To Become A Master!?!?!?! - Chess Forums - Page 3

damiencalloway

Mar 15, 2009

0

#41

k, could not find the Lasker book - but I did come across some websites that may be of interest, if all the OP is looking for is a structure to learn/improve with :

http://www.iamcoach.com/chess/chessexam.htm - this site has two self published self assesment books by a GM out of Pennsylvannia - I plan to check this out as soon as I can, myself.

http://www.chessmasterschool.com/ - I stumbled across this in my search for a chess course; the OP may actually benefit more from this than I can. Claims to give you a structured learning path to mastership in 13 months; they say you will have all of the information you need to reach your goal...

The OP may also find the two middlegame books I have to be of interest (I am too weak to use them yet - but I am not giving them away or selling them...)

"Practical Middlegame Tips" by Edgar Mednis

"Chess Middlegames : Essential Knowledge" by Yuri Averbakh

As for me ? Tactics, tactics, tactics ! Will likely be a couple of months minimum before I am able to check out the two links at the top. At any rate, this is a really cool thread - lots of nice info - hopefully I added to the discussion !

Kupov

Mar 15, 2009

0

#42

Reb wrote:

I dont think through just hard work alone you can reach GM status. If you dont have some talent/ability you can only reach a certain level through work alone and I think that level will be below GM level. Fischer was asked about this, he was asked could a person become a "great" player through hard work alone and he said no , he didnt believe so. Unfortunately , neither the questioner, nor Fischer, defined "great".

Fischer said that a player with no real talent could be good, but not great. He expounded on this by saying that "a number of the top players, I don't think are that talented, they just work like dogs", so Fischer clearly believed that GM level was obtainable through hard work alone.

BenWilliamson

Mar 30, 2009

0

#43

Kupov wrote:

Reb wrote:

I dont think through just hard work alone you can reach GM status. If you dont have some talent/ability you can only reach a certain level through work alone and I think that level will be below GM level. Fischer was asked about this, he was asked could a person become a "great" player through hard work alone and he said no , he didnt believe so. Unfortunately , neither the questioner, nor Fischer, defined "great".

Fischer said that a player with no real talent could be good, but not great. He expounded on this by saying that "a number of the top players, I don't think are that talented, they just work like dogs", so Fischer clearly believed that GM level was obtainable through hard work alone.

There's no way you can make that claim. What are Fischer's standards for someone being "that talented"? No way to tell, but it seems just plain silly to think that someone with no aptitude for chess could earn the grandmaster title. Even if that is what Fischer meant to say, why do we think Fischer, someone who was insanely talented, would have the slightest clue as to how hard someone with no talent would need to work to become a GM? It's ironic that he would know the least about this.

Let's be serious here. There is no patented program to becoming a GM, where if you just go to 'x' chess school for 'y' years, you will have all the skills you need to earn the grandmaster norms. A lot has to come together, not just talent and effort.

You can improve and you can enjoy the game and that is all that effort can promise.

urk

Mar 29, 2017

0

#44

Nothing happening here.

ed1975

Mar 29, 2017

0

#45

So why dig it up?

urk

Mar 29, 2017

0

#46

Reading these misconceptions and training programs is interesting.

Anybody can do it, probably even GM
blah, blah

Do a billion tactics puzzles
blah, blah

Read Jeremy Silman
blah, blah

The 10,000 hour rule
blah, blah

And yet years later ....nothing.

I've seen one old topic where the poster actually did achieve his goal.