Like all other things, we learn the most the easiest when we are young, as we get older things get harder to learn. Not that we dont have easier ways to get all the info we want and need. We all get older and lose the ability to retain information as readily as when we were younger.
Are limitations on success in chess much harsher than limitations in life?
Sort:
you could win the lottery in life. there is no such bonus in chess. chess is a sad, sad microcosm of life, with no fairytale endings. in chess you lose piece after piece until your opponent eventually hunts you down and backs you into a corner and utterly beats you into submission- cold, heartbreaking, miserable and degrading.
It's pretty common for chess players that started as adults to hit an absolute rating ceiling above which the player will never advance no matter how much effort and study he puts into it.
I'm sure you all know those people that are stuck at 1400, still study hundreds of hours a year, but just don't have what it takes to rise above it.
Is this harsher or about the same as real life? I believe men have unlimited potential at birth, theorectically, but there is a certain success level in life for each person that it is very hard or impossible to go beyond. This limit can be determined by the following: 1) looks 2) intelligence 3) people skills 4) education, 5) hard work, and 6) luck.
So perhaps the absolute limit of one's success is harsher in chess than real life.
What do you think?