Not so long ago, I read that the number of Ph.D. recipients at a big university, in one year, exceeded the number of those earning the Grandmaster title in the entire history, what brings the idea that it is harder to get a GM title than to get a Ph.D., however we just can’t say that the analogy here is appropriate.

 There are also other factors involved in the process of obtaining a Ph.D.

Maybe in Chess the individual has more control over his personal results. Over long periods of time, the G.M. develops a precise language that he is able to use in different set of complicated situations. Grandmasters not only have a deep understanding in chess, but they also know when, and when not to use the set of keys that they have acquired over the years, to unlock or lock difficult chess play.

 We sometimes bother ourselves with how many moves ahead we should be able to plan during play, but I think it’s not about that, but more about the dynamic relationship in a given situation, what I mean by that is the active play, where all the attention is, the active pieces, the ones which greatly influence the position. The pieces that play a key role for the outcome of the game, the ones that hold the whole dynamic structure of the attack or defense in a given position. Which means that in a higher level of play we sometimes must bend rules that get in the way of the truth of the position, this is to me the power of Chess, the real essence.

In my last tournament, I played a game in which my pawns were scattered and isolated and still managed to carry on and win the battle but only because the dynamic relationship was on the other side of the chessboard, because the dynamic relationship wasn’t, in this case, depending on my scattered and isolated pawn structure.

I am far from being a GM, but I think I have a strong feeling about the dynamic relationship and in my humble opinion this is more important than the number of moves you can plan ahead.

This is just a glimpse of the top level games and players, I am not a Grandmaster, but I had the opportunity to play and see some of them, and, I might be wrong, but to me this sounds much more likely to be the difference between GM and others players.

What is YOUR opinion ?    Are there any other differences ?

                             …And as always, in the Chess spirit, have a nice game!

                                                                                                             Shadow_47  

This, also its simpler to get a phd, after all you go through courses much of the way getting told what to do.

Many people study chess for a lifetime and still have no idea what theyre doing due to misguided efforts

Having earned a Ph.D, in chemistry, let me assure you, no one tells you what to do if you earn one.  If you finish it because you have the talent to conduct original research and solve problems, not because you can pass course work.