Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

What's the highest rating one can achieve without seriously studying?

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #41


    ChessPlayer6033 wrote:
    Petrosianic wrote:
    gregr507 wrote:

    I'm a reasonably bright person and my rating is ~1200 to 1300 I would guess (maybe that's being too generous) without any study or practice other than playing games and reading these forums occasionally. So my question is, for someone who is reasonably intelligent and decently good at chess naturally, what is a realistic expectation as to how good one can become without ever commiting serious time to studying?

    I was in a similar situation about 4 years ago (my rating was in the 14-1500s in 2009, when I was 21, and I had only dabbled with chess in high school before this, really... with no knowledge of chess culture [and there is still much I do not know]) and I'm a national master now.  If you can make studying and fun the same thing, you can be world champion [well magnus said something like this in a recent interview].  I know players up to 2500 who have made it to that level via mostly finding improvements on their own games and their OTB (over the board) experiences.  It helps to access, know and play players who are slightly better than you as you improve.  Also I found that playing through some famous games and reading stories of the more brilliant and entertaining players inspired my play also!  My favorite tournament to play was the USATE in Parsippany, NJ (a team tournament [so go with your friends], cheap entry and festive atmosphere, lots of free prizes, plus some great players there, I got to play 3 time US Champ LarryC last year for instance and analyze with him.  It's interesting to meet legends who have played legends with stories to tell... many masters have traveled internationally and learned much culturally too... I've heard Kasparov will be at USATE visiting/book signing or something next year...)

    I'm not saying that improvement is easy, and I have put some work into it, but it was mostly play and study of my play!  Playing masters helped me a lot to get there; I lost over 100 games to FM Dehmelt before I was finally able to play near his level.

    Ok how did you reach NM? wow, if it took me 4 years to reach NM level i would be thrilled, it must partly be natural skills

    I think it's very impressive, and it certainly may be a mix of work and natural talent, but remember to read carefully when chess players talk about their rating and progress.  He didn't go from zero to NM in 4 years, he says he went from 1500 to NM in 4 years.

    So his "dabbled with chess in highschool" = a few years of non-tournament play + a few years of playing in tournaments at the end of which he was a stronger player then than you are now, so your analogous 4 year count doesn't even start yet (first play a few years and get to 1500).

    And if going to 3 tournaments a year is dabbling, then I've barely even been dabbling Laughing In the future expect a post from me:

    "Yeah I didn't really start playing chess until 2014, and after that it only took 1 year to get to [insert absurdly high 1 year rating here].

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #42


    I've never stuided anything besides chess videos on youtube, some tactics and played lots of games. I started playing when I was 22, that was 4 years ago. I havent improved in the last year, possibly because I dont study, possibly because I've reached my limit

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #43


    What seems to be most chess players:

    "Other than [books, videos, magazines, and/or websites] I never studied.  And [discounting tournaments I went to] I didn't play any serious games.  And mostly I really only [other than clubs I attended weekly] played online.  In fact even online I [other than the long games] never really played serious games, only 1/0 games.

    And other than [strong players and friends I analyzed with] I never REALLY had a coach or mentor of any kind.

    Considering how I've [pretty much] never studied, played a serous game, analyzed my games, or been coached I think my rating is very good!  And discounting all those years I did all or some of those things it only took me a very short time too."

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #44


    The only way to play chess without studying or practice is to play your very first game of chess with no previous knowledge of it. So I'd guess that'd be a rating of 300 max.

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #45


    Nobody has every won their first 50 games.

    So at some time you lost. When you lost you had to figure why you lost. So bla bla bla you seriously studied. Now if your played you and do not give me no friend played you in a game ok a family member then cut the cheese. Sure they pulled out all those quick mates and traps beginners do not know. And naturally they did not tell you how to stop it at first. Bla bla bla you studied seriously not to have it happen again.

    If you know the name of openings, famaliar with GM's history, have a good understanding of mobility of pieces, tactics and etc then you seriously studied the game of chess to be good at it.

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #46


    Hey when they have an interface directly with the brain ....

    ..... well it be possible to be instantly a GM.  Frown

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #47


    Well for me I studied up until I was about 1650 USCF. Then I didn't study or studied very little, and in about 1.5 years, Tada! I'm 1932 USCF now. 😉

  • 14 months ago · Quote · #48



  • 14 months ago · Quote · #49


    nice one

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #50



    Well nobody cares how old you are here. You can be 5 years old and lie and get in :-) I am 11 though.

    Also, from 1650 to 1932, I have probably done maybe 60-80 chess puzzles. In 1.5 years. That's not good :-)

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #51


    11 and 1932 USCF? Surprised

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #52


    Yeah. Its true. Search up Derek Zhang on USCF Ratings.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #53


    I believe you, just impressed.

Back to Top

Post your reply: