RainbowRising wrote:
Any idiot can get PhD? I think that seriously depends on the PhD!
And from the institution which grants it--am assuming there are some bogus on-line places were such people can get their PhD
Road to Grandmaster
Sort:
odessian wrote:
Khmm I seriously believe that if i have started playing chess when i was 5-6, I could reach GM level by now, but I would never get the Ph.D
What do you base that on? Chess isn't just something that people are good at because they started playing at a young age. There are thousands of IM's who have been playing chess for their entire lives and simply never make the GM title. Sofia Polgar for one, and Jeremy Silman is another. I can't just make a blanket statement like "oh with another 25 years of study I would easily be a G.M by now".
There's something to be said for aiming high. If you don't try, you'll never succeed. Odds aren't good that he'll be hit by lightning or eaten by a shark, but never say never. Unusual instances happen every so often. I agree it's a highly unlikely goal -- but I'd never tell him to not to try. Even if he stalls at NM or IM, that's a worthy accomplishment that may have never come without lofty goals.
JetSetter wrote:
The Polgars are a poor example precisely because they started so early in age, while their thought processes and brain development were still plastic
True.
If one watches the special National Geographic did on her it is revealed that the part of the brain that stores faces was used by her as a child to store typical chess positions.
Something that the older you get the less effectively you can do.
JetSetter wrote:
The point is that GMs weren't typing on chess forums when they were a CM--they were playing blitz in the park or travelling to a real tournament. Chess forums do nothing for your development; if you're serious about making a title (FM / IM / GM) then you'll drop the forums and hit the books or the databases.
This made me smile, very true.
Larry Kaufman made GM at the World Senior Championships, admittedly not in the traditional way, and he has said that he would never make GM in the traditional way (an incredible claim, but the main reason was probably the ELO requirement.)
I don't think it makes sense to give up before you really put some effort in and see what results occur. I started playing chess at age 14, started semi-seriously studying chess at age 22, and now I'm 23 and probably around 2050-2100 strength, having jumped from the 1650-1750 strength I was before putting any effort in. This probably has something to do with trying to understand more kinds of positions, and from having the endgame always being a strength to give support for any slight inaccuracies earlier in the game.
I plan on spending more time on chess and at least reaching FM level in the next couple of years, it doesn't seem far off considering I beat FMs over the board pretty regularly. GM is a bit far off, but I do think it's possible.
So just find a system that works for you. For an example everyone is missing, Kotov was a pretty weak player but then started a systematic study of chess and became a grandmaster later in life.
Sep 24, 2010
0
#88
Interesting discussion. What is a realistic goal for a 21 year old Class A player?
A) Expert - 2000+
B) National Master- 2200+
C) International Master - 2400-2500
D) Grand Master - 2500+
---
As a beginning adult chess player, what would be a realistic goal with a few hours of play/study per day after five years?
A) Class D - a strong social player
B) Class C - average tournament player
C) Class B - above average tournament player
D) Class A - top amateur class
Here are the titles/ratings in order of prestige (Grandmaster is the highest):
International Titles
Current regulations are at FIDE handbook.
Grandmaster (GM) title awarded by FIDE for GM norms
International Master (IM) title awarded by FIDE for IM norms
FIDE Master (FM) minimum FIDE rating of 2300 after 24 games
National Senior Master (SM) e.g., USCF Senior Master--USCF 2400+
National Master (Master or NM) e.g., USCF Master--USCF 2200+
National Expert or Candidate Master (E or CM) e.g., USCF Expert--USCF 2000+
National US Amateur Classes
National Class A (USCF 1800- 1999) top amateur class
National Class B (USCF 1600-1799) above average tournament player
National Class C (USCF 1400-1599) average tournament player
National Class D (USCF 1200-1399) a strong social player
National Class E (USCF 1000-1199) social/scholastic players
National Class F (USCF 800-999) novice/scholastic players
National Class G (USCF 600-799) beginner II/scholastic players
National Class H (USCF 400-599) beginner I/scholastic players
National Class I (USCF 200-399) early beginner/scholastic players
National Class J (USCF 100-199) minimum rating
Good Luck :-)
Reaching GM is a realistic, but extremely hard task for a 21 years old person who is not even a Master. I strongly belive that an average person can achieve this, given a huge amount of study and dedication.
On the other hand, reaching GM while still going to college, having a girlfriend AND other hobbies, leaving merely a few hours a day for chess, is closer to daydreaming than chess.
RoadtoGM wrote:
Interesting discussion. To those who claim I have no idea of how difficult it is, let me point out that I'm not a kid who's just learned chess and decided he wants to be Bobby Fischer. I've played competitive chess for a number of years, have talked to and played against GMs, and have a strong sense of the enormous gap between their level and mine. However, I love the game and know that I will play it for the rest of my life, and so am prepared to put in a great deal of work on getting stronger. Whether this will get me to Grandmaster or not I don't know, but I believe that it is possible, and I intend to try.
Do not listen to those who say it is an "unrealistic" goal; people who say such things are the 1s that put limits on themselves. If it was unrealistic there wouldnt be any GMs; strive for and achieve your goal of GM, stranger things have happened.....
nimzo5 wrote:
The Soltis principle is worth looking at again. To paraphrase:
"After 10 years of tournament play, a player rarely increases their rating."
So if you had a room of 10,000 Class A players who had been playing for 10 years and 10,000 people who had never moved a piece. Your best bet is to find a GM in the 2nd group.
Actually, I found Soltis' principle to be the most promising for an aspiring late bloomer!
Assuming that a person has not been serious with chess even in their 20s, it might be possible to attain GM. However...
NickYoung5 wrote:
Silman has mentioned in his articles that he's worked with several very rich and driven people... Apparently some of them have made it to CM/NM level but not GM or IM.
It turns out (unsurprisingly) that you need specific aptitude to become a GM.
I also believe in SIlman's experiences on what it takes to even reach Master levels:
1. one already has money (to be able to put more time into training, studying and competing rather than earning it)
2. capable of doing the hard work
3. aptitude (aka chess talent, natural or developed)
What it takes is that your World becomes the Chess board.
There are no more roads or streets just diagonals and files, no colours other than black and white. No friends, only chess pieces, any chess friend may one day be an opponent over the board.
No art other than a chess combination, no books other than chess books, no TV other than a Chess DVD.
You do not live in there here and now only on and for that board, that moment of victory.
You will work a minimum of 4 to 6 hours every day, up to 12 hours a day coming up to a big tournament.
Still fancy it ?
Because this what it will take for a strong player to get to GM, unless you are born with that mysterious Chess gene.
Sceadungen wrote:
What it takes is that your World becomes the Chess board.
There are no more roads or streets just diagonals and files, no colours other than black and white. No friends, only chess pieces, any chess friend may one day be an opponent over the board.
No art other than a chess combination, no books other than chess books, no TV other than a Chess DVD.
You do not live in there here and now only on and for that board, that moment of victory.
You will work a minimum of 4 to 6 hours every day, up to 12 hours a day coming up to a big tournament.
Still fancy it ?
Because this what it will take for a strong player to get to GM, unless you are born with that mysterious Chess gene.
Bro, I'm a friend of johnny hector.
His life isnt like that, stop bullshitting.
Helzeth wrote:
Sceadungen wrote:
What it takes is that your World becomes the Chess board.
Bro, I'm a friend of johnny hector. His life isnt like that, stop bullshitting.
Where did this hate come from? Where did the inference to a "Johnny Hector" come from?
Narniacalls wrote:
@RoadtoGM, have you read the Ben Feingold book?
Can someone tell me the exactly title of the book wherein his story of achieving the GM title in his 40s?
I did a quick search on Amazon and came up with "The Feingold Cookbook for Hyperactive Children." Doesn't sound right.
EDIT
I don't know, but people have been misspelling his name - it should be Finegold. That might help you find it.
chessroboto wrote:
Helzeth wrote:
Sceadungen wrote:
What it takes is that your World becomes the Chess board.
Bro, I'm a friend of johnny hector. His life isnt like that, stop bullshitting.
Where did this hate come from? Where did the inference to a "Johnny Hector" come from?
Johnny Who ??
tonydal wrote:
Sceadungen wrote:
chessroboto wrote:
Where did this hate come from? Where did the inference to a "Johnny Hector" come from?
Johnny Who ??
Johnny Hector. He was the star of a Japanese cartoon in the 1960s.
He's also a Swedish GM
I personally think a grandmaster is equivalent to a phd. Good luck for your endeavour, what's your current ELO?
Any idiot can get a PHD. Being a grandmaster in chess is similar to being a pro sports player (but minus the 'pro' in most cases).
Assuming you know what you are talking about, you are both an idiot and a Ph.D.
Of course, the alternative is...you don't know what you are talking about.