Master over....30!?

<Pritesh36> +1 and thanks for your kind words. What you write about his kind is spot on!

I like very much the attitude of both NMs from the end of page 2... :-) - as well as <PMG8>'s (page 2), and the attitudes and messages of <Inexorable88>, <SDRealm>, <IPress12> (nothing like FACTS IN YOUR FACE!>, <BlunderLots>, one sentence in the post of <ChessOath>, and all of his next post, (page 3). 

Another point on which I would voice an opinion - 

if the limits of man's ability was only what Man has done before - we wouldn't have left the caves... :-)

And we wouldn't have Beethoven's ninth symphony, or Ivanchuk's Qxg7!!

Not to mention chess engines...

Man is all about doing what has NOT been done before. 

The opposite view is known as CONSERVATISM. 

Not that there's anything wrong with it - and it's a benchmark all too often - but thankfully it has its EXCEPTIONS. 

And these exceptions are what matters. 

So wait - you guys (the thread) are telling me that if and when I actually make CM in Feb. 2019 I would be "doing the incredible" and "achieving what nobody has ever achieved in the history of chess"?

If so, I'm totally up for it!!! :-)

I was not quite 1900 when I was 30, and was around 1500 level at age 18 (which was a 300-point improvement over 7 months before that). 

So, definitely a patzer-kid, not a strong youth player at all - 

And yes, I will make CM in February 2019, a month after my 47th birthday. 

I won't be a grandfather yet, and my brain isn't quite totally melted at this point of time. 

I will be breaking a new path for Mankind - demonstrate that such is indeed possible!!! 

HOORAY !!!!!!

By the way - the FIDE master who was dissing me back on page 1 is still fifty points shy of my blitz rating on this website - just saying... but I'm sure some of you guys have noticed. 

To be fair, solskytz, you're hardly mentally "average" if your occupation is concert piano.

Thanks, Dpnorman - but I didn't think that this was a requirement as well... :-) 

But it's completely accurate

@solskytz Actually, this is true. I forgot this was the chess improvement thread "du jour", and not the "can an average person become a master" thread from just about two days ago, lol

I know... there are some common points between them and such confusion is very natural... :-)

I think it would be a great, good luck!

Certainly inspiration for me and others who may hope to do the same. My first tournament was at age 21, and first established rating in the 1300s.

So you're even farther behind than me... :-)

Nobody says that it's easy, mind you - and I do have some professional tricks up my sleeve that I didn't really share with anybody... :-)

It's definitely an uphill struggle, for many reasons cited in this thread. 

Those reasons are valid and shouldn't be trifled with!!

But like in chess - there are ways to create an exception... :-) 

Oh my, this guy must really feel important when he thinks someone disagreeing with his delusions means "dissing" him. And he has a higher blitz rating than me. Which is really a big thing, considering me being an extremely lousy blitz player who usually does not use a mouse.

By the way, I never commented about your goal to become CM, but about your funny idea that IM and even GM is achievable for you. Not that it's likely that anyone, and especially someone with your obvious character deficits will get from 1950 to CM at an advanced age, but that wasn't even my point.

"character deficits" may not be the phrase you're looking for, since plenty of rude characters have become strong players.

If you're so sure he won't make it, what about the chance of me making my goal?

But it's the truth. The top rated tactics player on this site has a 4000+ rating, yet his "live" rating is like 1500, and in the first corr. game I looked at, he blundered a rook to a 2-move fork.

This is because he has memorized every single TT problem on the site. 

For someone who has done 500+ problems, you'll get duplicates from time to time, which add up eventually.

If you want to find a great tactical player, generally find someone who has reached the leaderboard w/ still <1000 attempts. 

You'll find quite few, and some of them, especially the super high success rate ones, probably use bots/set up the board on an engine. 

If he's only 1500, I highly doubt he actually memorized all the problems. More likely, he uses an engine, maybe a bot for max speed.

TT, if you use it correctly, can be a tool, but if you grind it to max the score you're able to achieve it's pretty meaningless and might even be reinforcing bad habits. Same for blitz.

<FM Rumo>

I also don't use a mouse. 

I found that there is no significant difference in my blitz performance when I use or don't use a mouse...

And btw - I'm sure that as an FM you can raise your blitz well above mine - and if you can't - that's not a problem either. Not every titled player must perforce excel in blitz play - so chill. I won't downplay your chess ability. I do honor your title. 

"your obvious character deficits" - that does speak of a tantrum... just like your first page 1 post did. 

You can have your tantrums - I don't really think I care. 

And about me reaching IM or higher? I won't speak about that until I actually get that nice pink background... that's a bit too much for now. 

Hi Dennis,

I think I wrote it before, I think FM might be possible, and 2200 should be well within your reach. I think your goals are realistic.

I think what many people don't understand is the huge ground to cover from 2300 to 2400. Not to mention how this (exponentially) becomes harder above that. No matter how much your learn, if your brain hasn't been wired for chess at an early enough age, you are at a big disadvantage against those players whose brains have been. And you have to successfully compete with them, in order to reach the level they are at.

Some years ago I played against a 14 years old who was rather high up in his age group. The game ended in a draw, and when we analysed, it showed that while he didn't understand much of what was going on, he was able to spit out lines that he calculated, all the complicated tactics and resources that were in the position, at a crazy speed. Unsurprisingly today he's a grandmaster. He now has the knowledge and understanding plus his early-trained chess brain. The first can be attained at a later age, the latter just isn't possible. Just like you don't become an NBA player when you start Basketball at 30.

This argument makes a lot of sense actually. 

Any mutual funds for old ladies with a GM title who will never get laid? Not necessarily females. There are plenty of capable people around. You are uninformed but that's not an excuse.