GMs, IMs, etc. are elitists!

I've been playing chess for almost 20 years. During that time, I have greatly improved my skill and decided to nurse this potential talent in order to get my rating as high as I possibly can, and possibly (dare I suggest it?) even obtain a title rank someday. But I am sarcastic toward my own dream because I perceive a severe elitism among chess players, especially chess authors and titled players.

By elitism, I mean that chess players, particularly highly skilled players and especially grandmasters, come across as extremely arrogant toward their craft. This is evident in most chess books. When analyzing and discussing games by "A" or "B" players, authors make snide remarks about their moves. "Clearly 32. f4 is far superior to the text, Ra8+." Or sometimes, "This incoherent litany shows why [this player] doesn't do well in tournaments." (Yes, I'm talking about YOU, IM Jeremy Silman! I understand you have an account on this site.) Harsh, austere comments have their place, but I witness authors and masters making arrogant, disdainful, scornful comments toward not only chess games but to the PLAYERS of those games themselves. They sound as if to say, "What in the world kind of moron would think moves like these could win a chess game?", or "No, you should have played this way. But you'll never understand that, because you'll never get a title, like I have." The ONLY titled chess player I have ever observed who taught great chess technique patiently and sincerely tried to truly help amateurs improve (i.e. like a QUALITY teacher should) is IM Josh Waitzkin. And he QUIT chess. Is he really the only one?

While I have greatly improved over the years, my rating (unofficial, on chess websites all over the Internet) has languished between 1500-1600 for a long time. I have a severe case of the doldrums in being unable to meaningfully improve beyond this level, and so if I hope to reach for the sky, I have a LONG way to go. But I am continually frustrated by chess websites that keep disappointing me with all their varied and many shortcomings, and by an inability to find quality instruction and organized tournaments. I have come to cynically believe that these difficulties stem directly from very high-rated players striving to glut themselves on their perceived glory and "immortality" (what a crock!), by branding lesser skilled players as "hopeless." I'm calling out all of you titled players to own up!

Does this sound bigoted? Am I right, or am I overly jaded? If I am wrong, then prove me wrong!

I am one amateur and semi-pro hopeful who has had enough, and I refuse to tolerate any more elitist garbage. Don't bother looking through my playing history. I'm not about to waste my time playing any more pointless games on yet ANOTHER hyped-up website. I am not out to make friends; I am just here for answers. Even so, I don't wish to alienate all the members on this site... just those who fit my above description! It's about time you GMs, IMs, and NMs learned that chess amateurs and class C players are NOT complete idiots! My question, to anyone who will answer, is: Amid all the snobbery and fluff, how can I know WHERE to turn in order to break out of my slump and significantly improve my skill?

This should be interesting.

I overlooked a mate in one in a tournament game..

now according to silman im so moron who never will do good in tournaments right?

I feel insulted.

So did Kramnik.

Your right!

and yet he is above Silman, god i feel sorry for elitists

Ahhh, another generation Y type who's afraid of having his/her feelings hurt! Sometimes the titled players just calls 'em as they sees 'em. I would much prefer chess mentor courses or the solutions to book puzzles to call BS when I make a BS move.

LOL! You think I'm afraid of anything, let alone my precious feelings? Pathetic. If I make a terrible move, you don't think I want to be called on it? Of course I do! If I have a flawed style of play, do you not think I want to be thoroughly shaken of it? Give yourself a break!

What I'm talking about is these elitists taking it way beyond that, to a personal level. Even harsh criticisms are fine, and I'm quite accustomed to them. And I respect them. But I do NOT respect being looked down on from some chess snob's nose!

I don't know what other books you had in mind but my memory of reading Silman's books is that, as often as not, the objects of his derision are his own games. Relax, people who are good at things often come across as patronising and condescending ... not just in chess.

i am sure you will find a mixture of good teachers, elitists, idiots, and jerks on this site.  of course, i don't know that all of those are mutally exclusive.  i am fairly certain that one person can be a combination of all of them. 

of course, just a thought here, calling out all the titled players on your first day on the site may or may not be the most prudent approach to getting friendly advice. 

I'm quite sure that I am not merely betrayed by an active imagination, my good sir. I don't give a care whether Silman slams himself and his own games, quite frankly. But what I find interesting is that these authors and "greats" hide behind their books and articles. Good chess teachers are next to impossible to find. But, no, you can go to your local Barnes & Noble and buy a chess book. And you can read the same old personal garbage over and over again. And they are nowhere to be found when the rest of us want to ask them questions, or want to seek to pursue further instruction, or even want to get their autographs! (Speaking purely theoretically.)

Who said I wanted friendly advice? I said I wasn't here to make friends. I came in here ready for a firefight. I am not intimidated by conceited skilled players who think dirt of us "mere mortals." But I would be pleasantly surprised to get positive, reasonable feedback from a titled player.

Soooo you want a GM to live on your couch, in case you get inspired to learn at some random time of day?

And "move on" to what?

Eww. Gross.

I remember a story from years ago, sadly I don't recall the names.

A well known author published a collection of games, with annotations.

Two of these games followed the same moves well into the middle game, and in both games White made a pawn break with e5. One of these games was won by White, the other by Black.

In the game where White won, the annotation read: a well timed advance...

In the game where Black won, the annotation read: a premature thrust...

Great story!

Whoever wins the war gets to write the history books.

A great story indeed. And it supports my point. Bias governs all.

i was using friendly in lieu of some made up "non-elitest" sort of word.  anyway, i suppose it will just be a wait and see as to whether you find what you are looking for here. 

Sounds like you are grumpy because you havn't earned a title yet.

So far on this site I have sent 2 messages to titled players and received 1 reply (a helpful one, from a GM). A rather small sample size to be sure but not a horrible return on messaging investment, specially given that chess.com membership is very large and there are relatively few titled players. Then again I have not launched any diatribes against titled players ...