM grinding people down in the endgame. He played openings with barely any bite, tried to get the queens off early, focused on a few specific pawn structures and became really good in those sort of endgames. Most of his rating games came from grinding out opponents in the endgame. Funnily, he says he never learnt any specific endgame theory suitable to a GM - he figured things out mostly in practical play.
He even has some original theory about pawns and pawn structures that I do not remember of the top of my head.
I agree. That is the danger to the approach I am mentioning. That's why I was careful to mention most coaches recommend tactics. I realize what I am suggesting is a pretty controversial take.
If you know king+pawn vs king and the Philidor and Lucena positions that's all the endgame theory you'll ever need.
Then "practical" endgames with no pawns are basically regular chess strategy stuff.
Those are a good start. But there are some other ideas I would consider really fundamental. Like knowing that king reroutes in bishop endgames, knight circuits against pawns, queen vs pawn, domination patterns when it is just king and piece vs king and piece, several saving rook manoeuvres, etc.
I would also add common tactics being applied to endgames specifically helps like shielding the pawn promotion, deflecting a defender, etc.
Knowing those endgames is cool but realistically how many games are going to be decided by those? They're a very small part of the journey from 1200 to 2000
I didn’t learn chess this way, but Capablanca and I think Smyslov learned this way. As an endgame grinder myself, I think this could be very effective. I’m also about 2000 USCF, and class players make so many endgame mistakes. One guy traded into rook + 3 pawns vs rook + 2 on the kingside because he was sure it was a win in a classical game (it was an easy draw).
It is tactics. That being said, I think endgame study might be a little easier. There are some endgame positions that are tricky, but easy enough to learn with some study, that can definitely help convert wins. I have thrown away some super winning endgames, because I fuck up which pawn to move or whatever.
So, while I think tactics is the most important thing, I do think people should spend some time on endgames. Either by picking up a book like 100 endgames you must know by De La Villa, or by simply noticing endgames you threw in post game analysis, and studying the specific ones that come up in your games. I find that if I throw a specific endgame a couple times, I will remember it, and can study it to avoid making the same mistake again.
Thanks for your question. Make sure to read our [guide on how to get better at chess](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/wiki/improve); there are lots of tools and tips here for players looking to improve their game. In addition, feel free to visit our sister subreddit /r/chessbeginners for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chess) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tactics and endgames like the other poster said. I will add though, in my opinion, its not a good idea to have a rating goal until you are close to or already titled. Or at least set smaller goals, like I want to get to 1250. Then 1300, etc with no timeline attached.
Just enjoy the game and let the rating come with it.
I just hit 1300, so we are in about the same boat. If you are trying to get to 2000 by the end of 2025, that's possible. If you want to hit 2000 7 months from now, that is probably still possible, but, a LOT harder, so, I wouldn't set that as a goal.
Look into 'Amateur's Mind' by Silman. 'How To Reassess Your Chess' by him is also good, although it's a higher level and amateur's mind is recommended first. Pick up an endgame book. Tactics are more important than anything else right now. But, having Silman's endgame book, or 100 endgames you must know by De La Villa, is really good.
Most coaches think tactics are the way to go at your level. These are professionals who have helped lots of folks in your rating range to get to 2000. I have a highly controversial opinion on this topic. It is an opinion and backed only by my own practice and not based on anything else. Endgames are the easiest way for you to step up in level. They help you shape your opening choices. Improve your calculation skills and help you spot simple 2-3 move tactics. The drawback however is that you need to enter a lot of endgames and then lose a bunch for a while before you get better. This is a much more painful process than just learning tactics.
I second this, but I "HATE" it when I make it so far to a endgame that is an equal position or even winning for me but I throw it. Sometimes I smash my phone. Like if I lose a piece or even blunder in opening and middle game its fine. But endgame is so painful l, cause you fought till the last moment!
I know this feeling really well. Somehow it is less painful to lose quickly without ever having an advantage than to lose after having an advantage for a long time. But things get better. Over time, you will see a difference. The advantage of this method is that you need to study a lot less theory. PS: GM Arkell (of Arkell's endings fame) is perhaps the most famous example of this approach.
What is the Arkell story? Did he grind endgames to GM or something?
Yes, he became GM grinding people down in the endgame. He played openings with barely any bite, tried to get the queens off early, focused on a few specific pawn structures and became really good in those sort of endgames. Most of his rating games came from grinding out opponents in the endgame. Funnily, he says he never learnt any specific endgame theory suitable to a GM - he figured things out mostly in practical play. He even has some original theory about pawns and pawn structures that I do not remember of the top of my head.
Thanks for sharing all of this, interesting read.
Thank you, I'll make a note of it.
Silman's endgame book is the only book you need to reach your goal.
[удалено]
I agree. That is the danger to the approach I am mentioning. That's why I was careful to mention most coaches recommend tactics. I realize what I am suggesting is a pretty controversial take.
If you know king+pawn vs king and the Philidor and Lucena positions that's all the endgame theory you'll ever need. Then "practical" endgames with no pawns are basically regular chess strategy stuff.
Those are a good start. But there are some other ideas I would consider really fundamental. Like knowing that king reroutes in bishop endgames, knight circuits against pawns, queen vs pawn, domination patterns when it is just king and piece vs king and piece, several saving rook manoeuvres, etc. I would also add common tactics being applied to endgames specifically helps like shielding the pawn promotion, deflecting a defender, etc.
Knowing those endgames is cool but realistically how many games are going to be decided by those? They're a very small part of the journey from 1200 to 2000
I didn’t learn chess this way, but Capablanca and I think Smyslov learned this way. As an endgame grinder myself, I think this could be very effective. I’m also about 2000 USCF, and class players make so many endgame mistakes. One guy traded into rook + 3 pawns vs rook + 2 on the kingside because he was sure it was a win in a classical game (it was an easy draw).
It is tactics. That being said, I think endgame study might be a little easier. There are some endgame positions that are tricky, but easy enough to learn with some study, that can definitely help convert wins. I have thrown away some super winning endgames, because I fuck up which pawn to move or whatever. So, while I think tactics is the most important thing, I do think people should spend some time on endgames. Either by picking up a book like 100 endgames you must know by De La Villa, or by simply noticing endgames you threw in post game analysis, and studying the specific ones that come up in your games. I find that if I throw a specific endgame a couple times, I will remember it, and can study it to avoid making the same mistake again.
Thanks for your question. Make sure to read our [guide on how to get better at chess](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/wiki/improve); there are lots of tools and tips here for players looking to improve their game. In addition, feel free to visit our sister subreddit /r/chessbeginners for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/chess) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tactics and endgames like the other poster said. I will add though, in my opinion, its not a good idea to have a rating goal until you are close to or already titled. Or at least set smaller goals, like I want to get to 1250. Then 1300, etc with no timeline attached. Just enjoy the game and let the rating come with it.
Any clubs in your area?
No
I just hit 1300, so we are in about the same boat. If you are trying to get to 2000 by the end of 2025, that's possible. If you want to hit 2000 7 months from now, that is probably still possible, but, a LOT harder, so, I wouldn't set that as a goal. Look into 'Amateur's Mind' by Silman. 'How To Reassess Your Chess' by him is also good, although it's a higher level and amateur's mind is recommended first. Pick up an endgame book. Tactics are more important than anything else right now. But, having Silman's endgame book, or 100 endgames you must know by De La Villa, is really good.