Achievable chess rating for 38yo beginner with a 130 IQ?

I'm 64 and not in particularly good health... and I've reached 2350 here on chess.com.

A year for each square 

I coached a player on our high school chess team who was absolutely one of the worst I'd ever had. He just couldn't grasp the game, and consistently played on the bottom board of our varsity team. One day our #1 player was out sick, and I stuck him in the #1 spot. He was shocked!! "Why me?" he asked. "Well," I replied, "the worst that can happen is that you'll lose. My other choice is to move everyone up by one board and risk the whole team losing." He got it, and of course he lost. 

So what's the point of this, given your original question? He was a bona fide genius and went to MIT on a full ride. IQ doesn't equate to chess skill. Period.

I guess somewhere along the line, folks thought chess was a game only for smart people, but guess what....geniuses and idiots play chess.  Easy to learn, difficult to master.  If you enjoy it, play it.  Don't get hung up on age or IQ.  Just enjoy it.

The amount of time you dedicate and how you do so is more important

When I first took up chess, years ago, I used to wonder that too. I'd think: How high can I get my rating? Can I one day become an International Master or a Grand Master? But the problem is that, like many activities, it's best to start young in order to achieve greatness. But chess also has a longer shelf life than sports, so maybe a 2000 rating is possible? Maybe GM is possible (you'd have to ask around), but I think that would require a huge sacrifice.

Sadly, years ago, I decided that if I couldn't be great at something, it wasn't worth doing. So, I quit chess (I wasn't very good anyway), and ended up focusing on art as my main hobby (I had started that young), and I think I've reached a pro level with it, but I missed out on a lot of other life experiences. Then, I had an epiphany during 2020. I realized I could still try new things, and these activities could still be fun if I would just quit the perfectionism, the horrible striving to be extraordinary. I needed to enjoy life more. So, I'm trying chess again, because I need a break from my other hobbies, and because I genuinely love solving visual puzzles. There's a bit of creativity in playing too.   Anyway, I'm rambling. My point is: Just have fun!

I have an IQ higher than yours. I learned chess in my early twenties, played with friends and read a couple of books, then tried out a couple of tournaments, getting a rating in the low 1400s. Before turning 30 I joined the local chess club to play more regularly, continued to play in a few tournaments and took up postal chess. By the time I was 40 my rating reached 2100, but working in the theater business kept me busy many nights and weekends, cutting into my play and slowly dropping my rating to 2000. I got even busier and quit for 25 years. When I retired and started playing again my rating plummeted and now fluctuates between 1700 (my floor in USCF rules) and 1850 depending on whether my most recent tournaments were successes or disasters.

     You have to realize that IQ will not help your chess rating that much. The most important chess talents are visualization--the ability to accurately "see" the position that will result following a series of moves--and visual memory--the ability to recall positions you have see before and how they should have been handled.

     Starting out as an adult, it is doubtful that you will ever be a strong master. (Marcel Duchamp did, but an artistic genius obviously has a high level of visualization talent.) Children imprint what they learn at a deeper level of their brains than we do so they can "know" the pieces' properties and relationships without having to think about them. Also, as an adult with many other real world responsibilities, you'll be unable to devote the kind of time to study and practice that kids do.

     But don't despair! At the weekly chess club I played at many years ago there were two UC Berkeley math professors who accompanied their young sons. The fathers both decided they might as well play themselves as long as they were spending their Friday nights at a chess club, and in 2-3 years were 1500-1700 players despite their late start and limited study time. (Their children became stronger players than them.) Your IQ should make learning and studying easier.

     Most importantly, if you find the problem-solving and competitive aspects of the game intriguing, just play for your own enjoyment. Don't take chess results as an indication of your intellectual ability. I've known a couple of people with learning disabilities and/or memory problems who played for years with very little success--stuck in the 1200-1350 rating range--who loved playing chess and were thrilled with the occasional wins they achieved vs stronger players.

People not answering you and giving tips.  

Check this out. Self explanatory. Chessgoals study plans

Based on the site ^^ I made a table of your progress.  

age rating hours/week xgain new rating
38   681     7                 360     1041
39   1041   6                 190     1231
40   1231   6                 130     1361
41   1361   6                 130     1491
42   1491   7                 100     1591
43   1591   7                 100     1691
44   1691   7                 100     1791
45   1791   10               60       1851
46   1851   10               60       1911
47   1911   10               60       1971
48   1971   10               60       2031

Use your IQ wisely, deliberate practice, time put in and you'll be satisfied with the progress. Ask questions, learn, play. If something is way too easy, skip it. If something is way too hard, delay it for future. Always learn at the sweet spot for max speed.

Good luck.

@mpaetz: Great post.

Depends on what you favourite colour is.  It's always IQ + favourite colour that is the clear determinant of your chess potential. 

Or was that the steps to metres ratio? 

Honestly, there's one thing that matters more than age and more than IQ: how much time you devote to chess.

If you're working a full time job, taking your kids out on weekends, taking your wife out on dates, and you can only spend 5 hours per week playing chess, you won't get that far. Perhaps you'll reach 1500 online rating after a few years, but that's about it.

The #1 thing that kills any chess player's progress is having too many life commitments outside of chess and not being able to spend enough time on the game.

I'd wager that starting chess at the age of 38 and being above average intelligence, you could theoretically become a FIDE Master one day if all you did was play chess from this point onwards. But are you willing to make that many sacrifices?

Why would you coach people when your rating is 1182. This is not an insult. I'm genuinely curious. Is it someone else playing in your account?

A coach doesn't need to be a great player.

He needs to be a great coach.

Two different skill-sets.

That's just blitz. It looks like their actual rating is in the 1200s. In any case, 1200s is more than enough to manage a high school chess club, which doesn't have to actually be serious at chess. Probably has more to do with managing the players than about requiring any kind of advanced chess knowledge.

Probably you can achieve a 0 elo...
If you think that IQ have some relation with your rank you are really false.
I personally have 145 IQ and my ELO rank is 1100.
High IQ does not make you a genious nor avoid you high training, reading, understanding theory but can change your way of thinking which can be good or bad, depending on personnality.

Figure that out yourself genius, you have 130IQ buddy you dont need our help! us unworthy scums over here with our avrage 90-110 IQs

Achievable chess rating...
1. In what time frame?
2. With how much coaching and training a week?

I agree with this. I still think a coach should be a strong player compared to his student but it doesn't always have to be the case. I am sure top-level players benefit from coaches that aren't even close to them in playing strength.

People underestimate the benefit of a fresh perspective/direction.