Am I too old to reach 2500 ELO?

I would say age is not a barrier to becoming a good player, but age is definitely a barrier to becoming a great player. Anyone could strive to be at the low end of "good" with not that much time - open files, gain the centre, anticipate opponent's moves, rudimentary opengings, etc. And you could if you worked hard be at the high end of good.

But to be a great player, I would say consistent 2400 or 2500+ FIDE, playing plenty of games, is a "great" player, then you would need to start very early in life, and it's almost like your biological development would involve chess in some way, if that makes sense. As if the way your brain has grown brain cells would be partly influenced by chess.

To make people really understand this, I hate to say this in a way and I hate to be morbid, but there's a fair argument that even if OP's life depended on getting consistent 2500+ and GM status by the time he turned 50, there's a high chance he still couldn't do it.

You may think that's harsh, and I agree it's quite possible OP could do it, I am saying there's a strong argument he could not. Noone is known to have ever started chess after 40 or even 30 and become a GM. There's a "critical window" theory of language that you have to do certain things in a certain age, such as language-learning, or they will never become completely fluent and natural, similar might be able to be said for chess. Obviously if life depended on it things would all become different. He might 1900, 2000 FIDE quite soon after throwing all resources at it. But this is still nothing compared to 2500 status.

Think about how Levy Rozmann does chess for hours pretty much every day, he's a young IM, well under 40 and even he would struggle big time to become GM if he went for it. If his life depended on it then I am sure that surely he could do it, but the point is that how much his status would improve to get the GM title, how much better financially he would make for the rest of his life being called GM rather than just IM, and yet he's not doing it as he thinks it would be too difficult to be worth it. Levy is only 2322 FIDE as of right now.

For all the talk about devaluation of the GM title, there are still only something like 1,800 GMs in the whole world, and a lot of them are old and have lost a large amount of skill, so a rating of 2500 easily takes you within the world's top 1,000 players.

With a life-or-death scenario on the table who knows. Without a life-or-death scenario it's not going to happen period.

It's an interesting question.

But...do you think 2500elo chess player could, at 40 years of age, ever become a professional mechanical engineer, get married and have a family?

Zero chance. This has to be a troll post.

I don't know you, so I can't say whether or not you can reach 2500. I do agree with others that you would have to have a level of chess fanaticism to do so at your age. I suggest that instead of setting a rating target you focus on studying the great games of the past and having fun playing your own games.

Well I started chess.com 2 months ago but started chess a few years ago now I am basically 10 and I reached advance level if it took this long for a kid (me) to reach only advance level then it would take you way longer to reach 2500 elo just like someone said it would be 10 years for you to reach 2500 elo which is the least amount of time it would take so there are many chAnces for you to take more than 10 years to reach 2500 elo

not if you cheat

Ok... Let me ask this question in a different way... Is it possible to improve by 200 elo points every year for someone like me.?

In the first few years you should be able to improve 400 elo every year if you have the right methods and the willingness to work.

Depends on you. Although most likely not.

There is an article by Todd Bryant explaining learning chess at adult and old ages.

Yes

Sure

I had A question

I need help

Okay

Play with me

Any friend

Wanna play

Ready

?