As a 14-year old chess player on chess.com, I am able to beat most people I know that are my age, and can't help feeling that I'm in a minority of chess players on chess.com.

Each day on chess.com I face off against many people of varying ages (most of which are much older than me), and can't help but wonder at how intelligence is linked to a person's age. I realize that there are grandmasters at age 14+ nowadays, but do people grow smarter with age? As I sit at a sturdy 1100 rating I wonder if I will ever begin to seriously improve at chess, and if there will be a natural progression as I get older? Does anyone know anything about the relationships between age and a person's performance on a chess board?

-Sweagen

http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/profile/Sweagen/replay/44586549/

Im 14 and I don't think age matters its more of a expirence at chess than life. Although intellegence can very well help you devolp chess but ive beaten alot of smart kids at chess at my school although they don't play alot like me.

I'm 12 and rated 1350-1500 and I wouldn't expect people to be underestimated by age. Also, Chess.com isn't as populous as the USCF. The ages in the USCF will not matter in any way since I've seen 50 year olds beating and losing to 12 year olds while 5 year olds are winning to 14 year olds. Hope I helped!

Well, certainly chess is linked to your age when you first learn it. When you arew younger your mind will grasp concepts much more quickly and rapidly advance in that knowledge. Of course there are those that learn at a much older age and become quite sophisticated players but very rarely become IM rated or higher.

This is true this is how prodigys are born.

I'm 12 and I'm staying between 1150-1270, so I don't think age becomes variable in chess.

I'm 16 and am a 1850 rating, I don't think it has that much to do with age, just the amount of practice.

Exactly, therefore in theory the older you are the better you will be because you have been playing longer. Unless your say 15 and have played since you were 8 and a 40 year old who has only played for a year, then you would assume the 15 year old would win

There seems to be a sense that players peak, likely some-time in their thirties, so it's not strictly a product of experience.

Here is an interesting, and very relevant chart of that phenomenon for six of the best players of all time:

I'm quite sure that it depends on starting age and practice and physical condition..

All conditions equal, an advantage on any of these three will be beneficial.

If you want to be a titled player it is not impossible to start late, but you will have to work.. much harder. Effectively, out of hundreds of GM's only two are known to have started at a later age: Akiba Rubinstein and Steinitz.

I'm 17, and I used to ask myself this very question when I was 14 like you. Here's my observation: as you age, the message of the people you live with sinks in more and more. That is, if folks at home encourage playing chess, you will want to play and improve more and more as you become older; if they discourage playing chess, your interest in chess will slowly albeit steadily decline unless you put an effort to hold onto your passion for the game.

I hope that helps!

I'm 30 and started playing chess when I was 5; it didn't make me reach a high rating, though. Recently, I lost a tournament OTB game to a 13 year old kid. Age has little to do with chess. Overall health, experience and hard study are far more important. So don't forget to eat your vegetables.

age does not have much to do with quality of chess but a 30 year-old is quite likely to beat a 6 year-old.