chess is a game of mind how true it is in this era😇

1818-1828271 wrote:

Even talented people are only good because of the hard work they put in, which is my entire point. Reading comprehension is your friend.

A few can put in almost no work at all and be at an elite level. Of course, if they decide to add "work" they will perform that much better. Point is savants and the like are born with a special gift. Same goes for athletes. Bolt would out sprint 99.9 percent with no training whatsoever. With training he's the very best. Carlsen would be a GM with very little "work". With the added work he is WC.

A few Athletes as runners, swimmers, baseball pitchers are born with physical advantages that no amount of hard work can duplicate. Artists , singers come to mind. The same also applies to the "mind". Math, music and chess talent . No amount of hard work can duplicate what is referred to as "God given talent/ability"

To say talented people are only good because of hard work is just a cliche. Talent and hard work are two seperate things entirely. Talent is generally thought of as something coming naturally, can't be taught. Hard work goes along way in any endeavor. With it comes being a GM or a pro athlete. For quite a few people though, all that's required is waking up in the morning.

APPTITUDE!

Chess is:

- 10% luck

- 20% skill
- 15% concentrated power of will
- 5% percent pleasure

- 50% pain

Intelligence has many ways and parts. Just think about all the different sports using different body parts featuring together, or appart, or in turn: speed, strenght, stamina/endurance, precision, etc.

 

One can easily identify many of the mental, or spiritual/psycho features that are, or can be involved in chess, especially in real life chess competition:

 

_ memory

_ calculation ability

_ judgement

_ observation

_ creativity/imagination

_ self control

_ willpower

_ courage/bravery

_ patience

_ sense of danger/prudence

_ work capacity

_ discipline

_ combativity

 

And others that are hard to name in one word, like when Korchnoï said "Believe in your position!".

 

So, some of us are good enough at chess, because they rock on some of these features, and the bests of all probably would score above 80% if tested on any of these.

 

Hence, when you wander in a tournament and try to guess who's strong and who's weak by how they look like, you fail. But all the same, a brilliant mathematician can be so poor in some of the required features for chess, that they won't make it beyond 1400 or 1600, while some dork obviously unable to copy the simpliest things in human interraction will score easily 2000-2200... And reversed

 

So, yes it takes "some sort of intelligence" to be good at chess, but not necessarily to be smart in everything.

 

My two cents

 

 

Obviously you have to use your brain. 

Same goes for drafts, but that doesn't mean it requires intelligence to play .

Is patience located in the brain?

I don't think so using your brain makes you a good player at all if you won't practice at all you will eventually gonna fail talent and technique matters

I guarantee you Carlsen would not even be 1600 if he didn't study the game at all in his entire life. Chalking things up to talent is lazy. Talent gives small advantages but is not the main factor in skill. Anybody who is good at anything knows this. Basically deepflight is full of crap.

Show me someone who has practiced seriously and efficiently 8 hours a day for 10 years who isn't a grandmaster.



Find your problem yet? Very few people practice that much.

 

Sure, no hard work doesn't get you anywhere, hard work gets you far.

However, I've been busting my ass at judo for years now. I'm ok, but from time to time I meet someone who puts in half the effort and has three times the results. Similarly, I work hard on my studies, but others work a lot harder and most don't have the same results as I do.

Talent is important, hard work is importanter*.

*and yes, that's a joke, I try to be funny sometimes

Soooo I could be a grandmaster before I'm fifty. 

 

If, I study for 8 hours a day....it IS tempting to try .  Truth.

 

 

Quality of practice is also key... Many times people just think that doing something is practicing it, it's not... You have to consciously and continuously figure out what you're doing wrong and fix it, always searching for new ideas to work on.. it won't come naturally by sitting alone in a room without direction or clear goals.. There's nothing innate about skill but perhaps some people just learn more quickly than others (not THAT much more quickly).

Practice is complicated work.. figuring out how to practice efficiently and productively can be more difficult than the practice itself, mostly for the reason that results are never immediate, and you just have to believe in your methodology and yourself. You never get immediate feedback if you're practicing incorrectly. It can take months or years to realize you need to be practicing differently.

I mean think of it this way: did Carlsen become WC by sitting in his room as a child and playing himself without reference to any learning tools? Obviously not, he studied the proper way, he learned from the masters before him. Bobby Fischer did the same thing. It didn't come from inside of him, he learned how to be good by devoting massive amounts of time to serious study of the previous masters. It's not any easier for these greats than anyone else. What separates them from us is their devotion and belief in the long-term goal, and their subtle and guided refinement of their practice to achieve that goal.

Those golf masters who practice their swing REALLY slowly? You think that's just something they woke up and started doing one day? No, they are making a conscious effort to train themselves in the most meticulous and efficient way possible. Nothing innate is going to teach you how to swing a club properly. Doing it over and over without guidance and a clear goal is not going to improve your game no matter how much time you spend.

Musicians study theory, they transcribe hundreds and hundreds (thousands even) of songs and solos to build their vocabulary. Great jazz soloists will all tell you they've transcribed and memorized massive amounts of music that others have written and they use bits and pieces from everything they've learned to improvise.


Savants are a thing but they are far outside the norm of skilled masters. Nothing comes without effort, to most people. And even savants need some guidance, they just learn really fast.

Nope, deepflight you have a massive misunderstanding of the relationship between hard work and talent. Are you skilled at doing anything?

Carlsen is not some god. He would not be a GM with "minimal study." He's built up a repertoire of patterns and games in his head from massive amounts of study, that's what makes him great.

The cliche, btw, is people doing exactly what deepflight is doing and chalking up skill to talent, like its a 90% talent to 10% work ratio, which is total bs. Just admit you have no idea how to practice and never took the time to. I'm not being "PC." Were not all equal but talent is nothing without hard work.

"who ever works the hardest" will end up 1st. sounds great but unfortunately it is not true. its hard for some to accept we are not created equal in every endeavor that requires a certain profiency of skills. we are equal as human beings. we all have our own special talents. this does not mean I will ever play chess like Carlsen if only I study hard enough. It will never happen. Can Carlsen, being a pretty good athlete, ever hope to beat me in a swimming race if he trained for 10 years and I never once jumped in the pool? never happen. Guaranteed. same goes for table tennis. no chanch.

I never said its 90% talent 10% hard work. Youre making that up 1818