anyone can be a super GM

Sort:
TheGrobe
freerabbitfeed wrote:

A lot of people claim anything is possible. But we have to remember that because "anything" is possible does not mean "everything" is possible. Ratings are based on how much ahead of the average players are. If everyone starts being a GM, then that would just mean that the standard of being a GM would go up.

Not only is everything possible, everything is.

brettregan1


- I vote with all the people who say for all kinds of reasons not everyone can be a super gm

- and then it occurred to me that this game is proof positive I cannot be a super g m

- like I make dumb moves and leave players "hanging"  grand masters don't

- and when it came to one part of this game I made a dumb mistake and put my rook into take by a bishop

HOWEVER - I MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING GOING BY ATTACKING WITH THE ROOK FIRST - but in the attitude of can't be a g m - - when I have a rook and queen in my attack - I WILL ALWAYS ATTACK WITH MY QUEEN FIRST - it is MY KNEE JERK reaction - attack with queen first because queen is more versatile - - however - I think a g m - would actually THINK FIRST - -  and when I look at this game I think I should have otter have attacked with the rook first

 

AT MOVE 48 I THINK I SHOULD HAVE ATTACKED NOT WITH QUEEN BUT ATTACKED WITH ROOK FIRST

- however I won the game on time - but even now I don't know how I should have approached and stage and move my pieces for a win

- well I think a chess master would

well maybe everyone else in the world could be a super gm - well I know I can't - like that fighter pilot movie - only I don't have the right stuff

AndyClifton

There indeed actually was a pretty cool win in there, brettregan, after White's 48th move (although it took a while for me to find it...all those check possibilities are numbing!)...

brettregan1
AndyClifton wrote:

There indeed actually was a pretty cool win in there, brettregan, after White's 48th move (although it took a while for me to find it...all those check possibilities are numbing!)...

 

- and there you go I could never ever be a chess master because in a million years without thousands and of years of " COACHING" - I would never have found that sequence of moves AndyClifton gave me because I would have thought the first move in the winning sequence would be to take the rook sacrificing my rook - then getting a queen and then spending the rest of the game putting the opponents king in check hoping for when I can eliminate his queen with a pin

- now if I could or would have thought of Andy Cifton's sequence I might consider myself a higher class player but I didn't and I know myself - I would always think about taking that rook first

winerkleiner

That's a lot of generations.

ekorbdal

No they can't.

Tom_Hindle

With how some people early on said that ANYBODY can be a GM then why is there only 500 GMs out of the 7 billion people on earth which is roughly 1 person out of every 14 million people on earth and in terms of being a super GM I think I read somewhere there‘s only 8 Super GMs so odds are nearly 1in a billion of becoming a super GM what I think it takes is A LOT of effort and what would help is a mental illness such as aspergus which helps memory a lot because Bobby Fischer showed signs of aspergus which would also explain his 180 IQ and Kasparov said he had a mental illness which helped him memorise chess positions which. would probably be aspergus

Rosenbalm

I hate to break it to everyone, but studies have been done on this, and it's been said that a person with average intelligence can only hope to acheive a FIDE rating of 2100 (Expert level). And that's with careful study and lifelong application. Beyond that, you better have the genes.

Sorry.

Consider, the average GM was better at chess after learning the rules and playing 10 games than you were after playing 1000.

Ouch. The truth hurts sometimes.

Practice does not make perfect. I love it when I play people equal to my rating that have played thousands of games on this site. Why? Because I've played less than 100. I have found my easiest opponents are those equal to me in rating that have played thousands of games.

KingMeTaco666
Rosenbalm wrote:

I hate to break it to everyone, but studies have been done on this, and it's been said that a person with average intelligence can only hope to acheive a FIDE rating of 2100 (Expert level). And that's with careful study and lifelong application. Beyond that, you better have the genes.

Sorry.

Consider, the average GM was better at chess after learning the rules and playing 10 games than you were after playing 1000.

Ouch. The truth hurts sometimes.

Practice does not make perfect. I love it when I play people equal to my rating that have played thousands of games on this site. Why? Because I've played less than 100. I have found my easiest opponents are those equal to me in rating that have played thousands of games.

Always kind of makes me laugh to see people pay money to have a rating lower than mine.

pfren

Rosenbalm wrote:

I hate to break it to everyone, but studies have been done on this, and it's been said that a person with average intelligence can only hope to acheive a FIDE rating of 2100 (Expert level). And that's with careful study and lifelong application. Beyond that, you better have the genes.

That would be very flattering, but... no. I have passed 2400 in the past, currently being at 2341 FIDE, and my intelligence is average at best.

Chances are you were reading a pulp fiction book, not a study.

TurboFish

anyone can be a super GM?

It depends on the meaning of the word "can".

If you mean is it physically possible (not forbidden by the laws of physics), yes.

If you mean is it realistically possible (based on statistical occurance), no.

As usual, many of the hotly debated questions never have a universally agreed conclusion because people are not even aware that they assign different meanings to words.

SmyslovFan
superking500 wrote:

chess study is dominated by the computer....

 

couldn't anyone be a super GM if they study there whole life, computers, books etc.

So, who in this thread has become a super GM in the last three years?

Anyone? 

I suppose nobody writing in this thread wanted it badly enough. 

pfren

Heavy computer usage can certainly make you an idiot.

Not a Super GM though... sorry for that...

Nipplewise
Rosenbalm ha scritto:

I hate to break it to everyone, but studies have been done on this, and it's been said that a person with average intelligence can only hope to acheive a FIDE rating of 2100 (Expert level). And that's with careful study and lifelong application. Beyond that, you better have the genes.

Sorry.

Would you mind sharing with us your sources?

Consider, the average GM was better at chess after learning the rules and playing 10 games than you were after playing 1000.

Ouch. The truth hurts sometimes.

Weak claims you have to back up. I've watched documentaries about Carlsen and Fisher and both used to play with their sisters (or relatives). What I remeber, is that at first they sucked like every one else.

Practice does not make perfect. I love it when I play people equal to my rating that have played thousands of games on this site. Why? Because I've played less than 100. I have found my easiest opponents are those equal to me in rating that have played thousands of games.

Practice does make perfect, but what we would formally call deliberate practice (https://goo.gl/nwwz9G). Either you're trolling or you have no clue.

Robert_New_Alekhine
Reb wrote:

If anyone could be a super GM there would be many more of them than there are. 

Everyone would be a Super GM if they made it so the only qualification would be to have a rating lower than 101 (lowest rating is 100)

blastforme
chessmicky wrote:

Rosenbalm: When you claim that " studies have been done on this, and it's been said that a person with average intelligence can only hope to acheive a FIDE rating of 2100..." please give a link, or at the ver least a citation so that we can check out that study for ourselves. Otherwise, we will think that ou are just making up garbage. Ouch. But the truth hurts sometimes!

I've come across some articles here and there (like this one: http://www.delanceyplace.com/view-archives.php?p=1975) that suggest that the linkage between general intelligence (as measured by IQ), and chess ability is actually not very strong at all, and that GM's generally have average intelligence scores. I don't know - maybe the jury is still out, but I'd be surprised, in light of this, if there is actual science behind such a presice ELO vs. IQ limit. So where does the '2100' value come from? 

Nipplewise

He seems to have good memory and focus; qualities you can train but some people possess them to a greater degree

Simen Agdestein emphasises Carlsen's extreme memory, claiming that he was able to recall the areas, population numbers, flags and capitals of all the countries in the world by the age of five. Later, Carlsen had memorised the areas, population numbers, coat-of-arms and administrative centres of "virtually all" Norwegian municipalities.

https://goo.gl/AS91zx

Could be interest in memorization at early age, but you can read different reports of people with eidetic memory (not related to mnemonics) either natural or achieved by means of drugs.

zborg

Anyone can reach average chess status, unless you live in Lake Wobegon --

The News from Lake Wobegon
Each week, Garrison Keillor shares with listeners the latest news and views from the little town where “all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average.”

SmyslovFan

Reminds of an education seminar I once attended where the speaker bemoaned some group's test scores where he said that 50% were below average. 

Possibly_Me

Maybe not yet, but as soon as cyborg-conversion becomes a possibility, then I don't see why not :)