Is it impossible to excel in chess without a CHESS-COACH?

Fischer used three seconds, on every move.

You aren't contributing too much with that either. I think delaying gratification, being objective about your game and the position otb (dedication to reality) and balancing (pretty much everything in life and in your chess training) is a nice summary of what it takes to excell at chess, and not only chess. I've seen similar material on many chess books.

sometimes winning is everything, take a stand, now or never, choose a high, leave your mark, now or never, kill doubt, stand for something, prove something, make waves, never say die, live your dream, conquer your fears, take a risk, erase boundaries, beat the odds, trust your instincts, take up a challenge, never give up, prove yourself, own your words, right a wrong, dare to dream, push the limit, play with pride, go for glory, tougher the better, face your demons, it's your time, taste victory.

Are you in politics, manavendra?

With all those posts, no clear and backed up answer has been provided. Only random blabber that could be juxtaposed to anything else. 

Nobody wants to answer that properly? I think the question is quite interesting!

I agree, padman.

Would anybody know what a typical training day for a master would be?

No, I am not into politics. I totally agree that having a coach would enhace and speed up your chances of being a top player, but the actual question being asked in this thread is can one excel without a coach. The answer is yes, that's why I am emphasising on self-motivation and determination. There are many ardent players specially in poorer countries who can't afford a coach. Becoming a premium member is also an expensive deal. The only place where we can look for answers then is within ourselves.

I, being a software engineer can write chess engines to defeat 99.999999% of the population, but can't become a best top-rated player myself. Computers play with tactics not with a strategy. This discussion would be better if accompanied by a chess game. Lets solve the below puzzle to see if you need a coach or not? Problem: White to play and draw.

Hehe.  I solved it instantly!  I'm amazing

I saw a re-done version of it, they'd only moved a piece or two a few squares so that it kept the original ideas, but there was a twist at the end... now that I think of it maybe something simple like K@f3 Q@h1 and a skewer on the long diagonal at the end.

Hey tonydal, maybe you know the one I'm thinking of.  I can't remember where I saw it -- it was a study like king and pawn endgame reached during a simul of (I think it was Capablanca) where Capa took only a few seconds, then made this crazy counter-intuitive move that won in the end... doubtless he'd calculated it earlier, or while making his rounds, only after 10 or more moves, and with no tempo to spare at the end do you see that it works.  I remember being amazed after taking plenty of time and failing to solve it myself.

The story goes that he made the move quickly, and moved on to the next board, leaving his opponent stunned, staring at the board in amazement.

Now it's you who is talking politics !! It's like you are playing a piece up and trying to counter-attack all my positions. Beware it may lead to stalemate as I have nothing to lose or win. Whatever I spoke before is all about the thread question being asked. You need to change your perspective towards this. Whenever you make a move, you make it two times: first in your mind, and then physically. All these motivational talks helps to train your mind, atleast on the foundation level.

Regarding the (meaningful) employment and the nature of work we do as software engineers (besides sending hallmark-cards) is that we want to use chess towards educational and scientific purposes rather than just a game. Chess engines are great in finding optimum order in chaos. This has many far-reaching applications. Similar engines are used in SETI programmes, AIDS research, NASA, and other areas to optimize brute-force search techniques. I don't think we will be ever out of employment ;)

Regarding the puzzle, it was more for beginners, who without swimming into the depth of chess were just asking for a coach. Congrats for all who have solved it in a single attempt. Now, for experienced players, in the following endgame, what can be the possible outcome (mate/draw), assuming both sides play their best.

Tony, I bet on a draw, as the Knights are already protecting each other. Or did you pick a really counter-intuitive position ?

Nice logic.

Fischer didn't have a coach.

I don't have a coach.

Therefore I am Fischer.

===

Fischer had numerous coaches and instructors, and because of his unique capabilities, he also got access to the best chess venue(s) and the best chess libraries in the US. Being totally, absolutely and insanely devoted to chess, he went through those chess libraries like an automaton, while constantly dedicating himself to improving his chess.

He was also blessed with a unique memory. On his first visit to Russia, he played a number of blitz games against various Soviet players. Thirteen years later he met one of them in Yugoslavia, and this player reminded Fischer of the fact that he had played blitz against him in Moscow.

Fischer remembered that very well. "Yes, one of them was a French..." And the astonished Russians around the table were then witnesses to Fischer reciting the entire game, move by move, to them.

During tournaments, Fischer would play the scheduled game, and then pester people to play blitz against him, far into the night. He must have played thousands of blitz games during those thirteen years, but could still remember the particular games from an encounter thirteen years in the past move by move.

===

If you can do anything similar, then maybe you won't have benefit from using a coach. BTW - what other sport can you think of where having access to a trained professional is of no benefit?

Probably impossible for most people to excell, even with one.

The question in the OP is whether or not it is " impossible " to excel in chess without a chess coach/teacher/trainer. The answer is clearly NO.  The question is NOT whether one would help or not.

 I suspect he meant Larry Evans

I believe that Anish Giri became GM without help from any trainer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anish_Giri

I actually think that this is a better example as Bobby Fischer (the man with the highest IQ ever measured).

I think that it depends on the person (in terms of the need for a math coach). Some people may thrive with a math coach some may be able to thrive without one.

Who said anything about coughing up money for those? I just said those are overall good advice for players who want to improve and are already existent in many chess books. Gee, you're so full of it, in almost every topic you "contribute".

I'm not objecting to that last sentence. Those "a lot of vague effusions" are required to sustain that practice for a long time, and are also useful in gameplay (working at the board). 

#20 "sterner stuff" ?!!

Black to play and win...

You create ideas through experience. So (with some unknown variables) either you can play X amount of games + solve Y amount of chess problems + read Z amount of books----or you can do 1/V of all of that and get a coach.

And it may be arguable that, the variables are QUITE HIGH when it comes to learning positional gameplay. Tactics can be learned easily through study and practice. Openings can be learned through reading and study. Endgames can be learned as well.

Middlegames have too many possibilities to be learned easily. They must be solved through tactics, and sometimes through STRATEGY or POSITIONAL play. The problem is, most players would need someone experienced to teach them these strategic values of developing and then generating a plan for winning the game.

Most can be learned by experience, but I think the strategy part, should be learned through a coach or some great book, because it's too difficult to understand.