not everyone can reach 2000

Very often there will be a post that asks what one has to do to reach a certain chess rating level, often it is above 2000, maybe even a grandmaster. My view is even reaching 2000 is an impossible task for the vast majority of players (myself included). I believe that at this level or above you have to be born with a very good memory (as well as unusual self-discipline). The % of players who reach this level is quite small and its my view that there is good reason for this. Any comments???

Yes.  Please get back to your translation of Arabian Nights. 

Chess would be a great game again if the scores disappeared.

Rating is not important -it is more important to enjoy the game

You may limit yourself in whichever way you choose.

This could not be more true, for example I will never reach 2000 OTB (or its ECF equivalent)

I agree, but the goal shouldn't be to reach a certain rating level, but simply to play the best chess you can with the means you have.

I prefer to simply enjoy playing chess, but yours is good too.

Translation; most everyone can reach expert/master level if they trade their life for a slavish dedication to a monastic Chess existence.

The problem is to determine what is good enough. If you're competitive you start to do things that you said that you would not do. I swore that I was not going to touch any books on openings any more, but you want to know what is best etc...

I think anyone who is "normal" can hit 2000.  I just stopped blundering pieces and tend to come up with some sort of a plan and that got me to 2000 otb

I think if you have enough discipline and time, you can become pretty good at anything. The experience will help too, learning from your mistakes and making less blunders thanks to it. Of course, raw talent helps, but I don't think 2000 is out of reach for those who work hard.

I think that's a good way to think about it that a lot of people ignore.

Some people could be rated 1500 after putting in 20 hours of chess, whereas another person might take 500 hours to get there. From that we can easily see that some people are much more "chess-inclined" than others.

Once I learned the rules and some basic tactics, I was playing at a ~1200 baseline level (otb). A lot of friends that I played with, knowing the rules and similar basic tactics, play around 800 level. In my experience, some people would take a lot of work to even get to 1200.

Becky, I'm sure you can reach the level of 2000 easily and still play chess purely as a passtime.

Always play others who are on  a higher level. Study your losses along with your wins. Train tactics, and remember your mistakes.

Whether it's one way or the other, I don't think anybody here has the empirical data needed to give an adamant yes/no answer. Speaking from your own personal experience is not enough, due to people's heads being different. To me it seems obvious, though, that there exists a minimum level of capacity in the realms of memory, the ability to calculate etc that is required of a 2 000 player. Just like some people are dyslectic, some just can't cope with a chess board.

What does otb rating stand for? Is it like fide or uscf???

  I think alot of people that are in the 1500 range could reach 2000 if they really worked at it , but there are some people i have seen that study hard and just can't progress much past 1500. I mself am currently at 1895 USCF and hope to cross 2000 sometime in the near future. What has helped me is 2 things first spending more time at my own board at Tournaments and not so much time watching the top boards that was a problem for me and second getting past the laziness and actually studying. I always just played without any real study an could easily maintain a rating around 1700 but after getting my butt handed to me at Kings Island last year i realized if i am ever going to get to 2000 i am going to have to put in the work. I a sure there are a lot of players just like me out there.