GM Within 6 months?

Sort:
magipi
62-Polymath wrote:
bumpathesecond wrote:
Going from absolute beginner to 2500 in six months has never happened in the history of chess. You may as well have the goal of becoming the starting center for the Los Angeles Lakers in six months. Its just not going to happen.

I set high goals based on a popular quote "Shoot for the Moon. Even if you miss, you'll end up among the stars." - Norman Vincent Peale

Okay, so let me be a bit more specific than bumpa.

Going from absolute beginner to 2500 in six years has never happened in the history of chess.

Take a kid who is absolutely passionate about chess. He is obsessed with the game. He (or she) plays and studies chess all day, every day for 8-10 years. This is how grandmasters become grandmasters.

Setting yourself the goal to become a grandmaster in 6 years is impossible, for various reasons. Shortage of time and starting age and lack of enthusiasm are the main ones.

But setting 6 months isn't just impossible. It's offensive. It shows that you haven't even spent 5 minutes researching the subject. That's just beyond ridiculous. This is why people keep asking if you're a troll. To which the answer is "probably yes".

V_Awful_Chess
62-Polymath wrote:

Just doing my normal transcribing YouTube chess games to PGN files "with full comments" that are available on my Github page for for.

But, someone asked me yesterday about why I study players? Especially the ones I'm going to play or might play? Easy, I believe EVERY GM does this "at least all the ones that I know and have talked to do" and here's an actual example of one saying it. Hans Niemann vs Andrea Botez in playing her for a date timestamped link just so you don't waste time. Granted he could be fibbing a little but I do have no doubt that he didn't study. Maybe not years "as he said" but he did spend some time analyzing her play. I already know both her, and her sisters play "Alexandrea" along with most other big YouTubers. Again, it helps me memorize my openings and middlegame play by analyzing and transcribing there games to PGN, etc. So great benefit for me. This is why I'm giving my PGN files away for download because I'm making them anyway for my own benefit so sense I have them might as well let others enjoy them who want to. And don't worry about me wasting time. I actually have a full program that is specifically for making PGN files with all the bells and whistles too. So I can make a PGN file as quickly as the game is played, pretty close.

I do hope no one thought I was making these PGN files by hand? But yes, before anyone ask, I have all the games they played in this video in PGN format. With comments

I can't remember anyone in this thread saying anylising GM games won't be helpful.

The question mark is more whether learning 72 openings is too many and spreads you too thin.

Although I feel like studying a 45-second GM game kind of defies the point of studying a GM game; the whole point of time odds is to make the GM player worse.

GYG
V_Awful_Chess wrote:

I can't remember anyone in this thread saying anylising GM games won't be helpful.

The question mark is more whether learning 72 openings is too many and spreads you too thin.

Honestly it doesn't really matter what he does, his rating will still be in the 3-digits 6 months from now. His best bet is probably taking Silman's advice and printing out a photo of Bobby Fischer and sitting on it for the next 6 months to improve via osmosis.

PremovePerry69420
GYG wrote:
V_Awful_Chess wrote:

I can't remember anyone in this thread saying anylising GM games won't be helpful.

The question mark is more whether learning 72 openings is too many and spreads you too thin.

Honestly it doesn't really matter what he does, his rating will still be in the 3-digits 6 months from now. His best bet is probably taking Silman's advice and printing out a photo of Bobby Fischer and sitting on it for the next 6 months to improve via osmosis.

fr

Jenium
62-Polymath wrote:

Granted he could be fibbing a little but I do have no doubt that he didn't study. Maybe not years "as he said" but he did spend some time analyzing her play.

Lol, why would Hans "study" Andrea's games? He is a top #100 GM while she is a club player. He could give her rook odds and would still win. It was obviously a joke on his part.

62-Polymath
Jenium wrote:

He is a top #100 GM while she is a club player.

That is the mentality of intermediates and some advanced players and it will be where I get my advantage over anyone I play. Because I'm going to know a lot more about their game than they think and it is ALWAYS a bad thing to under estimate your opponent. Especially if it's a very important game because ANYONE can get lucky just by doing something you wasn't expecting or ends up being better than you thought they were.

Even professional sports has this mentality because if you're 10-0 any 0-10 professional team can come into your house and beat you on any given Sunday. This has been proven MANY, MANY times over the years.

magipi
62-Polymath wrote:

Even professional sports has this mentality because if you're 10-0 any 0-10 professional team can come into your house and beat you on any given Sunday. This has been proven MANY, MANY times over the years.

This only applies if the power levels are somewhat close. If an NBA team plays a bunch of 8-year-olds, the NBA team will win no matter what. Even if they underestimate the kids, so what?

Elroch

"GM Within 6 months?"

No.

blueemu
GYG wrote:

His best bet is probably taking Silman's advice and printing out a photo of Bobby Fischer and sitting on it for the next 6 months to improve via osmosis.

It worked for me!

... well... not all the way to GM, mind you.

amchess16
GYG wrote:
V_Awful_Chess wrote:

I can't remember anyone in this thread saying anylising GM games won't be helpful.

The question mark is more whether learning 72 openings is too many and spreads you too thin.

Honestly it doesn't really matter what he does, his rating will still be in the 3-digits 6 months from now. His best bet is probably taking Silman's advice and printing out a photo of Bobby Fischer and sitting on it for the next 6 months to improve via osmosis.

I have tried this approach many times and have been very disappointed in the move that the ghost of Bobby Fischer recommended to me.

PromisingPawns

I can't help but 😂 laugh at this. But I respect your dedication. Wishing you all the best on your journey. Don't forget to update us after 6months 🫡

62-Polymath
Regalbeginning wrote:

I can't help but 😂 laugh at this. But I respect your dedication. Wishing you all the best on your journey. Don't forget to update us after 6months 🫡

I do appreciated you kind words. But as far as updating you all, that's not my job. My goal deals with me reaching 2500 and playing a GM is May 2024. If you all feel the need to keep up-to-date that's on you. Probably within the next 7-days I'll stop responding to this post; because, it's not really going anywhere anyway except for negative feedback.

So, this thread is going to be completely out of sight and out of mind come Jan 2024 and by May 2024 it'll be nothing but a distant forgotten memory.

bumpathesecond
magipi wrote: 62-Polymath wrote:

Even professional sports has this mentality because if you're 10-0 any 0-10 professional team can come into your house and beat you on any given Sunday. This has been proven MANY, MANY times over the years.

This only applies if the power levels are somewhat close. If an NBA team plays a bunch of 8-year-olds, the NBA team will win no matter what. Even if they underestimate the kids, so what?

Good point. I dont think this guy realizes that he is bringing an intellectual knife to a gunfight.

bumpathesecond
bumpathesecond wrote: magipi wrote: 62-Polymath wrote:

Even professional sports has this mentality because if you're 10-0 any 0-10 professional team can come into your house and beat you on any given Sunday. This has been proven MANY, MANY times over the years.

This only applies if the power levels are somewhat close. If an NBA team plays a bunch of 8-year-olds, the NBA team will win no matter what. Even if they underestimate the kids, so what?

Good point. I dont think this guy realizes that he is bringing an intellectual knife to a gunfight.

And a rather dull knife at that...

Khnemu_Nehep

Yeah...a kids plastic toy against a flamethrower lol.

bumpathesecond

Remember this guy? He has until 4/30/24 to become a GM...or to achieve a 2500 elo rating...or to beat a GM...or to meet whatever new revised goal he comes up with. Looks like he has given up. But you never know. Maybe he is playing opossum. After all, he is a polymath--and so very much smarter than you or me.

GYG

In post #125 I said that if he worked hard he could reach 800 by the end of his 6 month goal, but it looks like even that isn't going to happen.

bumpathesecond
astrologerdevanand wrote:

Becoming a chess grandmaster (GM) within six months is an extremely challenging goal. It normally takes years of devoted study, practice, and participation in tournaments to gain this title. To improve, focus on normal practice, play in tournaments, and get education from a skilled coach. While it is a difficult journey, setting sensible desires and staying dedicated will contribute to regular progress. Remember, turning into a grandmaster is a long-term goal that requires endurance and continuous learning.

no. its not extremely challenging. that is the entire point of the criticism laid against him. a GM title has never been earned in only six years, let alone six months. and starting this journey at age 62 alone renders this feat impossible. perhaps he should amend his goal to sprouting wings and flying around the world. that would be equally probable.

jetoba
bumpathesecond wrote:
astrologerdevanand wrote:

Becoming a chess grandmaster (GM) within six months is an extremely challenging goal. It normally takes years of devoted study, practice, and participation in tournaments to gain this title. To improve, focus on normal practice, play in tournaments, and get education from a skilled coach. While it is a difficult journey, setting sensible desires and staying dedicated will contribute to regular progress. Remember, turning into a grandmaster is a long-term goal that requires endurance and continuous learning.

no. its not extremely challenging. that is the entire point of the criticism laid against him. a GM title has never been earned in only six years, let alone six months. and starting this journey at age 62 alone renders this feat impossible. perhaps he should amend his goal to sprouting wings and flying around the world. that would be equally probable.

I think you wanted to put the word "merely" ahead of extremely. The one thing that helps him (microscopically) is that at his age he can get a GM title by winning the World Senior and having "only" a 2300 rating (FIDE direct title requirements). To continue your analogy he only need to fly across the continent instead of all the way around the world.

magipi

The guy (astrologerdevanand) slams a ChatGPT text in here, and people jump to answer. Utterly bizarre.