13610 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!
Good answers. Learned a lot.
Lol at the game too:
It's hard to become an IM! And when Dan was a young, active player it was even harder. There were very few opportunities to get FIDE norms in the U.S., so many ambitious players went to Europe and bummed around the tournament circuit, staying in cheap hotels, living on beans and sausages, and playing in as many tournaments as possible. If you wanted to get married and have a family, or start a career in the "real world", chasing norms around Europe wasn't an option.
At his peak, I believe Dan was rated somewhere USCF 2350. That's stronger than 99% of the rated players in the U.S., more than strong enough to be an excellent, authoritative teacher. But he may not have had the single-minder drive to get his rating higher than that. In fact, if he was beginning to have success as a teacher, he would inevitably have to give up some of his playing ambitions.
This is a similar to the "I'm 30, can I become a GM?" topics that keep popping up. Players just don't understand how hard it is to advance once you are only playing other masters. There aren't many gift squares, much less pawns, much less pieces like at amateur levels.
And once you do get an advantage, they don't fold like a cheap suit like an amateur, they double down and fight harder.
"At least an IM," indeed!
I find it amazing how strong players of Dan's generation (and before) became without any computer help. Those players had to rely on books, self-analysis and help from fellow club players. Perhaps I am only speaking for myself here, but it almost feels as if we have become a bit lazy... We want quick shortcuts to becoming GM's by watching a couple of videos and reading a book. Those players probably understood (more than anyone) what it took to become really good at playing chess.
"2nd Gashimov Memorial, Round 8 | Host: Evgeny Miroshnichenko"
When I win I get 2 points when I lose I lose 50 points. how come?
by whymychesssucks a few minutes ago
Members who don't accept friend requests, and only accept messages from friends
by aflfooty a few minutes ago
Surrender in 12 turns.
by Pulpofeira a few minutes ago
TT problem #521368
by Crazy_Assassin 4 minutes ago
4/25/2015 - A. K. - Christian Stevens, 2007
by damongross 7 minutes ago
by Crazy_Assassin 9 minutes ago
Nigel Short: Women's brains not chess brains
by power_2_the_people 14 minutes ago
Komodo 9 Announced
by MuhammadAreez10 24 minutes ago
Not suspicious if high correspondence rating but low blitz rating
by Optimissed 37 minutes ago
nigel short says women brain not suited for chess. Give 1 word for how you feel?
by MuhammadAreez10 43 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 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!