Thanks for that artfizz, I'll have a look.
I think one point some people are missing is that going up in ranking is not a linear process but exponential. Going from 700 to 1150 is MUCH easier than going from 1150 to 1600 and MUCH MUCH MUCH easier than going from 1600 to 2050.
I think you mean it's logarithmic, not exponential.
You bet woodshover can be an FM in less than a year? Not only does that dog refuse to hunt, but it doesn't even exist.
"If you reach for the moon, you may land back on earth, but if you reach for the sun, you may land on the moon." If he makes the goal to be that good at chess, in an even shorter amount of time, i think he might get there in less time that he anticipated.
And if you reach for something within your grasp you may actually get it.
what are you talking about? the very foundation of this topic is built around the fact that he is NOT reaching for something easily within his grasp, but something far greater. I said by continueing to reach for this far goal, he will find that hehas gotten a LOT better at chess, and can achieve his goals even sooner. What is this meager "within his grasp" you expect him to dump his FM goal and go for?
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
You can do anything you put your mind to! I think I can...I think I can...etc.
That bloody little train could do it, so can you.
Depends on who the 1500 is. If he's a bright kid who got there in a few months, he stands a chance. If it's an adult who went nuts for some reason, then no.
I get a few messages daily asking about something funny and rating-related. This one made my day today:
i got to 1256 in a year do you think i could be a GM in another year please awnser
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
I can't believe you, and several others still don't realize I'm not talking about myself, even though I've stated it several times.
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
I can't believe you, and several others still don't realize I'm not talking about myself, even though I've stated it several times.
Do you think Topalov failed to beat Anand because he didn't try hard enough? Thinking you can do anything if you work hard enough at it is just false reasoning. There are some things that are beyond our capabilities.
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
I can't believe you, and several others still don't realize I'm not talking about myself, even though I've stated it several times.
You did write your disclaimer in orange, woodshover. I've heard 99% of the population is orange-blind.
Is it a crime to be curious about something that doesn't concern you personally. I know there are a lot of people who are only curious about things that have to do with themselves, but I'm not one of them. Besides, I DO spend two or three hours a day doing Chess Mentor, and TT.
Subjectivity is subjective. If it interest you, then it must concern you in some form or way, I believe seeing as your interest itself in some way must be a part of you (quite like other aspects of 'your identity').
But no, I don't consider it to be a crime, don't worry. This is a certain concensus to that exact theme in my question, as you'll find. I'm curious about something that indeed does not concern me. :)
The elaboration is: WHY does it interest you?
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
I can't believe you, and several others still don't realize I'm not talking about myself, even though I've stated it several times.
You did write your disclaimer in orange, woodshover. I've heard 99% of the population is orange-blind.
RUBBISH! There's no such thing as color blindness to the color orange!
To plan on going from a rating of 1500 to FM in three years? Personally, I don't think so.
Im going to say my opinion from my expeirience,
I started playing chess 3 months ago my rating was 800 then now it became over 1450 thats about 217 points per month I know that I cant stay on that rate because it would get harder when I improve but IMO anyone can get a fide rating over 2000 this is a formula of whats the largest rating you can have
=IQ x 10 + 1000
btw Im only 14 years old
I can't believe you, and several others still don't realize I'm not talking about myself, even though I've stated it several times.
For some reason you think I was addressing you.
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
I can't believe you, and several others still don't realize I'm not talking about myself, even though I've stated it several times.
You did write your disclaimer in orange, woodshover. I've heard 99% of the population is orange-blind.
RUBBISH! There's no such thing as color blindness to the color orange!
The orange-blinded don't find it amusing that you call them names like 'color blind'. The orange-blinded dispute entirely, the existence of "orange" as a color. They merely humour those who pretend to see such things.
Im going to say my opinion from my expeirience,
my rating now became over 1450 ... but IMO anyone can get a fide rating over 2000 this is a formula of whats the largest rating you can have
=IQ x 10 + 1000
So, based on your experience as a 1450 rated player, you think anyone should be able to get to 2000. Frankly, I don't see why that should carry much weight.
If I believe your formula, then only people with an IQ over 100 should be able to get a rating of 2000. And that's only half the population, which is a lot less than "anyone". Of course, I also have no reason to believe your formula.
Or as Ken Smith used to say in his Chess Digest catalogs, there eventually comes a hill you can't climb.
I can't believe you, and several others still don't realize I'm not talking about myself, even though I've stated it several times.
You did write your disclaimer in orange, woodshover. I've heard 99% of the population is orange-blind.
RUBBISH! There's no such thing as color blindness to the color orange!
The orange-blinded don't find it amusing that you call them names like 'color blind'. The orange-blinded dispute entirely, the existence of "orange" as a color. They merely humour those who pretend to see such things.
Couldn't agree more! Off with the head!
Amazing how some people can cite a one-in-a-million example of achievement or ability as proof that "anyone" can do it if they want to.
http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_js/js_rapid_chess_improv.htm
"...Mr. de la Maza is a player who (at around 1321) suffered badly from elementary tactical oversights and, rather than lie back and accept eternal misery, decided to do something about it. Creating his own tactical study plan, he followed it with incredible verve and leapt up “…400 USCF rating points in my first year of tournament play and almost 300 rating points in my second year of play.” This, and a little luck (you always need some luck to win a tournament!), helped him win the U2000 section of the 2001 World Open, which netted him a $10,000.00 prize. He then retired from active play with a 2041 rating..."
So basically 8 hours of tactics training every day with ie CT-Art for a couple of years should get an average player rated around 1500 now most of the way to becoming a FM.
Simple.
The example of de la Maza's success surely makes a great example.
This thread is reminding me of the one where the 40 year old Indian guy who was just starting with chess asked if he could someday become a GM.
There were plenty of people repeating that familiar old hash of nonsense, "If you really try, then you can do it, sure!"
When he was told by a few that he had no hope, he told them to "stop it."
Is facing reality really so hard?
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
Is it a crime to be curious about something that doesn't concern you personally. I know there are a lot of people who are only curious about things that have to do with themselves, but I'm not one of them. Besides, I DO spend two or three hours a day doing Chess Mentor, and TT.