average players
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Most people thinks that vith hard study nearly everyone (even if not young at all) can reach a master level. Of course the task is easier for young talented players. There are instead very few cases of GM who started playing seriously in their twenties (without showing enormous talent in their youth). This might be partly explained with the fact that little people has the time to mainly study chess at that ag, but even so it is not an encouraging statistic.
What is certain is that VERY hard work always produce great results.
Apr 16, 2011
0
#3
It depends which rating u r talking about. FIDE extremely unlikely, here on chess.com 'online chess' or 'bullet' are more easier to achieve (still hard tho). If you can put a LOT of work into chess then surely you can achieve sumthin.
Yes, i was talking of fide ratings, on-line ratings are almost always inflated. Here on chess.com for example it seems to me the live rating are quite accurate while the "online" ones are popped up of at least 200 points.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Apr 16, 2011
0
#6
Well let me tell you something, I started to play chess when I was seven and my dad sign me up to local chess club I was there teached by a very good chess trainer (IM) along with several other kids, as years went by some of the kids got tired of all this coz more and more work was required to be competitive. Finally I resigned as well when I was 16. One of us stick to it - now he's a GM with a rating around 2570(FIDE). He wasn't the brightest but he worked the most of us and most importantly he didn't quit.
So yes it's possible but you have to ask yourself how much can u sacrifice to become good at chess?
[COMMENT DELETED]
daud2012 wrote:
RathHood wrote:
Well let me tell you something, I started to play chess when I was seven and my dad sign me up to local chess club I was there teached by a very good chess trainer (IM) along with several other kids, as years went by some of the kids got tired of all this coz more and more work was required to be competitive. Finally I resigned as well when I was 16. One of us stick to it - now he's a GM with a rating around 2570(FIDE). He wasn't the brightest but he worked the most of us and most importantly he didn't quit.
So yes it's possible but you have to ask yourself how much can u sacrifice to become good at chess?
Yes! That is the point. If a young adult would spend his time studying math or another scientific field, seriously, for the next 10 years, he would have a job as researcher or other kind of job, and make more than 100K a year (and this is true for every Master degree or PhD), while maybe the chess players who make a similar amount of money are less than 100 in the whole world (imagine on 7 billion people!!). So is it really worth it to become a GM, when a young adult could really give a REAL contribution to society and to the world discovering something which save lives or improve our living conditions?
Depends on who you are. I believe that you should work for whatever you have a passion for, while respecting anything you don't have one for (as long as it's not destructive). Firefighters, likely, are not firefighters purely because they feel they have to be slaves to society; they should have an individual passion for their service. Personally, I would be satisfied with my life if the only significant thing I ever did was to become a grandmaster -- I'd want to do more, but just being a grandmaster would be satisfactory to me. Because getting better at this incredibly challenging game rewards my mind more than anything else at the moment. It's a game within a world, but if the game seems more rewarding, so be it. It wouldn't be the only thing I'd do, but it'd be one of the few things I'd put my total heart and soul into.