Chess Players, Chess' biggest detriment

Sort:
Deadmanparty
darkunorthodox88 wrote:

this reminds me of the joke, on offering a woman a million dollars to bed her, when most would agree and then offering zero and getting a no , to conclude, that they both know what she is but simply havent found the right price!
obviously when people say, everyone or not can reach 1600, they dont mean literally everyone , not toddlers, not individuals with extreme mental disability or dementia, not people that literally have dory level memory or people so rowdy they can sit still over a minute.

we obviously mean a certain ideal person of mediocre ability and average intellect capable of learning and working moderately hard at something as a goal. Notice that the statement about not everyone being able to reach 1600 sounds kind of ridiculous if you lower it to say, 800 or even 1000! so clearly, you believe there is a level where our use of "everyone" can get to.

the question is then the number. it obvious, 800-1000 is too easy, and 2000 is prob were among the most optimistic ones would put the number. i think 1600-1800 is achievable for our average hypothetical every man if he wants it provided he doesnt have some undiagnosed visual processing disorder and actually wants to improve.

So, have you dealt with the general population to know? Or are you basing your opinion on your experiences and those people who you have met playing chess?

Deadmanparty
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:

When I was in second grade my teacher was helping a classmate with his handwriting work. I mentioned offhandedly that I didn’t see what was so hard about handwriting, to which she told me very personally, “just because you find it easy doesn’t mean everyone else does.” I didn’t understand what she meant- I mean it’s literally handwriting! Just trace the line!- but I’m no longer a second grader.

its more complicated then it look. you can dyslexia and confuse certain things like b and d, or be forced to write with you non-dominant hand.
imagine how absurd riding a bike looks like to an outsider who cant do it. How the hell you keep all that mass aligned in a small wheel like that at all times!?

Of course it could be a person with very weak motor skills as well.  Until you actually work with thousands of kids trying to teach them to write you have no clue really.

marqumax
Deadmanparty wrote:
marqumax wrote:
Deadmanparty wrote:

I am saying if you claim anyone can be a 1600 with self study, and your point of view is limited to your own experience, then you are ignorant.

Why praise someone for getting better at a board game. It just means if you want to win and have not studied, don't play that person.

We are people not ratings.

What does it mean to be 1600? It means you're supposed to score 90% against a 1200: that is a beginner. (Because otb you get your first FIDE rating starting from 1200). If you think that for some people it's impossible to each that level then it means they're way behind mentally or that you didn't put enough effort.

Guess what, chess is not defined by FIDE.

Only nut jobs believe that is does. The rest of us know chess is a board game.

You refer to ratings. You refer to chess as a board game. That means FIDE. If you want USCF then I think everyone agrees it's even easier than FIDE

Deadmanparty

You refer to ratings?  Where do I refer to FIDE ratings outside of FIDE competitions.  

 

Ratings are ratings.  The rating I see on this site is chess.com ratings.  1000 chess.com rating is very rarely achieved by a beginner.  Chess.com ratings are ratings and are not FIDE.  I thought I would clear that up.

MrKoovy
Deadmanparty wrote:

those who believe your worth as a chess player is linked to how well you play really make the game look bad. 

There are people in every game community, profession, religion, etc. that make said thing look bad. This speaks to flawed human nature and is not unique to chess. But of course most people would agree with this. There are numerous positive things that each chess player can bring to the community other than their playing skill.

Deadmanparty wrote:

People making the claim that everyone can be a 1600 here or achieve a class A status with self study are simply ignorant.

Of course "everyone" includes individuals with certain mental challenges that could prevent them from reaching 1600. But for the rest, is dedication not the only requirement? It might not be realistic for those people to reach 1600, but it is certainly possible. If someone could afford to dedicate sufficient time to studying and practicing, what are you suggesting would still prevent them from reaching 1600?

Deadmanparty

Anything is possible.  You could choose the average person walking down the street and it is possible that the person could be entered into a FIDE tournament and that person takes first place.

 

It is possible.

MrKoovy
Deadmanparty wrote:

It is possible.

Well then I'm glad we agree this statement is false:

Deadmanparty wrote:

People making the claim that everyone can be a 1600 here or achieve a class A status with self study are simply ignorant.

Because if it's possible, however difficult or even unrealistic, then it can be done. Maybe you could call us optimistic, but definitely not ignorant.

Deadmanparty

If you want to say that something with a 1 in 10 thousand chance of occuring is possible, the I suppose we agree.

The statement is theoretically true but is probably wrong.

MrKoovy

Lol, but it seems we are looking at the same reality with drastically different levels of optimism.