IQ has nothing to do with it - just ask Magnus Carlsen.
Do you believe you have the capacity to be a GM?
Sort:
one time i had to poo really bad and i pooped my pants
I think I can become an NM if I continue to put the time into chess and study hard. When (if) I do, I'll think about higher titles.
Conflagration_Planet wrote:
PedoneMedio wrote:
IMHO, as for anything else, it depends on the motivation.
Suppose you had to play a game with a gun at your head, and if you blunder of lose the gun fires: you'd play the absolute best game you're able to (it's an instrumental example for what I write below, so fear and stress are to be considered absent).
Now suppose that everyday, just for some personal motivation you have, you play one or two classic time control games, and/or you study Chess, with the same attention and motivation as in the gun example: wouldn't you become an international-title-strenght player in record time?
No.
+1
The horsey goes in an "L".
I guess that depends on how you define "capacity." Does it mean being able to do something if you set your mind to it, without considering whether that "if" is possible, or do you consider whether or not you have the determination and drive to do it?
doctorbagel wrote:
one time i had to poo really bad and i pooped my pants
random comment?
macer75 wrote:
doctorbagel wrote:
one time i had to poo really bad and i pooped my pants
random comment?
Benedictine penguin.
macer75 wrote:
I guess that depends on how you define "capacity." Does it mean being able to do something if you set your mind to it, without considering whether that "if" is possible, or do you consider whether or not you have the determination and drive to do it?
From every profession i have heard the same thing with regards to success in a field. Those that we try to be like we wind up emulating what they do to limited success. This approach you are not learning something new, you are memorising what somebody else did. The reason why younger individuals attain Master level skills is because when they were being trained they were not given the option of saying no to the studies. What makes Bobby Fisher so special is he trained himself with that same approach in mind. He developed a method of learning and stuck to it religiously. He took no shortcuts when studying classical games. At every move he asked why a particular player made a specific move until he understood it. He didn't bog himself down with theory and speculation and chose to keep things simple instead focusing on the position and not what the other player is thinking.
To answer this question, it would be interesting to see statistics in Russia on how many of the young people who actually attempted to make GM or IM made it? My guess would be that it would be about 20 to 25% of those with the desire to make it, succeded. Its not easy, BUT, and this but is as big as Rosie Odonnels BUTT..the difference between those who made it and those who didnt may not be aptitute but perserverance. I think if you take up chess young, you will be very close to IM or GM, the ability to cross over depends on perserverance. I think those who didnt make it would still be very good chess players. YA DIG?
dlordmagic wrote:
macer75 wrote:
I guess that depends on how you define "capacity." Does it mean being able to do something if you set your mind to it, without considering whether that "if" is possible, or do you consider whether or not you have the determination and drive to do it?
From every profession i have heard the same thing with regards to success in a field. Those that we try to be like we wind up emulating what they do to limited success. This approach you are not learning something new, you are memorising what somebody else did. The reason why younger individuals attain Master level skills is because when they were being trained they were not given the option of saying no to the studies. What makes Bobby Fisher so special is he trained himself with that same approach in mind. He developed a method of learning and stuck to it religiously. He took no shortcuts when studying classical games. At every move he asked why a particular player made a specific move until he understood it. He didn't bog himself down with theory and speculation and chose to keep things simple instead focusing on the position and not what the other player is thinking.
I hear he was playing near master level at the age of eight.
Start young, work hard, have talent.
Well crap, none of those are me.
My answer is a big fat no!
PedoneMedio wrote:
Conflagration_Planet wrote:
No.
You underestimate yourself.
You underestimate chess. I'd guess a 2000 rating is less than 1/10th of the way to GM. Get to 2000 FIDE and let us know what you think then.
I believe I had the capacity to be a master, or even a GM, as a child. Not so now. That train left the station long ago.
Jun 9, 2013
0
#36
This should make a good poll.
Do you believe you can become a GM?
a) Yes
b) No
c) Theoretically - yes, practically - no
d) I am a GM already
e) What is a GM?
Jun 9, 2013
0
#37
Then I am [c].
I can climb Mt Everest as well. Just lack motivation, ability and shoe shoes.
Jun 9, 2013
0
#38
Fingerly wrote:
I believe I had the capacity to be a master, or even a GM, as a child. Not so now. That train left the station long ago.
I was going to be a GM. Then life arrived. Its red lettered bills made me into a GM of other things in my career first. As for being a chess GM...um...that had to take a back seat. Then it was tossed out of the back seat outright by real life.
Jun 9, 2013
0
#39
But Carlsen as a physicist would be a nerd with no hope of getting the girls. His pick up line would be "Do you like the latest string theory?" Come on. What life is that?
He made the right choice to make chess better.
IMHO, as for anything else, it depends on the motivation.
Suppose you had to play a game with a gun at your head, and if you blunder or lose the gun fires: you'd play the absolute best game you're able to (it's an instrumental example for what I write below, so fear and stress are to be considered absent).
Now suppose that everyday, just for some personal motivation you have, you play one or two classic time control games, and/or you study Chess, with the same attention and motivation as in the gun example: wouldn't you become an international-title-strenght player in record time?
No.
You underestimate yourself.