IS 25 too old to become a titled player?

You'd be one of the first, if not the first.

Age wouldn't stop you from NM, certainly.

Sure, with all the ways to learn in this point of time you can become a titled player.  Might take a few years and it is not easy at all.

From what I've heard it shouldn't be too late but it depends on who's trying.

How about 38? Arrrgggg.....

You just take a seat and we'll get you a nice warm blanket.

lol...very funny goldendog. Make sure I get a pillow for my arse too while you're at it.

I hope not, because i have heard all the it can't be done comments before but i am 51 and even though i know it is a huge uphill climb i intend to break the 2200 barrier before i die

It doesn't have to be a problem. I am thinking about Yge Visser, who achieved the GM title later in life, though he was a long time player.

I think the same is true for (FM) Erik Hoeksema, who is a bit of an interdisciplinary player. (Checkers) 

That also brings Jannes van der Wal to mind, a checkers word champion who switched to chess later and reached very respectable levels, though he died at a relatively young age. 

There's no telling what you can do if you have the drive and the affinity. I am warning you though, that even pretty strong amateurs I know don't have titles. Some of them have pretty advanced mathematical ability, and even for them it takes hard work to get better. Incidentally Yge Visser does have a math background.

I earned my NM title just before age 27. My first rating was 1465 at age 17.

Does anyone have any examples of a master who started after 25?

I'm gonna say yes, prove me wrong

I can't answer that for you, but the games from Jannes van der Wal I can find are from 1993-1996. (He is from 1956) Taking a little leeway, that is well beyond 25. Mind you he already had the checkers title and again, a math background. 

Though he received no title his rating was around 2250 when he died. There's no telling how far he could have gotten.

If that is possible, then it's only a small step to a title. I can't find a particular example, but it doesn't seem impossible at all.

That would be good enough, but I imagine the games you can find of him would be from when he was already a strong player, unless the site you looked at stores games from class players?

There was a study once that showed that a person usually takes about seven years to attain a rating that is within 100 points of their life-time maximum. If you are just starting out at age 25 and you seriously want to gain a chess title, you probably need to spend at least 30 hours a week on the game for the next seven years.

Even then, there's no guarantee of success.

Note: Edited to remove an inaccurate statement!

Absolutely true, but we are talking about 37 years old or so, while he was actually an active checkers player before that. (World champion in '82) 

Also online sources say his switch was in his thirties, so indeed well beyond 25. He also played Bridge. So if he started in his thirties it's not so odd at all his published games appear around age 37.

^ Thanks. World champion at checkers and 2250 chess, not bad.

Today ? Probably not.Existing younger players w/ tech. says it would be a long, uphill climb. Maybe 40 years ago there was a good chance....getting past 14/1900 rated players today is going to be hard,very hard as in many cases they seek the same tittles and have vast book knowledge. If u have some existing ability (checkers, go) W/ board games and a math backround it counts toward your goal.I give u credit for seeking a tittle but mountain climbing,poker, would be alot easier......good luck

Thanks guys, just wondering. Regardless of obtaining a title I plan to continue to pursue improving my chess.