I want to become a 2000+ rated player without reading any books is this possible???

I've never read any chess book seriously. Usually I read a few pages and then I give up. You can see my stats. Not 2000, but still decent (I hope).

It just seems a waste of time these days, specially because of youtube.

But there's a exception: Silman's Complete Endgame Course is still "mandatory" to read, imo.

Yes, of course. But it's probably like putting together your husbands unnecessarily complicated Christmas present. Not everyone reads the destructions. But those that do put the thing together a whole lot faster than those that dont.

I think the problem is that 95% of chess books are written by extremely boring people, with very poor creative writing skills, and these people are not very good at engaging readers.   I think there are many exceptions, but unfortunately there is an over-saturation of boring people who think the world needs their literature.     Sierawan, Soltis, and Silman are quite decent creative writers in my opinion (I'm sure there are hundreds more), but as far as opening books go, they are almost always boring with the exception of mayhem in the morra, a great read (in my quite limited experience)

Yes, but it might be helpful to learn from stronger players who do.

I knew a player who hated to read books and thought studying opening theory ruined his play, but he was wildly inconsistent and seemed to have problems with objectivity in his evaluations. He reached 2000 USCF for a moment, but did not maintain the rating and dropped over a hundred points into Class A. He always dreamed of playing unexpected moves to win against titled players, but he lacked a solid foundation in his development. I think he had greater potential, but I also think he had self-imposed barriers in the form of pride over his identity - some the steps he could have taken to improve would be rationalized away under the excuse of undermining "creativity."

Studying books is not tremendously important when you are starting out, but I would keep an open mind about the future. If you learn to use Chessbase well and form a good training program, you probably won't need many books anyway.

play the computer at 3000

It is like "can i sail across the sea without compass", yes possible. Just estimate your chance.

Good luck

 is it possible?!! anything is possible!!! likely? not at all!!

"Yes"

"play the computer at 3000"

"capture hanging pieces"

"yes. go for it"

"is it possible?!! anything is possible!!! likely? not at all!!"

People, just out of curiosity... how old are you? I know you are being sarcastic but... what kind of cringy responses are that?

The player today has maybe a dozen different resources to improve his game. So eliminating one of them [books] will only slightly hinder his game.

However a smart player, who wishes to improve, will use all resources available to him.

Is it possible to reach 2000 without reading a chess book? Sure.

It will likely take you much longer, though.

And when he does do it..... He can write a book on it! 

IT WILL NEVEEEEEER EVEEEEEEEEER BE POSSIBLE EVEN IF YOU don't READ ANY BOOKS

Sometimes someone needs to be told they CANT do something to inspire the motivation to "prove them all wrong"  You would make a good coach

Yeah Damn right ( Wait but I am not a coach am I? )

I reached 2100 only knowing the most basic 1/4th of silman's endgame guide ( you know, the basic reti endgame, the f and h pawn vs queen draw, and other small very modest tecniques. i actually didnt know the basic pawn vs king endgame or key squares or any of that which is embarrassing for a 2100!

I did however, use chess engines and some databases for openings, i did have chess opening books when i felt they could tell me of some novelty (thing is, i only  play weird openings, 1.b4 1.b3 and 1.nc3 for white 1.nc6 and 1.b6 agaisnt any of black's replies) so to research some obscure testing lines, i needed all the resources i could get. 

I also learned some chess history through the chessmaster program as a kid, so  knew the name and some history of the big names of chess and the name of a lot of openings superficially.

Most chess books in my opinion are suboptimal for learning. (aside from endgame studies) especially with the fluid learning of masters with engines nowadays, which resembles more intuitive stream of consciousness pattern recognition coupled with concrete computer lines, then the kind of old school thematic principled breakdown approach. they do have their place though

That's just sad if you need someone to talk you down to be successful. Do it on your own! OP is pathetic for asking this question at all. Just do what you want to do without posting any bs on the forum. If you're successful you can come back and tell us but don't infest the forums with attention seeking bs.

Don't listen to others advice. Just mine.

DON'T LOSE ANY GAME YOU PLAY AND YOU'LL BE A GRAND MASTER. SIMPLE!

DENVER

 Einstein

OneStone