What chess books/study tactics can bring a 1300 elo player to IM level in 4-5 years?

I'm not exactly sure....but I think it refers to pieces with limited mobility. In the firts page of Jesus de la Villa's book it shows the worst places for pieces. Like the knight on g2 because it has very few places to go. They call it the "dumb square."

Reaching 2300+ is entirely doable, with enough effort and instruction, but expecting it to happen in 5 years or less is asking a lot.

7 to 8 years is more reasonable.

You will need more than just some books. Set a more realistic goal first in my opinion.

I am afraid that's not how it works. All GMs have studied for countless hours. That doesn't mean that everyone who studies 10000 hours will become GM. It depends on several factors. Age is one of them. If you were 6 years you might have a chance. At age 13 reaching 1800-2200 seems to be a more realistic goal to aim at.

I wanna shoot for that first and then maybe get to 2300-2400. I'm 1300 elo right now, and I learned when I was 7-8 years old. I was the best at my school but I didn't compete and I only played casually....but now I'm hoping I can get back into studying really hard and hopefully become a WGM by the time I'm 18...crossing my fingers and hoping its possible 😅

That's not really true unfortunately.

Here's another one: 

Certainly. I think chess as a subculture has many easy parallels with boxing, which I didn’t expect at the time. Boxing is full of obsessives, full of prodigies, who either develop into what their potential was or get derailed.

Boxing is a world where you’re either rich or need a second or third job, and I think that’s even more extreme in chess. There’s a lot of poverty, despite people being extraordinarily talented at other things. I’ve met a lot of people who’ve had PhDs and very marketable skills, who threw away their livelihoods and their families because of how addictive chess was.

I think obsession, addiction, compulsive people [are common]. Like boxing, at times, it is elevated beyond just being about sport. It’s drawn in so many big literary powerhouses to take it on — there’s something so primal about it. Chess is something like that too.

https://www.the42.ie/the-grandmaster-book-magnus-carlsen-4413190-Dec2018/

People like Kasparov and Susan Polgar are just liars about chess. They can't do anything else in life so they push chess. They push their own game. The studies aren't reliable and some find no difference or players doing worse with chess, but they ignore those studies. I think chess is a nice game and it's great to play but you shouldn't take it too seriously. Fischer ended up hating the game altogether.  

You shouldn't really do anything for other people (like to make your family proud), you should do it for yourself. But if you were going to do something to make others proud of you, have it be something beneficial for the world.  

Let's say you spent all that time reading books instead. You would likely learn a lot about the world. When you play chess you don't do that. 

Even if you do win a title, what good is that? You'll have sacrificed many hours for a silly title and for what, so other chess players will see you and think "she's good at chess"? Unless you were able to get big on twitch or something, but you have to carefully consider what you're doing. There are 3,800 active IMs in the world (I looked it up), so out of millions of chess players, it would take something special.  

There should be a law against playing too much chess or any similar pursuit as it's not healthy to spend so much time on it. Besides, what's the point if it's just a case of the more hours you put into it the better you get? Don't let your ego and ideals of chess get in the way of your real life. Quiz players also sometimes go down a crazy route, wasting their life on stupid quizzes, so they can look smart, of course they will never admit it. It's just so ridiculous.  

Well, best of luck then.

Maybe on chess.com, but 2000 chess.com blitz is a lot different than 2000 USCF

Only one way to find out .

Best of luck and dont let yourself get discouraged by anyone. 

Thank you all for your input. Looks like I have a lot to think about now. I guess it was a little too ambitious to think I could get there in 4 years. It could take much more than that. I don't plan to make chess my entire life or become the best player in the world, but I like playing alot and I am going to a prestigious highschool soon and after that I have a good chance of going to an ivy league college, but of course I'm not sure I have time to study for both school AND chess. I might have to give one up. I want to play for an Ivy league chess team and travel the country to play and meet new people, but I'm not sure that attempting to give all my time to a title might not even be worth it any more....especially since it may affect my school life. Anyways, thanks again for everyones thoughtful answers. I'll take them into consideration and think about what I want to do from here ☺

I read a chess book the other day by Mark Dvoretsky....it said his methods could bring a 2200 elo player to 2500 in 4 years....could his methods bring someone like me from 1300 to 2200 in 4 years? I mean, it would certainly be easier to go from 1300-2200 than 2200-2500....just an idea. I want to be realistic, but I also am a little hesitant to give up on my chess dreams so quickly😅 Because every day that passes without me studying is a day that takes me further from my goals, and I want to study, but not if my goals are impossible. I've been tested with an IQ if 135, which I guess isnt very impressive compared to some of the chess geniuses nowadays, but it makes me just slightly better than the average 115 and maybe that gives me a chance to pick up tactics quicker than the average person. Maybe, maybe not. I have a lot to think about now unfortunately...

If you enjoy chess, then play it and study it. 1300 to 2200 in 4 years is probably quite possible with hard work.

Most everybody is explaining that goal is not feasible, but only a very few comments about how to go about getting seriously better.

My only two cents is this: set intermediate goals (this is true of life in general: yes, you might have a goal of a Ph.D, but you need a HS degree first, then a bachelors, etc.).  Have your first goal to reach 1400.  Then set a goal of 1600.  Etc.  Each time you reach a new goal, evaluate and see if it's worth it, how much fun your having, where you're at in life, etc.

As to *how* to get there . . . it seems to me that playing experience with longer games and then going over your games with analysis would be the top two items.  It's easier to remember an opening line when you actually play it, make a mistake, and learn from it.  Same thing with an endgame.  And middle game.  But, I'll leave that particular advice to those much better than I !

Books I read/am reading: (no opinion about them): all of them are quite good: -My 60 memorable games -Play like a grandmaster -My great Predecessors -Mastering chess strategy -Secrets of modern chess strategy -Silman's complete endgame course -Fire on board -Pump up your rating -Dvoretsky's endgame manual -the woodpecker method -forcing chess moves -life and games of Mikhail Tal -new art of defense in chess --Mastering chess strategy

I'll just say that you might become better than you think if you put in the work, learn from your mistakes and most of all keep genuinely enjoying the game. As for the indicated years, I wouldn't focus on that too much because it could add unnecessary pressure; I was in the 1800-2000 FIDE range for literally 10(!) years before crossing the 2000 FIDE threshold just two months shy of my 25th birthday, and before my 26th birthday I was 'already' 2117 FIDE. I was actually taking it easier in terms of studying, and it randomly clicked one day so yeah my advice would be not too focus too much on stuff like ''within x years''.

Based on your age, your enthusiasm and my own rating progress chart (from age 14 till 24 below 2000, now at 26 sometimes drawing IMs and beating FMs in classical OTB games) I'll say that yes you can definitely become a WGM.

hi

I'm surprised that no on seems to have answered your question about books and resources.  I wish I had practiced what I preach, and worked my way through all these, but here are some obvious ones that I found helpful every time I invested the time to use them:

From complete novice to strong tournament player (heavy focus on tactics).

These books are immediately accessible, and provide great PRACTICE of the ideas they preach (without which it's basically a waste of time to read chess books).

1) 5334 Problems, Combinations and Games by Lazlo Polgar. Available on e.g. amazon here.

2) Chess Tactics for Champions: A step-by-step guide to using tactics and combinations the Polgar way by Susan Polgar (basically a lightweight intro the massive tome above) available here.

3) Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess by Bobby Fischer available here. 

4) Chess Fundamentals by Jose Capablanca available here.

5) The Game of Chess by Siegbert Tarrasch, Algebraic Notation Edition available here. 

To go from proficient to expert (includes more on strategy):

These books are generally a bit harder to understand, but still not completely inscrutable.

1) How to Reassess Your Chess by Jeremy Silman available here. Companion workbook available here.

2) The Polgar Method (extended course) available e.g. here.

3) Silman's Complete Endgame Course by Jeremy Silman available here. 

4) 1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations by Fred Reinfeld available here.

Btw none of these is an opening book, and that's because I have never found a book that helped me understand openings very clearly. Most just list lots and lots of lines, but assume you will understand why some of those lines are "obviously superior" etc. l can't really see why the obviously better lines are better and when I play according to the book, I don't get better results with "obviously better" lines. If someone else has a great openings book, that actually explains why some openings are better and maybe how to act on that "better" I'd love to read it.

And for inspiration:

1) Documentary Film:  The Life and Chess of Judit Polgar available here.

If you noticed the name Polgar re-occurring above it's not an accident. In my opinon Lazlo Polgar is the greatest chess teacher of all time and the 3 remarkable Polgar sisters (his daughters) are the best evidence of his teaching method.  

Thank you all again very much. I still have much to think about since the answers are very different. My main problem is that I have the enthusiasm and passion, but I put so much pressure on myself that my studying always becomes work. I want a job in highschool to help my family out, and I also need to join multiple extracurricular activities/school societies to help with my college application in the future, and I cant possibly do them all along with studying chess for 30+ hours a week, the hours I would need to become a WGM. I hope a solution to my time management problems presents itself along the way soon....

in 5 years i will become 100 rated