I disagree, I think any person of average intelligence and talent can become at least a National Master with enough hard work. Once you reach higher master titles though, such as IM and GM, I think talent becomes much more critical.
Since I'm nowhere near master, I could be wrong and have no idea what I'm talking about. It would be nice if some masters shared their opinions.
the problem with the masters is that they are too busy studying and playing the game to take the time to write on threads like this and gg the name is Holy Flame 777. Have u seen my last name E. Scrooge well have you Joe gg?
Don't be so pessimistic. 
and the Protocols are a forgery , and Osama did it, and the deficit is not a problem
The black king is you trying to being a GM
with hard work you should at least be able to become a Fidemaster
Without the requisite talent mastership will forever remain out of your reach. Maybe you'll be an anonymous club player some place. Somethings no matter how bad you want you will still never have because you dont have what it takes.
I think that only masters can say something about this.
And I'm sure there's natural born chess talents that easily became master (Some GMs even skipped the IM part), while other people fail to become master no matter how hard they study chess.
(I know that I, achja, will unlikely become a master with my last tourney round troubles, and distraction from noise in otb chess, and last but not least my mediocre speculative chess play with incomplete chess knowledge. :) )
I have no talent.
Yes but at what age you start playing and work on your chess? (:
'Hard work alone can never make you a Master'. What if your talent is hard work studying? (I use the term 'studying' very loosely, as that involves both practical and theory).
And you posted this to discourage anyone from putting the work in to become the best they can be? Even if what you state is true, what harm is there in putting in the work to become the best player you can be? And what good can come from raining on their parade?
I think the average person with hard work should be able to obtain the lower levels of "mastership"...but to become a GM? Maybe not.
Tracking in, just to see the current state of afterlife troll medicine.
I wonder if participating in forums will ever make me master....
gg i like u more and more, yes the stupid ones are in the majority, the towers disintegrated because of "The plane boss, the plane!' Tower 7 which was never struck by planes also came down in splinters because of the debris offshoots of "The plane boss, the plane!" We go to war with iraq right after , a country unrelated to 911. they immediately slide through the facistic Patriot Act while Congress is sheeeing in their pants because "Osama did itm Osama did it boss." we were set up on 911 by people that know well the general stupidity of the popuklation. They know if people dont read it in the newspapers they will never believe it. These people are playing triple chess while the rest are playing pin the tail on the donkey. And some believe that anyone can become a master with enough hard work? It's like telling an earthworm "Work hard buddy and you will become an eagle." Aint happening! If u suck at chess now the chances are overwhelming you will suck forever.
Even if what you state is true, what harm is there in putting in the work to become the best player you can be? And what good can come from raining on their parade?
Reminding them to not waste all their time on a board game, only to be disappointed -- or possibly worse, finally become a master after they wasted all their time to acheive a label.
Wrong question. The correct question is "Is it necessary to work hard to become a master?" Answer: Yes. Yes it is.
Yada, yada, yada...
The fact is that there are millions upon millions of patzers and relatively a rare few Masters.
That's because the vast majority of chess players aren't willing to put in the work neccessary to reach master level. There's a common saying that "it takes 10,000 hours to master something." That's the equivalent of 4 hours a day, every day for almost 7 years.
Obviously that's just a gross approximation, and the real range can probably be anywhere from 2,000-20,000 hours to master a skill. But have you ever known of a chess player who put in several hours of studying (not just playing, serious studying!) a day for 5+ years, under the direction of a coach, who hasn't become a master? I would be very surprised many people put in that must effort and never made it, regardless of talent or intelligence.
The reason there are so few masters isn't because it takes talent, it's because it takes more work than 99% of chess players are willing to put in.
Without the requisite talent mastership will forever remain out of your reach. Maybe you'll be an anonymous club player some place. Somethings no matter how bad you want you will still never have because you dont have what it takes.