Im solving cf problems for 4 months and already done 42 problems (at this moment). Every time when i sit to solving problems i get confused, every time i get wrong answers and something else. It really pisses me off. So, i want to get some advices to be better in this way.

I can solve 1100-level problems 70% of the time and 1200-level problems 40% of the time, and the rest of the time I fail to solve them and have to look at the editorial. I thought I would start solving 1200-level problems after I get to the point where I can solve any 1100-level problem very easily and quickly. Even though I am solving 1100-level problems almost every day, I feel like I am not improving.

So what should I do? Should I abandon the idea of getting good at the 1100-1200 range problems and then try to solve even harder problems, or should I just jump to 1500-1600 and try to solve them? Even if I fail to solve 1500-1600 problems, will just learning the solutions make it easy for me to solve lower difficulty problems?

My goal is to be able to solve Div. 2 A, B, C problems.

Problems I have solved so far:

800 - 84

900 - 31

1000 - 46

1100 - 42

1200 - 31

Hello guys, a bit of my background:

I don't have any degree related to programming, I'm actually bachelor in business.. But I've always been very logical and around 10 years ago I've started to study programming through gamedev in my free time (hardcore mode though, 40h or more per week) on my own by attending to online courses and some solo projects, I've clocked probably around 10000h by now. I've never made an actual career switch from business to programming due to being "hard" to move on from my own business, but I've found in programming something that I really love doing.

And now, at 34yo, I'm really thinking about switching careers and I've been studying to become more "full-stack" coming from a gamedev background. And I'm trying to actually understand the viability of it, I've started to look at my overall level of problem solving compared to who's in the market right now, and for this I've looked into competitive programming to get a grasp.

I've looked into a few problems from lower range (up to 1200) and they felt really "easy", problems around 2000~2500 range are more elegant, but also somewhat easy, just require some more thought, multi-step solution and organization, and also requires to understand the underlying pattern. And honestly, the 3000~3500 problems do feel somewhat hard, but quite manageable given enough time.

So, are those 2500ish problems, for example, seen as hard for most junior programmers or even senior programmers? Or competitive programming is just somewhat of a bubble without underline actually meaningful ranking?

EDIT:

These above 2000 are Harder than I originally thought, I didn't realize that the requirement for performance could be so steep in some of those challenges.

When I say that something is "somewhat easy" or "quite manageable", is accordingly to my expectation due to being a beginner into the competitive problem solving thing, what I see as really hard problems are usually things that I look at and don't have a clue about how I would approach it, which was what I expected when I looked at those higher rankings. I understand that people that have high scores have to solve those problems within a small timeframe, capability that I still don't have and up to a point probably never will (or aspire to).

I understand that this post made me look like an arrogant a*hole, and I'm sorry if it went through that way, I originally intended to understand if this community was somewhat of a bubble (as most of the communities are to some extent) and if the ranking itself does translate to real world performance, and got the answer that I was looking for, thank you.