Can intelligent person suck at chess, forever?

I don't think anyone sucks at intelligence but I think it's far more possible some just decide to make a career in mediocrity and I'm not talking about chess skills.

Always thought before came before after...

Yereslov, English was a subject I took at Ordinary, Higher and Sixth Year Studies level, passing each time.  You do not understand how to use commas.  The use of a comma, for example, in this sentence is as parenthesis.  That is how it was used with trollishly - in that example the word between the commas is indicated to be seperate and removable.  The comma before the conjunction "but" is what in Britain (the home of English) is called the Oxford Comma and the use of it varies in US to Britain.  The subject of grammar is one you should understand is not the same in UK as USA.  To explain a little better, it is only if appropriate under certain other conditions (which I always weigh up) that you use the comma there.

i havent read most of the previous comments, so sorry if i re-hash things. id definitely recommend playing some 30 minute games (or longer) this can give you more time to think over your moves and come up with new strategies. it also sounds like you could be "overdoing" it a little.. if you are  playing often but are not improving, then it seems like you could benefit from some tactical training through theory. so long as you genuinely enjoy playing the game ranking shouldn't be too much off an issue. just try to play games with players associated with your own ranking.

1) Starting at an early age is certainly helpful: you learn faster and have more free time/less obligations.

2) The weaker you are, the more you have to practice. The stronger you are, the more you have to study. The advice to start off by only reading books is one of the worst I've ever heard. Note: practice means play standard time control games and analyze them, not have fun blitzing.

3) Working hard is not enough. You have to work smart, or you will have to spend a lot of time unlearning your bad habits. Find a qualified coach who would be genuinely interested in your progress as opposed to showing you one position after the other and milking you for $.

4) Most people have no idea how much effort it takes to become a reasonably good player. Even the lowest titles takes ages to obtain. So, if one is aiming for a title, s/he must be prepared to consistently dedicate lots of time to chess for years. A positive result is not guaranteed. I've seen people play regularly for decades and still remain only at club level.

Hope it helps

Yep, that's me :)

Thank you, Natalia. Always good to hear advice from someone as accomplished as you

I like to play over GM games and try to guess one of the player's moves throughout the game, kind of like the Solitaire Chess column in Chess Life magazine.

That is THE WORST! You think you're having a decent game and you are up-ended by one mistake or blunder. Have you ever noticed that the mistakes/blunders never seem to happen to the other guy often enough!?

This happened in the first tournament game I ever played. I had black in a QGD and really put a lot of thinking/effort into the game over the course of about four hours, eventually achieving a nearly won position. One simple oversight and the game was over because I lost a rook (forget how, it was either a skewer or a check where my rook could be captured after I moved my king.) It was the absolute worst. I don't think I would have missed something like that earlier in the game, but I was so mentally tired that I got careless and lazy.

Not-so-funny thing is, if my opponent had beaten me in 10 moves, the result would have been the same. You don't get points for losing a well-played game lol

And yes, I have noticed it doesn't happen often enough to the other player lol.

The only two gifts I can remember getting is my opponent resigning after he dropped a piece in the early middle game (seemed much too early to resign, but he said he was having a bad tournament and just wanted to end it) and an opponent who decided not to play a clearly winning move (I was going to resign if he played it) because he wanted even more of an advantage(!) That game was hard but ended in a draw after around 30 moves (three-fold repetition on his part.)

My opponents don't seem to blunder often. If they do, the usually resign. Most of mine just make innaccuracies or mistakes that almost aren't noticeable.

Agreed; blunders are far from common, but they do turn up every now and then, especially (in my experience) when someone who's pressing an attack forgets that his opponent isn't restricted to defense, and toward the end of a long game when one or both players may be mentally tired

Why not?

There is still hope to get better just work hard and be smart

ok, this thread has totally been hijacked. its official.

Apparently you didn't study enough.

How are you only a 2300+ on here?

No, no, I think you mean "How are you only 1000 points above me?"  You say so many idiot things, Yereslov.  You attempt to correct my grammar and then think that you are refuting my clarification with an inane comment.  You tell a WGM, yes a professional player....sigh, why bother talking to you...Do you understand that for any player to get the rating up they have to play a lot of games and it is not just automatically awarded at 2500?  Do you understand also that if the average 2200 player gets paired against a titled player (note - titled, worthy of respect) then they will try harder and spend more time on the game analysis?  Have you considered that some people will apply "help" to those games?  Do us all a favour, Yeres, stop commenting on subjects you know nothing about.

I asked, you incredibly emotional idiot, with sarcasm.

Now take a deep breath and punch yourself in the face.

Do us all a favor.