15908 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Classes over, got to play some blitz for the first time in a while, a lot of fun. I see there are still talent threads lol :p
Although you're all probably sick of them, for those that do go ahead an post, what factors do you think go into building skill? Don't really want to talk about what doesn't factor in until there's a clear argument about what does count.
More than time x effort? After my break form chess my (long) games feel easier to play somehow, like I can see things better. Got me thinking about that + davidegpc blocked me so can't post there.
Lol he blocked me too
Skill at the highest level = (Hard work + Motivation + Innate talent), in my opinion. Even the bum Capablanca had to have some motivation to become the WCC. The hard work component is obvious. Some people will criticize the "innate talent" component, but I'll stick with the assumption that a "divine spark" is needed. At the TOP LEVEL, once again.
I had no problem with people ignoring this topic . Looking back at davidegpc's posts seems it's already been beaten to death. Was glad though that some rational people did manage to make some good posts in there (even if david characteristically ignored them).
But yeah, if you think about it, isolating the factors time and effort we see that they alone contain no attributes directly linked to skill building. Building skill is a biological function first, and building a working definition using these functions will inevitably manifest what some call talent. As was already pointed out it's mostly a problem of semantics -- or in david's case, genuinely and sincerely, I believe reading comprehension.
Going over your games, like Botvinnik did. Or was is that Kotov ?
4/18/2014 - Steinikov - Jaskoy, USSR 1988
by vijay_sena_reddy 2 minutes ago
Banned from a thread
by Khallyx 3 minutes ago
White sacs a knight on move 3 and wins against a player with a rating of 3141
by mittensthebunny 3 minutes ago
I lasted 30 Moves against an NM!
by LazyChessPlayer3201 4 minutes ago
Avoid House of Staunton!
by Whalstib 4 minutes ago
What do you feel about players that do perpetual checks when they are losing?
by Mike_Logan 9 minutes ago
Please tell me how I did.
by LazyChessPlayer3201 10 minutes ago
Bullet & Blitz: Is it shame to play for time-control win?
by 2200ismygoal 16 minutes ago
*Mangus Carlsen's moves*
by hsong1 17 minutes ago
LCP Chess lessons Part 3: Tactics
by LazyChessPlayer3201 17 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!