Old people drop 300 rating poinst!

I recently came across some people with FM and IM title who went down 200-300 rating points when became 50-60 years old. Why do you think that is? No physical activity or concentration becomes weak with age? They stop playing regulary? Is playing regulary important? I have played regulary since the firt day I started chess so I don`t know importance of that. Korchnoi`s concentration seems strong he just needs a lot of time to re-charge between tournaments he said, he dropped like only 150 points.

http://www.chessclub.org/TNMstandings.html

See that guy at #1.  He's over 80.

I am 62 and only started to play speed chess 3 years ago.

I have managed to get to 2085 here and seem to average out at around 1950. I know that my opponents are a lot younger with sharper reactions. I wish I'd taken it up when a lot younger...I fancy I'd have reached 2400.

Great picture of Korchnoi - he's phenomenal. I think the peak age for chess players is mid 30s. After that you slowly decline as far as endurance and concentration. Of course to a degree you can compensate for it through experience, wisdom, etc. but the raw physical assets do fall off over time. It's aging - you can slow it, but not reverse it.

You will KNOW the answer to your own question as you grow older yourself.  

I am inpationt, Reb. That over 30 it goes down is bullshit. All the way to 40 one can stay very sharp.

i am 84 years young, played my first game 77 years ago anf my first internet game in December 2010 when i joined chess.com I have to admit that playing chess is quite challenging, but so enjoyable..... I have discovered the joice and medicinal virtues of 1 minutes games thank you chess.com

Well, I am 58 and I havent lost even 100 points off my best ratings in USCF nor FIDE.  The biggest problem for me ( and I think most as we age ) is one of stamina . 

 Sure you can. Look at boxing - Bernard Hopkins who is 46 nearly won the light heavy weight title. George Foreman won the heavy weight title at 45. Both fighters are very intelligent  and experienced and used this in the ring. Look how strong Lasker was in his 50s and older. You can be very sharp in your 50s 60s and beyond, but the aging process is a given.

in a way i am quite fortunate that i do not suffer from any disabiliting illness, otherwise chess would have been out of a question

yes it seems like it`s all about stamina and perhaps passion for the game starts to dissapear as one gets older and wiser :)

passion remains capabilities tend to fade

Sooner or later, all of us will find out...

god willing

 And King and Pawns goes in the same box at the end. Could I share a coffin with you?

George Foreman, like Korchnoi in chess, is an exceptional individual. Foreman was in his prime during an era of great heavyweights. Ali, Frazier, Norton, Weaver, even a lesser known fighter like Jimmy Young  who was small at 210 pounds but a clever counter puncher developed skills beyond what contemporary fighters develop. Today's elite athletes tend to go into sports like basketball or football rather tha boxing. It's easier to make a lot of money in these sports, and in the case of basketball, it's not as hard on your body. Ken Norton Jr., who was a middle linebacker for the Cowboys and the 49ers is one good example. Now there's MMA as well.

If you ever watched George, his punches generated a tremendous amount of force with little apparent effort. This is technique. Strength and stamina may wane as you age, but once you've mastered technique, you always have it. I think older fighters like Foreman or Archie Moore can be successful because superior talent and ring savvy are enough to overcome what's lost due to age - for a while. 

very good point

You're talking about guys who have, at some point been Super GM's.

These aren't your average chess players.

Don't expect Bob the stogie-smoking gambiteer from your local club to slow down all that much as he joins the grayhair set.  Bob isn't putting all that much time into this hobby.  If Bob is going to slow down at anything, it's as a plumber, or an electrician, or whatever he has been spending 8 hours a day doing to make ends meet for the last 40 years.

Guys who were once 2700 had to stay REALLY on top of it to get there, and to stay there.  They had to spend hours a day just keeping up with the latest in bleeding-edge theory.  Chess wasn't a hobby to these guys...it was a full time occupation.  And their hours weren't spend idly piddling away at games.  A lot of them were in rigorous, focused analysis.

So when Bob got old, he didn't have to lose his edge all that much.  Because Bob never put all that much effort into keeping his edge to begin with.

As Karpov, et al, grow old, the other people in their talent pool are suddenly going to be able to run laps around them in terms of the effort it takes to stay current in the theoretical borderlands of chess, where points are won and lost at the highest levels.

All the talent in the world is nice, but if you ain't boosting it up with full-time study on top of full time play, you won't be competing against the 2700's of the world.

You might have hit the nail on the head when you mentioned physical activity.  I saw some documentary where they were saying older people who stay mentally AND physically active don't lose abilities anywhere near the rate of people who did not. People who walk at least six to nine miles a week don't experience "normal" brain shrinkage as they age like people who do not.

ok then based on your rating u have not played for decades