My Coach — sample
This is the full report for a fictional ~1500 player, built from their games. The Skill Profile (the Analysis tab) comes with Standard; the coaching plan (the Coaching tab) is Premium.
You're in the Advanced tier
1485Next milestone: 1500 (just 15 to go)
315 points to reach Expert. ↗ Trending up — on track.
The plan below is how you get there — but your real rating is the scoreboard. You climb by gaining points in games, not by ticking off tasks.
Your trajectory
Per-game estimated rating across your last 12 reviewed games — you're trending up (+96 pts).
Feedback from your Coach
Your opportunity: you play like ~1552 but score ~1485— that gap is rating you're leaving on the table.
What you excel at: the endgame is your strongest phase — there you lose only ~2% of your win chance per move, versus ~5% in your middlegame. You also play with steady king safety (castling) and piece development. But games are usually decided before then, so that endgame edge rarely gets the chance to matter — the leak below is where they actually slip.
Your biggest leak: back-rank weaknesses. You closed out only 65% of your winning positions, slipping up 5 times from a winning spot. Against players at your level, you're behind 69% of them in defending worse positions.
Your form is trending up — start with your top card below: Fix your back-rank mate weakness.
Your training plan
The highest-impact things to work on, in priority order. Start a session below — it mixes these weaknesses at your level and resurfaces them over time so they stick.
Sharpen up at the board
Puzzles fix patterns; real games fix matchups. Based on your results, the fastest way to break through is to play more tactical bots — your toughest style (38%), and bots in the 1400–1700 range, where your score dips to 28%.
Move quality across these games: 79% accuracy · 38 avg centipawn lost/move · 5.2% of your moves were blunders.
Critical moments
Where you threw away the most from a playable position in your recent games — the fastest gains are here.
You play stronger than you score
Your move quality is around 1552, but your results sit near 1485. The data points at conversion: you closed out only 65% of your winning positions, and slipped up 5 times from a winning position. Closing these out cleanly is your fastest rating gain.
Your trajectory
Per-game estimated rating across your last 12 reviewed games — you're trending up (+96 pts).
How you compare at your level
Your level is how you score in games (wins, losses, draws) against rated bots — the same Glicko rating shown elsewhere on the site, updated as you play. Below, your move quality is compared against real players rated around 1500 (the nearest level we have data for) — higher means stronger. Based on your last 26 reviewed games. Your standout is piece safety; your biggest gap is blunder avoidance.
Broken down by phase & situation
The same comparison, split by where on the board it happens — so a strong overall score doesn't hide a specific leak.
Each game is ranked against real games at your level, then we take your typical (median) game — so this reflects how you actually play, not one lucky result.
How you handle winning & losing positions
When a game swings to a clear advantage or disadvantage, do you finish the job — or let it slip? (Reaching ≥80% / ≤20% win probability.)
5 times you blundered from an already-winning position — each one a full point left on the table.
Composure after a mistake
After you blunder, do you steady the ship or tilt? This compares your move quality on the move right after a blunder to your calm baseline.
You lose 6.3% more win chance per move right after a blunder — a sign of tilt. Slowing down for the move after a mistake is the fix.
You followed a blunder with another blunder 4 times (of 18).
Based on 18 moves played right after a blunder — a rough read that sharpens as you play more.
Your results
Across all your games (W–D–L) — by color and how they end.
Where your ceiling is right now — the band where your score drops is the level to push against next.
What you do well
The good stuff — drawn from the strong moves you actually played, not from mistakes you avoided.
You've found 3 brilliant and 11 great moves — nicely spotted.
Relatively, the middlegame is where you lose the most ground.
Your weaknesses — and how to fix them
Each bar shows how costly that pattern has been — the longer the bar, the more rating you've lost to it relative to your biggest leak. Recent games count for more.
Based on your 28 most recently reviewed games. Recent games count for more, so this updates as you play.
Every pattern we track and how it measured across your reviewed games — even the ones you handle well.
Your results by opening
How you score against the openings the bots play at you (W–D–L). From every finished game — no review needed.
You do best against the Ruy Lopez (75%, 4–1–1), and find the French Defense the toughest (30%, 1–1–3).
You play closest to a tactical style
Spots combinations and punishes tactical errors with precision.
In your games you score best against positional bots (72%), and find tactical bots the toughest (38%).
Where the data comes from.Opening results use the final outcome of every finished game (no review needed), so that section fills in first. The mistake breakdown + personality read come only from games you've reviewed— running the post-game review is what produces the move-by-move engine analysis we read. Deleting your account removes its games entirely; there's no stored summary that lingers — the page is recomputed from your current games each time you open it.
How a mistake is measured. We replay every move you played through Stockfish (depth 18) and measure how much winning probabilityeach move gave up — not just material, but real win chances from the engine's evaluation. A move that drops you from 70% to 45% counts far more than one that shaves a fraction.
How patterns are ranked. On your moves we deterministically detect 12 recurring patterns (forks, pins, back-rank, hanging pieces, and so on). Each is scored by the total win% it cost you, with your most recent ~12 games weighted most heavily (we look back up to your last 60 reviewed games) so the picture tracks your current form rather than old habits.
How you compare at your level.“Your level” is your site rating — your game-results (Glicko) rating — picking the nearest data band (500–1900). We then measure seven move-quality traits in each of your reviewed games (every game, up to 60, weighted equally— unlike the weakness breakdown, which leans on your recent games), rank each game against thousands of real depth-18 games by players in that band, and take your typical (median) game. Because it's relative to peers facing similar positions, a high percentile genuinely means you're good at that trait — not just that the situation never came up.
The other numbers.“Metrics with data” is how many of the 12patterns we've actually seen in your games. “Biggest leak” is simply your single highest-severity pattern. The personality read is a light estimate from the balance of sharp vs. positional patterns in your play — flavour, not a verdict.
Start free to seed your own. The Skill Profile unlocks with Standard; the coaching plan with Premium.