Can Anyone Become Grandmaster?

And an astronaut and a vet and in the SAS and a popstar . Of course you can be a GrandM! You've just got to believe and [etcetcetaretcetara]

Well, I remember thinking a while back that it would be better to dedicate ones time to becoming super good at poker than chess because chess is an exact science whereas in poker a bigginer could win a hand against a really good titled player on any given night. Then I started watching videos on chess on youtube and when Mato would annouce "the killa move" I"d sometimes get it right. This has convinced me that master or grandmaster is within my range. Now, I am no prodigy as they say. I"m just a guy willing to work hard to improve. Right now I am a D to C rated player and my goal is to reach A status. My opinino is that anybody with some decent talent can. What percentage of people? I dont know

Few people achieve the grandmaster title. Isn't there some reason for that? If it were achievable by everyone, would it even exist? Thinking that willingness to improve in chess is enough to become a grandmaster is at best an underestimation of other players who aim for that too.

Solve my puzzle on the Ponziani forum and you can be above a grand master.

But practically speaking few have the inborn talent to become a grand master.

Everyone can be a grandmaster but not everyone has the time

Yes, that is the myth. The only thing keeping everyone from greatness is the time it takes.

Keep believing that.

True. If I had taken more time last week to study, I would be a GM now. :)

I think 50% of the population could become FIDE Masters if trained from youth. Maybe 2% could become GM if trained from youth.

"Nope. Even with tons of work, noone is assured to reach that level. There are also other factors involved. Gift? Nope again, it's not some sort of charisma. It's a mixture of various elements, and noone knows the exact recipe."

A pretty fair point from IM pfren on page one. I indeed think it's a mysterious recipe. On one hand, a lot of genius ideas that GMs spew out come from their huge database of patterns that allows them to clue in on potentially strong moves. However, to actually learn those patterns, whether you will succeed or not, and how easily you will, may just depend on who you are -- your critical thinking skills, openness to new concepts, willingness to learn what is necessary, etc.

I think those two things conflict with each other a bit. Because obviously if a 2700 player demonstrates a logical plan that you completely overlooked, although he may or may not be a more logical thinker than you, surely a good part of it is due to his pattern recognition. But that in itself can't rule out that the 2700's aptitudes is what helped him acquire such knowledge.

Scientifically, so I'm told, a kid's brain can make more new neural connections than an adult's brain, or something like that, which may allow a kid to, everything else being equal, absorb new patterns more easily than an adult.

I've been working on my knuckleball for 38 years.  In another 38, I'm quite confident I'll be in the Tigers' rotation.

(I don't know what they get, trying to convince people that it is impossible: level the playing field, stop anyone from trying because maybe they tried for many many many many years and couldn't do it, then out comes this 14 yr old ( Anish Giri for instance) and then he shoots up to GM, so the only REASON he is that good has to be TALENT.Is it sour grapes: "I couldn't do it, so no one can. It is a supernatural gift. That is the reason. If only I had been gifted, I too would have become a GM").

To get to the top percentage of a percentage in any field requires hard work, ability and luck. Outliers aren't anywhere close to average by definition. 

Talent doesn't have to be supernatural to exist. Do you think everything you don't understand the cause of, has to be supernatural?

In my opinion, everyone on earth can be a gm starting at any age, with the sole exception of Conflagration_Planet.

He sucks, and I'm sure he agrees.

Can I have everybody's autograph?

It's only fair.

Everybody send a dollar with it.

i too believe this question comes from ignorance. the more you realize about chess the more you come to respect players who can see solutions at the board. if you want to appreciate the hardness of chess try solving three or four pawn endgames. its easy to think that playing the middlegame is easy because many people think they can get by on general principles of the middlegames. but figure out a rook vs rook+bishop endgame and you will find a different story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Probably already mentioned, I guess.

You must love the game.