13234 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
i have a question, sorry if it has been asked already, i can't find it..
Can even adults with no special skills for chess reach 2000 with some work, or is it 'either you have it "inside you", and with some work it'll come, or you don't have it and forget about it"
i started playing chess late (at around 20y.old), just for fun on the internet, i quickly reached about 1700 and i'm now 25 but never improved and i'm still 1700..
now i'm willing to spend more time and work and play in real life tournament to finally reach 2000... if that's possible.
I believe that with training anyone can get to 2000
Agreed! Everyone can reach 2000, though for some it comes quicker than for others.
As for myself, 2000 is my goal for next year. I'll reach 1850 OTB in the next rating list. The problem is, I think my game has improved greatly over the last year, but it does not yet come out in my tournament play.
You probably still need to adjust your play to would you've learned.
I have encountered the same problem, even dropped before going up.
I know, but I play better in my games, though not consistent enough. In my experience as a chess teacher, I think it takes (young) chess players about 3 months to apply what they have learned in their games.
A better question is: who gives a rat's patootie?
"2000" is an artificial level on an artificial scale. It won't win you any state championships, nor many city titles of cities of any size. There is no one who can tell you if you spend X hours at Y exercises for Z years you will achieve any given level. You could just not be able to get your play to that level, even if you can play at that level most of the time. Some people just can't play serious chess at that level. So what?
If you have fun and enjoy playing and can stay competitive within your peer group or club or online group, that's what it is all about. People who can't consistently play at Class C (USCF 1400 OTB) can still get a lot of pleasure from the game and learn a lot of amazing things.
Hypothetical questions aren't worth the gossamer wings they are tattooed upon.
Sure, just put in the effort. I started late too (around 20), 10 years later I'm now rated 2080 FIDE.
Heck, I'm 65; just started "studying" chess a year ago and I plan on becoming a titled player before I die. Realistic, probably not, but if it keeps my mind sharp I'll be happy. At 25, you won't make GM, but 2000 ? Why not? You've got a diamond membership. It's not like there are no training resources available. Figure out where you are weak and work on it.
Of course everyone can reach 2000, it just takes alot of work.
At 25, he won't make a GM? I wouldn't go that far, either. With a teacher / trainer, one can get amazingly good in a short amount of time. It just depends how much time you're willing to spend getting good. All the GM's have had chess teachers from day one. Huge difference in just trying to teach yourself.
I certainly admire your optimism and of course there is always the exception that proves the rule, but the consensus on the forum (I'm retired so I've read a lot of threads) is that unless you are a titled player by your teens, you just won't make GM. Apparently you are just too far behind your peers and can never catch up. It's not my opinion; I'm just parroting the consensus of previous threads. A titled player? Sure, at almost any age. GM is a different animal altogether.
I don't think you have to start as a child to become a grand master. I think it will be easier if you start as a child though. Many studies (including a recent one and ones from 200 years ago) show that it takes a human being on average about 10 years to master a skill. I think most adults just aren't ready to put in that time and effort to bring themselves all the way to GM status if they start at say 20-30 years old.
Also parents who really want a child to be good get them a coach who spends a lot of time with them to perfect their skills. How many adults take the time (and money) to do that?
I don't think there is anything a person can master starting in childhood that someone can't master starting in adult hood.
there is a benifit to starting Later, You are more willing to listen to advice, and you will probably not be discouraged by losses. (I am actualy encouraged when I loose because now I am out for Revenge, and I learn more from losses than wins)
Well, let's hope WGM Natalia Pogonina is still reading this thread. I'm certainly willing to accept her opinion as gospel. I have certainly been wrong before (and will be again, often), but I think you guys are underestimating the difficulty of becoming a GM. I hope you all prove me wrong and become Grandmasters some day.
that is one of my goals
here are the others
Bowl a 900 set
Record a toop 10 single
become and engineer
Live in Seattle
Have a Family
I think you are reading it wrong. It is certainly very tough to become a GM. Most children who play chess will never see the rank of GM, same with most adults who play chess. I'm simply saying I do not believe that because you don't start playing chess seriously as a child you are now prevented from ever achieving GM.
I don't think age plays a roll in the ability to make it, the person does. Olympics for example are typically seem as a young persons game because almost everything is a physical competition so age certainly plays a roll. Yet last olympics there was the older lady who started training to become a professional swimmer later in life and she did well.
I simply don't believe starting chess later in life would ever block a person who has GM potential from becoming a GM.
GM Anand "Nowadays, when you're not a grandmaster at 14, you can forget about it". OK, I've obviously taken this quote out of context-GM Anand was talking about competing on the world stage, in effect becoming a superGM. Nevertheless it points out his opinion of the grave difficulty of starting late and becoming great. I'm afraid we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. And yes, I am aware of the absurdity of this whole discussion. An old patzer arguing with class players about who can and can't become a GM?
The man who claims something is impossible is often interrupted by the man doing it.
Everyone can get as good as they work hard enough to be. You just have to work at it.
Practice makes perfect! If one puts in the necessary hours, and dedicate oneself to the task of becoming a 2000 level chess player, then and only then will one obtain the rating of a 2000 player. You have to believe in yourself. Play alot of chess. Record your games. Study your loses, wins, and drawn games.
Best Accidental Checkmate Ever
by screwballz a few minutes ago
losing games by abandonment
by Killallyalll 3 minutes ago
by MyRatingis1523 5 minutes ago
10/26/2016 - What's Better Than Winning A Queen?
by booduhbooduh 9 minutes ago
can't find opponents?
by Thowra 11 minutes ago
Ridiculous new "anti-cheating" rule for the World Open.
by camter 11 minutes ago
by bunicula 11 minutes ago
by cghori 12 minutes ago
Solskytz vs logozar blitz games
by solskytz 12 minutes ago
Becoming a GM, too late?
by YerekSan 13 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
Try the new Chess.com!
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!