Don't dream becoming a GM

you haven't answered my question.. question was;

please find significant answers for these people, why they are/were still there?

Jeremy silman was born in 1954, became International Master in 1988 and died in 2023. He never lost interest in chess, till the last year of his life.. his last book was published in 2022..

Answer for him (not for yourself): Why couldn't he reach the last stage of mastery, there is only +100 elo between an IM & a GM. You think he never tried? all those years.. he never wanted it? or do you think he still had missing knowledge about mastery? what held him from being one?

Books[edit]

• Silman's Chess Odyssey: Cracked Grandmaster Tales, Legendary Players, and Instruction and Musings, 2022, Siles Press, ISBN 978-1890085247.
• Autobiography of a Goat, 2013, 252 pages, Maelstrom Press, ISBN 978-0989928908.
• How to Reassess your Chess (4th edition): Chess Mastery through Chess Imbalances, 2010, 658 pages, Siles Press, ISBN 978-1890085131.
• Silman's Complete Endgame Course: From Beginner To Master, 2007, 530 pages, Siles Press, ISBN 978-1890085100.
• Pal Benko: My Life, Games and Compositions, with Pal Benko and John L. Watson, 2004, 520 pages, Siles Press, ISBN 978-1890085087.
• Gambits in the Slav with William John Donaldson, 2003, 160 pages, Chess Enterprises, ISBN 978-0945470397.
• The Reassess your Chess Workbook: How to Master Chess Imbalances, 2001, 400 pages, Siles Press, ISBN 978-1890085056.
• The Amateur's Mind (2nd edition): Turning Chess Misconceptions into Chess Mastery, 1999, 443 pages, Siles Press, ISBN 978-1890085025.
• Accelerated Dragons (2nd edition) with William John Donaldson, 1998, 320 pages, Everyman Chess, ISBN 978-1857442083.
• The Complete Book of Chess Strategy: Grandmaster Techniques from A to Z, 1998, 360 pages, Siles Press, ISBN 978-1890085018.
• Winning with the Sicilian Defense (2nd edition): A Complete Repertoire against 1.e4, 1998, 353 pages, Chess Digest, ISBN 978-0875681986.
• Essential Chess Endings Explained Move by Move Volume One: Novice thru Intermediate, 1992, 223 pages, Chess Digest, ISBN 978-0875681726.
• The Dynamic Caro-Kann: The Bronstein Larsen and the Original Caro System, 1990, 182 pages, Summit Publishing, ISBN 978-0945806028.
• A Complete Black Repertoire, 1986, 126 pages, Chess Digest, ISBN 978-0875681634.

That's a lot of books I became lazy to read them but I get your point. My question is, is he happy in the pursuit or not? If not, why?

I don't know how he felt, but he was busy with chess almost all of his life, he wrote around 35 books (more than i listed here), he was probably happy...

Okay here is another guy, just became a GM recently, but this one is a bit "young", he didn't give tens of years in chess.. but became a grandmaster.. and he is not the only one, many top GMs became one before their 15.. anyways. On one hand there are bunch of guys "studying" all of their lives.. and on the other hand there are these kids becoming GMs in their 13-14s..

Funny, this little guy recently has beaten Hans Niemann in september 2023.. and Hans won against Magnus. If point still wasn't taken, there nothing else i can do. Keep dreaming, and enjoy it.

The key difference (and this truly does make a difference) is that most adult hobby players who study all their lives have generally done so on their own.

The kids that become teenage GMs (like the Carlsens and the Woodwards and so on) receive personalized and specialized training from grandmaster coaches, starting from a young age ...

Two different paths that lead to vastly different outcomes.

Oops. Attacking the user really? Is that the only thing that you got? Why not say your argument instead? Fight fair and square.

Nah bro chess is not that g-loaded. It is more about early exposure than IQ/innate talent. If you didn't grow up playing chess, you basically can't become a GM unfortunately.

In the opening-quickly develop the pieces and castle the king.
Be good tactically, one tactical mistake might cost the whole game.
Think what piece position you can improve.
What threats does your opponent have?
Try not to give pieces away.
Stay motivated and concentrated during the whole game.
After the game manually check out different possible variations.

holly mother molly.. what have you done valentine!!. you shouldnt give away the secrets of being a Grandmaster plainly.

Now there will be thousands of GMs out there, if not millions.

I don't think being a GM is about having that inborn ability, but instead, it's about the passion and consistency. When you look at the data, most people gained the GM title in their 20s and 30s, not in their teen years. Therefore, I believe your argument is discouraging and partially false.

Do you think that all those people who are stuck at IM for their whole lives never had the "passion and consistency"? Isn't that kind of belittling? Everyone who's either close or already GM all have great passion and consistency for the game.

From my perspective, what matters is the level of passion and consistency. As a low elo player myself, I definitely have some passion and debatable consistency. The level of passion, consistency, and the time you're willing to commit is what defines people's level in chess, I believe.

I respect that, but also disagree. I think talent makes a difference, but only at the highest level. For an extreme example of what I mean, let's take someone who can naturally remember certain chess patterns versus someone who can't. Obviously he will learn tactics and be able to apply them to his game easier than the latter, thus improving faster, and being able to use more of his earlier years' time in learning more advanced stuff. If both players work equally hard, the former will likely end up at a higher rating peak than the latter.

you said that everyone has an in-born ability but that has been proven time and time again to be false. Anyone can be a master no matter who they are as long as they have the motivation to do it.it has nothing to do with the way your brain works just how much time you put into it. Many,many people have become masters starting from below 800 and older than 8 years old.if someone spends hours a day playing and studying(me),goes to tournaments several times a month(also me) and shows a rapid improvement rate then if they are willing to put in the time then they could well become a master.

We are talking about grandmasters. Not masters. Hell, even I was close to becoming a master! I was stuck at 800 USCF for half a decade, quit chess in middle school, came back at age 14 and peaked 2144 in my senior year of high school (2023 Feburary). But we aren't talking about masters.

Great advice from a 1300 player who obviously has

a) no talent for the game, nor

b) any passion for the game.

What’s the point here? Don’t try? Give up? It seems to me like you’re saying to give up before you get ahead of yourself. If we have a predetermined amount of potential, that doesn’t mean anything other than we have to discover what that upper limit is. (Which is something we technically can’t do) perhaps Garry Kasparov could’ve worked harder? We don’t know. Saying there’s a limit doesn’t change anything as far as persuing a goal is concerned. If the goal of becoming a GM was truly unattainable then that fact will all but likely become apparent anyways to those who seek it. In Gothams case he literally can’t lead two lives. You have to remember that you’re competing with a bunch of other people are OBSSESSED with the game. So if you don’t have that level of obsession, yea, the goal is unattainable. Some people stop because they have busy lives, don’t want to study, don’t have time to study, or genuinely lack talent. 

Same with becoming a GM is the goal of hitting 2700 classical. If you don’t hit the goal before the age of 21 your progression tapers off and you never hit it. Statistically no one does. But there’s a catch. It’s because college hits and they have to shoot for being in the top 10 chess players world wide or get a normal job.

Hope all this makes sense. If I misunderstood part of what you said please feel free to clarify. But it does seem like you’re saying we can actually figure out our upper limit. I don’t think we technically can.

The only point I see is that anyone trying to achieve anything meaningful is going to face worse detraction than just this comparatively harmless post. If this is all it takes to distract or discourage you, well ...

I agree with this, seems very boring.