The Next Step (For 2200+)

Of course this doesn't really apply to myself (yet :P)... but after reading How to Reassess Your Chess by IM Jeremy Silman, I was left with one (almost random) question.

What's the biggest difference between a NM (or other 'lower' master) and a GM/superGM?

I'd love to hear from some of the stronger chess.com-ers!

I'm not qualified to directly answer this question, but there is a good answer in Yermo's book...

I think that GMs have the better psychological skills to deal with many kinds of positions.  Many of them were born with an extraordinary ability.  They also have a tendency to be more open minded about certain positions.  This makes them more creative.

"A lot of the difference between an IM and GM is a seriousness to the game. The GM is willing to go through all this. He's willing to put up with anything. This shows his dedication. One other thing is the GMs superiority in tactics. For example Christiansen can find tactics in any position. If you're a GM you should be able to overpower the IM tactically. The GM will often blow out the IM in this area. "
-- Nick de FIRMIAN, in How To Get Better at Chess : Chess Masters on Their Art by GM Larry Evans, IM Jeremy B Silman and Betty Roberts

I will use an analogy. A lower master is like a shark. A GM is like a shark with a freakin' laser beam attached. Check out the game I posted :)

Haha Mavros you found me!  There goes all my in depth opening theory *deletes blogs :P*

That was a decent game ... but had nothing to do with the master analogy :).  'lazer beams' :P.

Alright back to my endgame study!

-matt

study (heap of it) thiers own games and others and tactics lots of them  as goldendog said.