Secret of Studying Style of B.Fischer - Chess Forums - Page 2

fissionfowl

Oct 11, 2011

0

#21

davidegpc wrote:

A friend of mine is straight, totally, his brother totally gay, and the reason is not talent, one had more talent in one field!

What has that got to do with anything?

Arctor

Oct 11, 2011

0

#22

kwaloffer wrote:

Arctor wrote:

Reb wrote:

Arctor wrote:

"Bobby Fischer was a rare combination of talent and hard work"

SInce his ability can be explained by hard work alone then why do we need the lumineferous aether of talent?

Because hard work alone wont make one the best in the world at anything. Some people just have more innate ability/aptitude/TALENT than others in certain areas....

Because you say so?

You believe that a hundred people all working as hard as they can will all become exactly as good?

Find me one hundred identical people

Monoceros

Oct 11, 2011

0

#23

daw55124 wrote:

DanaEileithyia wrote:

But what people mostly forget is that some kids need other instructions than others.

The slow kid may be with another teaching approach the faster kid.

While it's certainly true that some kids respond better to other instructors than others, I have never observed a kid who took longer to learn something learning things significantly faster with other instructors in either martial arts or music.

I have seen different pedagogical approaches make huge differences in some kids for some concepts (for example, some kids can learn the idea of intervals very quickly using one method while struggle with another method), but the difference tend to be averaged out over a broad range of topics. Good instructors tend to have all their kids learn at a rate higher than poor instructors.

So if you find a pedagogical method that works better than another, bringing it to the classroom will have everyone accellerate at about the same rate.

What you will never see is an instructor show up in a classroom and the kids who were taking a long time suddenly become the stars, while the one's who were the stars suddenly become the bottom of the totem pole. Relative innate ability that drives how easy or hard a subect is for each student doesn't change much.

Well I'm myself an example of someone who could be considered poor in some learning instances and gifted in the other. I've a very poor auditive memory while my visual memory is excellent. If you teach me by auditive instruction for example maths, I would be a very very slow learner, while if you just give me a book I will learn maths very quick (teacher gave me the calculation/maths books at age 8 and year later all material up to the age of 12 was done).

Offcourse I'm bad with music whichever learning method you give me, as I can't even remember a single song even not if I listen to it 8 hours a day. I'm honest I do not have any talent with music however I do think that teachers are often to simple and automatically think that the poor performance of a kid is the lack of talent in place of trying to find out what is holding him back and if there are better approaches of teaching him something.

emmett4077

Oct 11, 2011

0

#24

Talent is simply the brain's predisposition to be better adapted at a particular activity. Modern science accepts some level of neuroplasticity, and this is especially evident in children, when the brain is still developing.

If you start teaching chess to a super young child, they should develop talent, as their brain structure is still forming, and it will form based on what inputs it receives.

For adults, it is much more difficult. Hard work will take you far, though. Very far.

NM TheOldReb

Oct 11, 2011

0

#25

One should not confuse education with intelligence .

Metal-Gerd

Oct 11, 2011

0

#26

Anubarak wrote:

Bobby Fischer Wrote two of the top 100 chess books ever written:

Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess

My 60 memorable games.

"Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess" has not been written by Bobby Fischer.

GabrielBedard

Oct 11, 2011

0

#27

i've once read that Fischer was an Aspergian ; that explain his infinite passion for Chess! I wonder if theres any other GM who have the Asperger's syndrome?

yusuf_prasojo

Oct 11, 2011

0

#28

davidegpc wrote:

In reality you also mistake thinking that Judit is the most talented, when in reality she played only with men for her choice, while Szusan played with women, that makes the difference, because women were not as strong as men, due also to the prejudices that a male society imposed on women. And the best player of the three sisters was the one who stopped playing, and is now living in Israel.

Who is the most intelligent (by common standard) between the three, I wonder?

yusuf_prasojo

Oct 11, 2011

0

#29

DanaEileithyia wrote:

I've a very poor auditive memory while my visual memory is excellent. If you teach me by auditive instruction for example maths, I would be a very very slow learner, while if you just give me a book I will learn maths very quick (teacher gave me the calculation/maths books at age 8 and year later all material up to the age of 12 was done).

Your ability to learn is much better than your teacher ability to teach. That's all.

yusuf_prasojo

Oct 11, 2011

0

#30

davidegpc wrote:

I like chess, not because I have a talent, otherwise I would be a GM by now, and I'm willing to spend 200 hours behind it, but I don't care a little bit about music, is boring for me to learn how to play an instrument, so yes, you can spend the next 200 hours trying to teach me how to play the violin, and I will stop right away, because I don't give crap about playing a violin. Is it talent? NO, I just don't care about it.

Oh my, what have you been through?

raul72

Oct 11, 2011

0

#31

I am curious about this talent thing and Fischer. When Fischer first discovered chess at 6 did he exhibit any talent. What about 7---did he show any talent. What about when he was 8 and his mother took him to a Max Pavey simul---he lost in a very few minutes---he cried and got his picture in the Brooklyn Eagle. The kid is studying and playing ten hours a day and whether the kid is talented or not---it aint showing up in his play. When he was nine did he display any talent---no. What about ten (by the way he was receiving Russian chess literature when he was 10) did he show any talent---no.

Fischer says when he was 11 or 12 he just got good. His rating was around 1700. He was playing in local tournaments and not doing that great. where was the talent. where was the fruition of all that hard work? At 11 yrs of age how close was he to that magic 10,000 hour mark ?

Did talent one day knock on his door and say knock, knock, knock---here I am! Grab that chessoard and follow me boy---I'm gonna make you a star---bright lights, Hollywood, fame, money, GIRLS.

yusuf_prasojo

Oct 11, 2011

0

#32

raul72 wrote:I am curious about this talent thing and Fischer

If you want to ask question, you should be sincere, because otherwise you won't realize if you get the answer or not.

raul72 wrote:When Fischer first discovered chess at 6 did he exhibit any talent. What about 7---did he show any talent. What about when he was 8 and his mother took him to a Max Pavey simul---he lost in a very few minutes---he cried and got his picture in the Brooklyn Eagle. The kid is studying and playing ten hours a day and whether the kid is talented or not---it aint showing up in his play. When he was nine did he display any talent---no.

To me he clearly showed that he has talent. You cannot just pretend that you have talent. Talented people know who they are. The kid really knew who he was and what he could achieve.

blake78613

Oct 11, 2011

0

#33

GabrielBedard wrote:

i've once read that Fischer was an Aspergian ; that explain his infinite passion for Chess! I wonder if theres any other GM who have the Asperger's syndrome?

I think there is a good chance that Akiba Rubinstein had it.

Michael355

Oct 11, 2011

0

#34

it's foolish to spend all your time on chess just to prove to others you are smart

raul72

Oct 11, 2011

0

#35

yusuf_prasojo wrote:

raul72 wrote:I am curious about this talent thing and Fischer

If you want to ask question, you should be sincere, because otherwise you won't realize if you get the answer or not.

raul72 wrote:When Fischer first discovered chess at 6 did he exhibit any talent. What about 7---did he show any talent. What about when he was 8 and his mother took him to a Max Pavey simul---he lost in a very few minutes---he cried and got his picture in the Brooklyn Eagle. The kid is studying and playing ten hours a day and whether the kid is talented or not---it aint showing up in his play. When he was nine did he display any talent---no.

To me he clearly showed that he has talent. You cannot just pretend that you have talent. Talented people know who they are. The kid really knew who he was and what he could achieve.

Yusuf I have a question for you---what is talent and how do you show you have talent? Maybe it is just hard work and love of chess that gets you to the top.

Yusuf how did Fischer show you he had talent at 6 or 7 or 8 0r 9 or 10 or 11 ? Describe how you knew he had talent. Please be sincere---nobody likes a smart a## !

bigpoison

Oct 11, 2011

0

#36

davidegpc wrote:

Reb wrote:

Tell me David , whats your problem ? Are you in Atlanta or Milan ? I mean really....

My problem is that I'm tired of people who continue to spread myths and fables like if they were true. So as you (but this is true also for others, so there is nothing personal in it) are never tired to spread them, I will never be tired to counter them with reason and skepticism, because I do want a better world for the new generations. A world not based on lies, but based on the search for the truth, against those who are 100% sure their side of the story is the only correct one, and nobody should ever challenge them.

Man! that was funny!

You're tired of lies, yet you assert talent is a myth. Thus, eye hand coordnation is equal among all; spatial reasoning equal among all; fast and slow twitch muscles equal among all; stamina and pain tolerance equal among all; ability to endure altitude equal among all. These are the building blocks of talent.

You and your Scottish cronie are the ones spreading the "anybody can acomplish anything if they just work hard enough" myth. Reb is articulating what he's seen as he's run this arduous race that is life. You're articulating "pie in the sky, this is how I think the world should work, therefore it does," nonsense.

Boxer got sent to the glue factory.

Michael355

Oct 11, 2011

0

#37

bigpoison wrote:

davidegpc wrote:

Reb wrote:

Tell me David , whats your problem ? Are you in Atlanta or Milan ? I mean really....

My problem is that I'm tired of people who continue to spread myths and fables like if they were true. So as you (but this is true also for others, so there is nothing personal in it) are never tired to spread them, I will never be tired to counter them with reason and skepticism, because I do want a better world for the new generations. A world not based on lies, but based on the search for the truth, against those who are 100% sure their side of the story is the only correct one, and nobody should ever challenge them.

Man! that was funny!

You're tired of lies, yet you assert talent is a myth. Thus, eye hand coordnation is equal among all; spatial reasoning equal among all; fast and slow twitch muscles equal among all; stamina and pain tolerance equal among all; ability to endure altitude equal among all. These are the building blocks of talent.

You and your Scottish cronie are the ones spreading the "anybody can acomplish anything if they just work hard enough" myth. Reb is articulating what he's seen as he's run this arduous race that is life. You're articulating "pie in the sky, this is how I think the world should work, therefore it does," nonsense.

Boxer got sent to the glue factory.

davidegpc is totally right, he has seen no Evidence of a "god given talent" and if there is any sort of talent, why by default assume it is from the fairy upstairs? what evidence you have of that? if you don't, you should not spread it around as a science fact.

bigpoison

Oct 11, 2011

0

#38

You never saw me reference a God. Where did that come from?

What's a "science fact" anyway?

I observe the world around me, I read what others nave observed, I listen to what folks have to say. From these sources I draw conclusions.

You all just make shit up.

Michael355

Oct 11, 2011

0

#39

bigpoison wrote:

You never saw me reference a God. Where did that come from?

What's a "science fact" anyway?

I observe the world around me, I read what others nave observed, I listen to what folks have to say. From these sources I draw conclusions.

You all just make shit up.

Maybe for your sake you should stop making conclusions (assumptions) for a while :) it's not helping you...

bigpoison

Oct 11, 2011

0

#40

Maybe...

I sure am wrong a lot!