If chess became your full time job, how good do you think you could get?

Say you were given a stipend of $100,000/yr to focus entirely on chess. You must show significant progress in order to keep the stipend each year, and can get a bonus for exceptional improvement.  That being said, lets say you studied 40 hrs/week, hired a renouned GM coach, traveled to tournaments, etc.  How good do you think you would get?  I think most beginners would reach 2000 within a year or 2, and most 2000 level players would reach 2400 within a year or 2. 

Not really sure about that but it would be a neat experiment to try. Need to find someone willing to fund that study.

I could break 2200. I might come close to 2300 with a really patient coach, but I doubt I'd break 2400. 

My highest USCF was 2189. 

Outstandingly average!

I would be living on minimum wage

$100,000 before, or after taxes?

Smyslov, so with an impossible amount of financial support; you could only exceed your top rating by 110 points?

wow.

chess is hard. 

anyways didn't a few top Gm's address how Good an average person could get?  I think Kramnik said nearly everyone could get to mid master strength if they made the neccessary sacrifices in their life.

I'm also not sure many people WOULD put in the time and effort; even with a guarenteed stipend. its a heck of a lifestyle. 

I think age and talent are important factors to take into account. An eager young talent will probably leap into expert level within almost no time at all. A retired/middle aged chess enthusiasts who has always been stuck at club player level for decades no matter how many books he reads or games he plays? Probably not the same.

I'm not going to tell you what I would reach with your training program, that's just asking for one of those poisonous forum trolls to take a swing at you :P

I love the game of chess, and what it offers, but no way im blowing $100,000 a year on a game.

For many people, $100K per year would be a drastic pay cut and require big changes in spending to survive on that budget. 

As to the OP's question, I don't think that I personally could get much higher than 2200 even if I devoted 80 hours per week to chess.  Plus I don't think I have the motivation to spend full-time on chess, even though I do enjoy the game.

It's possible that the OP is posing the question to the vast minority of folks who make substantially less than 100k per year?

I'd give it shot, I'm retired and maybe I could collect a few paychecks before they realize they're pissing their money away on me.

Must be a lot of rich people here

OP means if they were sponsored to study chess.

Yes!

You think you could do 2300 within two years?

On a separate line of though altogether, I imagine age plays a major role in answer the thread-starter's question.

I'd starve to death...

It's so tough to say, especially considering that my USCF rating is moving toward the rarefied air of the top 10% in active USCF players.  Chatting with friends, I know it's mcuh more difficult to improve one's rating once over 1800.  I'd like to say that I could continue to gain 220-250 points per year, but that's easier said than done.  Okay, for fun, I'll just make the outrageous claim that I could make 2150-2200 in two years' time.  Part of me believes it could be so.

Who knows?

I have reached 1900 FIDE with no coach and without finishing a single chess book. I have some aptitude for games, but I started late and I suspect like most people who learn a new language as an adult, I'll never play chess fluently.

I don't think FM would be realistic at all for me. I could learn a lot, but I don't think my thought process can be improved sufficiently. I see kids play blitz at a level I know I can never reach, no matter how much work I put in.

2000 in 2 years perhaps