Is it possible(likely) to reach a rating of 1800 by teaching himself?

YES it's possible to reach 1800 without a coach esp here with their hyper-inflated rating system! USCF ratings are much(?) less inflated than chess.com ratings and I strongly suspect the vast majority of +1800 USCF players got there without a coach - I did in both OTB and postal chess, and I'm not exactly the most talented player around in my class.

I'm sure one can hit IM without a coach if they know how and what to study and are dedicated.

Exact motivational answer I was looking for. Thanks!

I have witnessed someone putting his head in a crocodile's mouth and surviving .Would you try it?

     Your husband may be the greatest talent ever lived, all the rest need a guide.

When I first got on this site someone compared trying to learn chess using the resources here to getting a drink from a fire hose.  Kind of agreed with that view and for many months I was like a kid in a candy store running from one treat to another.  Obviously the powers that be recognized the problem and have come up with study guides for both beginners and intermediates (advanced coming in early 2012).  They are quite comprehensive and represent what working titled chess professionals think you should know.  Found by clicking "read", then "articles", then Chess.com help. 

 LOL a little melodramatic much? Maybe so however I know that isnt the case. He used chess in place of a bad habit. It took dedication and hard work but he did it. Maybe your problem is you dont have enough confidence in your own intelligence and ability to learn. So no maybe you dont have it but how can you know if you never try?

Yes, it is definitely possible. I reached 2000 rating on another chess portal with little to no knowledge of opennings. But, you have to learn from mistakes and constantly improving your game.

I was curious about the same thing. I am starting a self study plan. Every day I do tactics, and then I have a different part of the game I study each day of the week. Today's non-tactics task is to analyze a game. So I was wondering if there was something to do besides computer analysis.

Natalia Pogonina has an article about how to analyze your games. It doesn't have a lot to it, but it certainly has stuff I hadn't thought about, especially writing down your in-game thoughts immediately after the game. I found another article by Yury Markushin, which mainly talks about writing down your in-game thoughts, not analyzing them afterwords. It does have a note about recording your time for each move, so you can see where you spent a lot of time thinking (and maybe got into time trouble). There is a series of articles by Steve Lopez. I have had a chance to read through them, but they are based on using ChessBase. Then there's this article by Chessblogger. It mostly echoes Pagonina's article, but I like the bit about noticing critical points in the game where the evaluation shifts.

I also like the quote from the last article: "The unexamined life is not worth living." I guess we could paraphrase that as "The unexamined Chess game is not worth playing."

It's not about my confidence.It's like believing you can be a pilot by teaching your self(Wright brothers did it , didn't they?).In chess history , no one, I repeat , NO ONE  of the great players ever did it by teaching himself.Confidence is not enough to be an astronaut , you have to be trained in NASA otherwise you forget about it.It is good to be confident , certainly helps, but don't forget to be realistic too.If you start from the same point , you alone and another one with a teacher , I assure you in 2 years the other one will be much better.

     Your husband is on top-100 by teaching himself but are you sure he couldn't be at top-50(or higher) if he had a coach?You should compare what he is with what he could be if you want to have an objective and realistic result. 

No, it is impossible.

Yes, it certainly is possible (why not?  our mind adapts to our environment, play regularly, pay attention to what went wrong (we learn much more from our losses than from our victories), and you're likely to steadily improve).

Maybe, but I'd be concerned about a personal coach causing more harm than good to one's chess playing ability (& one's bank account).

sftac

I know most 1800 rated players are self -taught.I am saying that with someone helping they would reach 1800 sooner.

   I have already an experience with people trying to improve by themselves in our chess club.Once they came in the club and they started lessons they had a significant improvement in much less of a time.And I am not talking about people that had the time to study 8 hours a day or be every day in the club.

    Chess is simple if you know where to go but can be chaotic if someone doesn't show you the "road".You can find the road by yourself but you will be significantly late in your "date".If you want to gain time , you need a GPS.

1869/9 games 2 tournaments

Well done, I'd say.

I've been a member of chess.com for about two years and have been playing turn-based for a little over a year. Never had a coach and am now flirting with 1800 (over 1800 very briefly). The Study Plans, as mentioned above, have been a wonderful addition. It sorts out all of the learning features on the site and puts them in a logical sequence for us. With the Study Plans and lots of games, I look forward to going much higher than 1800.

Short answer, a coach is not required, just stay with it and remember to have fun.

If 1869/9  games isn't worth some praise then most everyone playing otb isn't worth spit.

I think you're not getting it.

Either just playing and watching games or doing normal study and play, getting to 1869 is quite respectable.

I never limited the achievement having started at square one as he entered his first tourney. How the hell that got into your mind god knows. Is anyone in the thread saying that he did!?

Okay. now read with comprehension and stop being a dumbass.

If only it were that simple.

yes it is possible. I reached 1831 on this site. My best temporary blitz rating on the chessbase server was about 2000 ten years ago with an anonymously played account.

Not very strong thou. I have never read chess books. I only studied several GM-games out of databases and tried to understand how computers play chess. My first portable chesscomputer was a mephisto milano

I rented a book from the library and it had several strategies and ideas that I would have not figured out or thought of if I only played games.

I also have Chessmaster 9000 for PC, a game/program that teaches you beginner, advanced, expert, etc chess. But to be truthful I found many of the lessons to be much too similar and repetative. I would say the book I took from the library was a much better investment of my time and even took less to finish than to play through the Chessmaster program lessons.

Apologies but I don't remeber the name. It was sort of a flip-through books, plenty of color illustrations on nice paper, and had "sticky notes" printed on the pages with ideas and reminders. Maybe someone who knows the name can help.

I also suggest you only play "online chess". I personally am not fast enough to think on the spot like the live players do. And usually take an entire minute to think out several possibilities and moves and their outcomes, and online chess allows me to do that, and without time limitations to pressure you

I learned in the days before we had all these life coaches and other assorted dinks. Of course it's possible!...it's the way most everyone did things (in the pre-Wienie era).

Bear in mind though that this is how we had to go to school every day back then:

Even the Great Fischer wasn't rated at 1869 after only nine games