What's the highest rating one can achieve without seriously studying?

nice one

11 and 1932 USCF?

I believe you, just impressed.

Do you ever...play chess naked?

This is false. I’ve reached 1775 and I have never studied or done analyses. I’ve done some chess puzzles here and there but they mostly bore me. I started playing regularly in 2016.

I do wonder how much further I could advance with study but I’m going to step back from the game to focus on other things for a while, I feel burnt out.

I am a 1930 rated player and I don't know any theory or a single opening. I use mainly my intuition and the basics principles (center, castle, space, color weakness etc.) . My understanding of the game (better positions) comes from just watching others play, especially GM tournaments. I can probably reach 2050 if I play more often but I would need to study the game to reach 2100 and more. 

you need to define what studying means because there is so much material available now outside book format, you can get pretty darn far without having read a chess book in your life. 

playing ,doing post-mortems on my rapid and long games with an engine, chesstempo tactics , having reference books for my openings and knowing them pretty well got me to 2000, my first chess book, silman's endgame guide and more of the same got me to 2100 ( i didnt even know what the opposition was prior to this), a lot of the same and skimming de la villa's 100 endgames got me to NM.

but seriously with a modicum of strategic choices you can cut back on even this minimalist framework, play simple naturalistic openings where normal moves get you acceptable positions, play for  decisive games that tend to be settled before endgames , be heavy on your tactical training , watch master games etc, and 2100-2200 FIDE is within reach if you are pretty talented. Maybe even a little higher.

its a bit of a stubborn achievement though, if you can improve this much as a chess "redneck" then you will be a forced to be reckoned with once you get the proper training to reach the next level. 

Without seriously studying, and just relying on casual study, reasonably about 2600. Beyond that takes actual serious study. 

Without any study: 1500
With 200 hours of study: 2000

About 1000 with no study and similarly un-skilled but vaguely competent opponents who can describe castling and en-passant correctly. The OP on the other hand already has a score of 15 in puzzle rush, which already represents some 'serious study.' What is 'casual study?' Watching that movie?

It is amazing how 8 year old topics like this are suddenly resurrected for no reason.

So a person could conceivably make GM without studying? That's news to me...

I am 1600 and studied a bit…

That would be news to me too.

I didn't say anything about becoming a GM, OR not studying. 

Without committing serious time to study? I'd say club player, at the highest.

Also: nobody is "good at chess naturally". Chess ability is not some magical power that's inherited through DNA.

It's an entirely learned skillset.

(Yes, some people are faster learners / more intuitive, but that's related to learning ability in general, and not chess-specific.)

It is very funny that someone just writes "USCF C class" and expects that people will know what the hell that is

In my estimation, roughly 90% of forum members have no idea. Most of us are not Americans, so why should we know, and even half of the Americans don't know because they are not USCF members.

Are you talented?

read silman's books to learn:

solve puzzles & take lessons to study;

you must train or you'll get destroyed.

I have never studied anything about chess, just turned 29 and been playing for 5+ years, I believe I have reached my peak rating in blitz at 2000, bullet 2100. So anything above that definitely need to study.