and one thing that im sure would be a good weapon to net higher rated players, especially younger students who study chess too seriously and take the book along, will be to play unusual openings, and take them to unknown territories...any territory is unknown to me, so why not make it equal and then fight it out..as Tony Miles said after that game in 1980 against Karpov, why not throw their book out and make them play some chess? Im surely going to try it out myself for sure this December..will definitely post my findings if im here...
can I be an IM before i die?
Sort:
Dec 6, 2013
0
#103
sky_is_the_limit wrote:
and one thing that im sure would be a good weapon to net higher rated players, especially younger students who study chess too seriously and take the book along, will be to play unusual openings, and take them to unknown territories...any territory is unknown to me, so why not make it equal and then fight it out..as Tony Miles said after that game in 1980 against Karpov, why not throw their book out and make them play some chess? Im surely going to try it out myself for sure this December..will definitely post my findings if im here...
Just remember something:
Going for unusual lines shouldn´t make you go for bad lines.
It´s ok just to get = from the opening, but try not to get a worse position just to try to surprise your higher rated oponnents.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Once in a USCF tournament I played this line vs a former USA Champion
Once in a USCF tournament I played this line vs a former USA Champion
The Danish; I play that too, it's good fun, but generally only in blitz. Did you win?
Dec 7, 2013
0
#107
This is annoying...yes/no.
Seriously...do you need people to make up your mind for you? Are you that indecisive?
Go for it or do'nt!
noob!
What is your Mathematical and Spatial IQ? I ask this specifically since verbal being factored in inflates or deflates the number regarding chess relevance. If your mathematical is higher try to develop a calculation heavy style, though visualization being an important part of calculation is needed too.
Schiller says in Encyclopedia of Chess Wisdom (a good my first chess book with many historical tidbits too and just the Terrasch quote, Q: What is the point of playing a gambit? "To look like a dashing player at the cost of losing the game" was worth the money) anyone who is at least average intelligence can make FM.
Aside from naive intelligence you also need plenty of spare time. Many say that one needs 10,000 hours of study to make expert. Spend that time acquiring an understanding instead of pointless knowledge. I can play certain Grunfeld lines over 25 moves deep... yet I don't even play the Grunfeld anymore. I'd be better off studying endgames and calculation more back then instead.
sky_is_the_limit wrote:
well honestly i think beating a higher rated player (with a difference of 400 or more ratings) is far from impossible...i have already seen this too many times in the 3 tournaments i have played..i myself had beaten a 1532 (the 1 was talking of out of the 5 i played)...i cud have drawn against the 1712 i played, but lost only bcoz of lack of technique...i cud fox the 1972 with an unusual opening, but lost a piece by blunder...against the 1665 i was beaten in the opening bcoz he played a book line...and i lost to the 1412 only in the last stages of the endgame...so i guess its also a matter of luck before u net big fishes on ur way, after all even higher rated players are humans, and in a tournament, they r the ones under pressure to perform...and if i beat a player 400 points higher, i get 27 points, which doesnt seem bad...yes it does get lower as the difference lowers...and i vud very humbly say that i have never studied chess or any opening, just know the first 3 or 4 moves...just played on general principles...so with serious study in the 4 or 5 hours, i say without being arrogant that atleast 2000 is not too difficult by the time i reach 37 or so...and here at chess.com, i cudnt find players who play with larger time controls, so i dont find it useful bcoz playing shorter games teaches u nothing useful...
Could've, would've, should've. All the excuses you just gave are reasons why they are higher rated than you are. You make mistakes that they don't. Blunders, endgame losses, these all matter. To beat someone with a higher rating you need proficiency, not luck. Luck is for poker.
A chess expert is about top 5%. Masters are top 2%. GM are... top 0.02% I think.
Your question is basically can I become better than 98% of competitive chess players? We are not talking about becoming a grade A student here. 100% of your school can be grade A student. But master will always be restricted to 2%. You want to be IM? Start beating everyone who answered this thread first.
Dec 9, 2013
0
#112
harryz wrote:
Time to untrack
These are the responses YOU get when YOU post pointless questions!!
I know that I can't. In fact most days I feel I suck so bad at chess that really i should be taken out in to the street and shot. When I really like chess on here is when I'm actually winning a game and someone starts with the taunting, the "you can do better Loser" or "look how my knight is holding back all u'r pieces" type stuff and it actually works. Its a wonder my laptop is not sitting outside on the grass sometimes..
Dec 9, 2013
0
#114
Oops. I misread the title. I thought it said "Can i see an IM before i die?" I was about to say "You must be a real hardcore chess player. Most people ask for a priest." 
That's funny. I first scanned the title quickly and thought it said "Can I be a GIMP before I die." That's not appropriate.
Guy with 1200 rating "yeah it's possible"
Guy with 2399 rating "no way"
[every thread like this ever made]
Know what the guy with the 2399 rating who spent ten hours a day from the time he was four studying chess with masters and getting shuttled to tournaments every weekend by parents willing to foot the bills all through adolescence and into early adulthood says?
Nothing, because that guy doesn't exist. He's a super GM.
IM Marc Esserman started when he was 7 years old, he is not a Super GM.
he also spent 4 years at harvard earning a degree.
Like GM Kamsky or GM Nunn?