No way you were talented or a prodigy if you are still this low rated.
[DELETED]
Sort:
You coulda been a contenda.
Insanistis wrote:
No way you were talented or a prodigy if you are still this low rated.
I quit all chess learning, forgot about it, rarely played the game until I turned 13 which is when I joined this site. Even then it's been very on-and-off.
I don't think I had it to become a world-class player or anything close to the 2500 mark, though I think I had some exceptional talent.
@Malmberg
What does exceptional talent means by your definition?
It depends on what are the facts. Is it normal that a kid who plays chess with his grandfather and random strangers gets to 1200 ELO by the age of 7? I wasn't taught anything else than the basic rules, and the only book I had was Daniel King's "Chess: Moves, Games, Masters" which provided a basis for my knowledge of chess.
If it isn't normal, then I would define it exceptional. If it is normal, then I have learned more about myself.
MMalmberg wrote:
It depends on what are the facts. Is it normal that a kid who plays chess with his grandfather and random strangers gets to 1200 ELO by the age of 7? I wasn't taught anything else than the basic rules, and the only book I had was Daniel King's "Chess: Moves, Games, Masters" which provided a basis for my knowledge of chess.
If it isn't normal, then I would define it exceptional. If it is normal, then I have learned more about myself.
I would call this raw talent, you can develop further by exercise. Yet, you didn't do this and I guess you're still stuck slighty above your level back then.
Thanks for clarifying that.
The term 'raw talent' intrigues me. Does everyone have a raw talent at some certain subject, or does the 'raw talent' (or rather, potential) develop at a very young age if exposed to some certain subject, say, chess? Obviously raw talent also has to be complemented by exceptional mental capacities that allow one to acquire more information in a short amount of time. And it obviously requires devotion.
Can I still develop my raw talent at the age of 16, or does it fade over time?
Clarify. 
Yes you have a chance to be a competitive player. But if you're worried about losing then you're going to have problems in any competition.
If you really have something, you should be at least a FIDE Master by now. But don't worry, there is still time. I think you can be an IM or a GM in 5 years, if you really have it.
Of course you could have been a prodagy, so could I... If i was any good it and was playing since i was 3.
do you really still think that the man was playing to the best of his abilaty?
[COMMENT DELETED]