What do you think the average person's limit is?

Around 1200 is my guess

average limit if they do nothing prob around 1000-1200 just by playing games and nothing else

Any person can reach 2000, but not without hard & smart work.

does age also effect it? I am 13 and surely I would have more potenitial than an 70 yr old

"does age also effect it?" ++ Yes. Any person can reach 2000, but to reach 2100, 2200, 2300, 2400, 2500, 2600, 2700, 2800, 2900 you have to start younger and younger.

"I am 13 and surely I would have more potential than an 70 yr old" ++ Yes the potential is higher at 13 than at 70, but even at 70 it is possible to reach 2000, but probably no more. at 13 you certainly have potential above 2000, but to realise your full potential needs hard and smart work, dedication and persistence.

okay

The average person's limit is extremely high, probably some master level. But alas the average person won't put in nearly enough work to realize this potential, for obvious reasons.

Clearly there is a huge difference between not studying at all (which is typical), or studying one hour per week, or studying one hour per day, or studying six hours per day.

The last option is clearly impossible for the average person, and the penultimate one is close to impossible.

With proper teaching and enough money to quit their daytime job I think more than 50% on this site would be capable of reaching 1800 within five years.

Among the general population there's just so many things that prevents people, there's around 15-20% that lack the logical thinking to get good, a huge amount of people above the age of 50 would have a really difficult time getting good. That doesn't mean that you can't get good, its just that most people just can't do it.

I think that 1800 (ELO) is a very key grade. The majority of players could achieve that with serious study (a million games of blitz doesn't qualify) but beyond that, the game changes to a whole new level that I think is restricted to those with a gift for the game.

@RING can we play?

@12

"With proper teaching" ++ unnecessary, a few books suffice.
'Chess cannot be taught. Chess can only be learned.' - Botvinnik

"enough money" ++ Not necessary, chess is cheaper than tennis etc.

"to quit their daytime job" ++ Not necessary. But 1-2 h every day...

"I think more than 50% on this site would be capable of reaching 1800 within five years."
++ That is unambitious. All can reach 2000 in 1 year, but with hard and smart work. 1-2 h / day.

"Among the general population there's just so many things that prevents people"
++ Yes, lack of persistence, unability to cope with drawbacks, lazyness, straying on false paths

"there's around 15-20% that lack the logical thinking to get good" ++ No.

"a huge amount of people above the age of 50 would have a really difficult time getting good" ++ Yes, but difficult is not impossible.

"most people just can't do it" ++ Most people can, but will not.

rapid?

ust let me finish this game

@14

"The majority of players could achieve that with serious study" ++ Yes.

"a million games of blitz doesn't qualify" ++ Indeed.

"a whole new level that I think is restricted to those with a gift for the game"
++ No. 'I have only one talent: a talent for hard work' - Kasparov

If you can get to 1365 without any study, then reaching 2000 is perfectly reasonable if you were to work hard at it and to use study methods that worked for YOU.

I do not know how accurate this is, but I have heard that a persons IQ (intelligence quotient) has a fairly direct relation to a persons maximum capability with lots of hard work. This formula has been used for that.

Elo =(10 x IQ) + 1000.

If the average persons IQ is 100, then, according to this theory, Elo = (10 x (100)) + 1000 So, Elo=2000. This would be the average persons maximum elo, which seems consistent to the guesses here.

Hope this helps!