FIDE rating, Masters

Sort:
Avatar of nimzo5
philidor_position wrote:
orangehonda wrote:

I wonder how long it would take me to break 2200 if I made a plan of it and took it seriously... that's the problem for most though, willingness to commit the time and energy.


This may sound stupid, but I have the impression that if you give me just 3 months with nothing at all to do, serving me food on plates etc, I might be able to reach that level. Actually participating in rated games and reaching that rating would take much longer though.

I think playing a 60 min game every day, analyzing it, studying tactics for 3 hours, either opening or endgame training for 1 hour and reading a good book for the rest of the 10 hour study period per day would take me there in 90 days.


 Not to burst any bubbles, but if you studied 10 hours a day for 90 days most likely your results would get worse.  I know because I have done it. There is a reason you don't see random 400 point jumps in rating outside the provisional period. The mind can only absorb so much, and no matter how much you increase your knowledge, it is the skill of applying it that you get tested on in tournament games.

I spent several months when I had a break from work studying and working with a GM - my results during and shortly after that period did not improve, even though I was long term becoming a better player. It takes a long time to absorb and manifest in your play new ideas.

With really focused study and playing 75-100 games a year of otb I would say an average talent can move up 100-200 pts a year up to Class A or so and then 100 pts a year after that.

So if you are 1400 now - I would say you are 6-7 years of really hard work from 2200. Almost everyone burns out on the work or gets distracted by other activities long before they reach that 7 years.

Avatar of nimzo5
pathfinder416 wrote:

I've seen several players jump 500, 600, 700 points in a single year. What seemed common is that they (1) stopped spending time playing significantly weaker players, (2) began solo study for 2+ hours a day and usually with some expert guidance as to what they spent their time on, (3) developed a concise set of preferred openings as White and Black (making their study time more efficient; one player I know reached Canada's top 30 after restricting himself to Alekhine/Gruenfeld/Catalan -- boring game after game, but with these it's not easy for your opponent to force you into something else), and (4) spent time analyzing their games with experts and masters.

But this means you may have to give up some other things in life, and perhaps a board game isn't worth that. I reached a point where I was winning against experts, but began to realize that (lacking the brilliance of a true chess genius) I was unwilling to do what was necessary to rise much further. Other priorities.


 You are telling me someone gained 700 pts in actual otb play? Unless they were sub 1000 I would have to see the documentation. If you go through USCF ratings on their website you will be hard pressed to find players who gained 300 pts in a year.

Avatar of pathfinder416

The online CFC ratings info doesn't go back to the 80's, so I can't provide court-quality notarized documentation for you. Just think of me as a liar, it's much easier that way.

Avatar of Vlad_Akselrod
mynameinc wrote:

1. How do I get an FIDE/Elo rating?

2. What's the best way to get to Candidate Master level?  I'm pretty weak right now, and I'd like to do so within 2 years, if at all possible.


 What for do you need that CM level? Getting it in 2 years is possible, but my experience tells me that people asking at public forums how to get a rating often have trouble improving at that speed. Laughing

Avatar of RoJac

http://ratings.fide.com/id.phtml?event=2107139 

Here is an example of a very talented Brazilian player who got over 200 pts in only two FIDE periods (Jul 04 - Jan 05). He went on to become a grandmaster in another 3 years. 

I'm sure there are many examples of rapid progress out there. Not only at master level but also for beginners. 

Avatar of Martin_Stahl
nimzo5 wrote:

 You are telling me someone gained 700 pts in actual otb play? Unless they were sub 1000 I would have to see the documentation. If you go through USCF ratings on their website you will be hard pressed to find players who gained 300 pts in a year.


I personally know two that have gained that much ( 300 points as per my post above). One of the guys gained 210 points in one tournament with a 5-0 result in his section (non-provisional rating).

Avatar of nimzo5
pathfinder416 wrote:

The online CFC ratings info doesn't go back to the 80's, so I can't provide court-quality notarized documentation for you. Just think of me as a liar, it's much easier that way.

 


Classy response. I often trust anonymous posters on the internet who make grandiose claims with nothing but their memory of 25 years ago to back it up. I guess it was too much work to even explain what rating they were when they started etc.

No, you are right, I guess I will just have to assume you are a liar.

Avatar of nimzo5
Martin_Stahl wrote:
nimzo5 wrote:

 You are telling me someone gained 700 pts in actual otb play? Unless they were sub 1000 I would have to see the documentation. If you go through USCF ratings on their website you will be hard pressed to find players who gained 300 pts in a year.


I personally know two that have gained that much ( 300 points as per my post above). One of the guys gained 210 points in one tournament with a 5-0 result in his section (non-provisional rating).


 300 pts from 1200 to 1500 or even 1500 to 1800 is not the same as 1900 to 2200. You see a lot of rapidly improving scholastic players tack on 200-300 pt gains a year but they tail off as they get to around 2000.

Avatar of pathfinder416
nimzo5 wrote:
pathfinder416 wrote:

The online CFC ratings info doesn't go back to the 80's, so I can't provide court-quality notarized documentation for you. Just think of me as a liar, it's much easier that way.

 


Classy response. I often trust anonymous posters on the internet who make grandiose claims with nothing but their memory of 25 years ago to back it up. I guess it was too much work to even explain what rating they were when they started etc.

No, you are right, I guess I will just have to assume you are a liar.


Classy? Just a practical suggestion. Especially when it's something as important as this. No sense in hanging your ass out when you might lose some marbles. You did the right thing.

Avatar of pathfinder416
nimzo5 wrote:

I guess it was too much work to even explain what rating they were when they started etc.

I missed this on first pass ... 1300 to 2000. Someone I was accustomed to trouncing in club championships, and he blew me up with a Center-Counter after a summer break.

Avatar of gorgeous_vulture

I'm setting myself a simpler goal: actually getting a USCF rating! I may get to play in my first rated tournament on Monday.

Avatar of heinzie

Ha ha Nick, having a USCF rating is the privilege of the American kids

Avatar of philidorposition
nimzo5 wrote:
philidor_position wrote:
orangehonda wrote:

I wonder how long it would take me to break 2200 if I made a plan of it and took it seriously... that's the problem for most though, willingness to commit the time and energy.


This may sound stupid, but I have the impression that if you give me just 3 months with nothing at all to do, serving me food on plates etc, I might be able to reach that level. Actually participating in rated games and reaching that rating would take much longer though.

I think playing a 60 min game every day, analyzing it, studying tactics for 3 hours, either opening or endgame training for 1 hour and reading a good book for the rest of the 10 hour study period per day would take me there in 90 days.


 Not to burst any bubbles, but if you studied 10 hours a day for 90 days most likely your results would get worse.  I know because I have done it. There is a reason you don't see random 400 point jumps in rating outside the provisional period. The mind can only absorb so much, and no matter how much you increase your knowledge, it is the skill of applying it that you get tested on in tournament games.

I spent several months when I had a break from work studying and working with a GM - my results during and shortly after that period did not improve, even though I was long term becoming a better player. It takes a long time to absorb and manifest in your play new ideas.

With really focused study and playing 75-100 games a year of otb I would say an average talent can move up 100-200 pts a year up to Class A or so and then 100 pts a year after that.

So if you are 1400 now - I would say you are 6-7 years of really hard work from 2200. Almost everyone burns out on the work or gets distracted by other activities long before they reach that 7 years.


No no, I'm not a 1400 rated player, don't let my blitz rating mislead you, I like to believe I'm close to expert level in slow chess. But of course, that may not be true. These are all hypotethical, and a litte hopeful thinking. But I am going to get the title one day, and I'll tell you how. Smile

By the way, there's no way my results would go worse with 90 days of study with 10h/day. I mean, again this is hypotethical, but there's just no way I can even imagine something like that.

Avatar of gorgeous_vulture
heinzie wrote:

Ha ha Nick, having a USCF rating is the privilege of the American kids


 I live in New York these days (though still a subject of the crown)

Avatar of nimzo5
pathfinder416 wrote:
nimzo5 wrote:

I guess it was too much work to even explain what rating they were when they started etc.

I missed this on first pass ... 1300 to 2000. Someone I was accustomed to trouncing in club championships, and he blew me up with a Center-Counter after a summer break.


 Fair enough- when you look at say Gm Nakamura a super talented junior player - you see rating gaps like this in one year cycles -

Nakamura - 10-1996 rating is 1560 2 years later he is 2227 - while that is only 667 points, quality wise the move from 2000 to 2200 is a much bigger one than 1500s to 1800s.

it sounds like your club player might have had some real talent for the game.

Avatar of nimzo5
philidor_position wrote:
 

No no, I'm not a 1400 rated player, don't let my blitz rating mislead you, I like to believe I'm close to expert level in slow chess. But of course, that may not be true. These are all hypotethical, and a litte hopeful thinking. But I am going to get the title one day, and I'll tell you how. 

By the way, there's no way my results would go worse with 90 days of study with 10h/day. I mean, again this is hypotethical, but there's just no way I can even imagine something like that.


First off, you may or may not even be able to put in that kind of dedication. I hae done it, and in the short term, my results declined. It is pretty disheartening. But people underestimate fatigue - after 4 or 5 days of really hard studying you get really tired. After a month or two it is hard to look at a chess board.

Lastly, if you haven't played tournament chess (and I don't know how long you have been playing etc.) I would just say that an otb expert is probably better than you think they are.

Avatar of philidorposition
nimzo5 wrote:
philidor_position wrote:
 

No no, I'm not a 1400 rated player, don't let my blitz rating mislead you, I like to believe I'm close to expert level in slow chess. But of course, that may not be true. These are all hypotethical, and a litte hopeful thinking. But I am going to get the title one day, and I'll tell you how. 

By the way, there's no way my results would go worse with 90 days of study with 10h/day. I mean, again this is hypotethical, but there's just no way I can even imagine something like that.


First off, you may or may not even be able to put in that kind of dedication. I hae done it, and in the short term, my results declined. It is pretty disheartening. But people underestimate fatigue - after 4 or 5 days of really hard studying you get really tired. After a month or two it is hard to look at a chess board.

Lastly, if you haven't played tournament chess (and I don't know how long you have been playing etc.) I would just say that an otb expert is probably better than you think they are.


Yeah, there's always that possibility. One can dream though. Smile

I have never played an otb game in my life, but in FICS, when I was playing actively a year ago, I was competing with expert level (I topped at 1900+ standard), and I take FICS ratings relatively more seriously than any other online rating. Probably now I wouldn't be able to compete with experts due to long inactivity and changing my opening repertoire. I'm slowly warming up though.

How is your progress going? What was your training regime in that hard chess study period?

Avatar of ozzie_c_cobblepot
tonydal wrote:
mynameinc wrote:

2. What's the best way to get to Candidate Master level? I'm pretty weak right now, and I'd like to do so within 2 years, if at all possible.


LOL


Hey TonyDal how far away are you from FM? It would be nice to see some of the NMs on here change their titles...

Avatar of nimzo5
How is your progress going? What was your training regime in that hard chess study period?

I took about 6 months off work (those were good times ha) and focused on chess. I played in Chicago, Philly, LA, Biloxi, SF, Berkeley, Reno, Sacramento etc..

My daily routine was warm up with CT Art. Play an hour of blitz, analyze the games. Lunch. Do ct art for an hour. Study openings for two hours (a lot of chessbase work to start from scratch.) and then I would play through a game or two with a proper board. 1-2x a week I would work with a coach.

At the start of that period I was just coming out of my provisional chess rating at 1750ish - at the end of November my rating was 1771. I didn't win a single tournament, often leading in the early rounds and fading on sunday last rounds. In my last tournament of that period, I had an outside shot to win my category prize if I could win, my opponent was a scholastic playing up - he sacrificed a piece on move 10 to force a perpetual.

That was it for me, after that, I played a couple random times when a friend dragged me out to play. I totally stopped for 3 years until last fall.

Now my rating is 1910 uscf and 1957 fide - go figure.

Avatar of philidorposition
nimzo5 wrote:
How is your progress going? What was your training regime in that hard chess study period?

I took about 6 months off work (those were good times ha) and focused on chess. I played in Chicago, Philly, LA, Biloxi, SF, Berkeley, Reno, Sacramento etc..

My daily routine was warm up with CT Art. Play an hour of blitz, analyze the games. Lunch. Do ct art for an hour. Study openings for two hours (a lot of chessbase work to start from scratch.) and then I would play through a game or two with a proper board. 1-2x a week I would work with a coach.

At the start of that period I was just coming out of my provisional chess rating at 1750ish - at the end of November my rating was 1771. I didn't win a single tournament, often leading in the early rounds and fading on sunday last rounds. In my last tournament of that period, I had an outside shot to win my category prize if I could win, my opponent was a scholastic playing up - he sacrificed a piece on move 10 to force a perpetual.

That was it for me, after that, I played a couple random times when a friend dragged me out to play. I totally stopped for 3 years until last fall.

Now my rating is 1910 uscf and 1957 fide - go figure.


Thanks for explaining, that sounds pretty intense, and close to what I'd do if I had 3 months to spare. I would perhaps leave out blitz and add in rapid games against the computer (or humans if I could find a sparring partner), and chesstempo instead of CT-Art.

That leaves me with the question, how the hell am I going to get my title then?Smile I think you shouldn't give up too, if that's what you did.