lol, I'm not asking for a title (not planning on ever getting one), but if someone gives me one, I'm not complaining
Why are people talking about getting a title when they're complete beginners?
Sort:
May 26, 2017
0
#43
Possibly of interest:
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/why-are-people-talking-about-getting-a-title-when-theyre-literally-a-beginner?page=2
Looks like I got more responses.
It seems like alot of you think that Talent is required. You need to remember what the question partains to... its about being a master. Lets say we only consider the IM and GM titles as a master. Then I do not think you need any talent at all to get there. But ofcourse you can get there faster if you do have talent for certain traits that good chess players like Carlsen, Naka, Caruana, So and all of them share. Otherwise ofcourse you can just get there with hard work. Maybe you will need more than 10000 hours sure. The arguement for 10000 hours of chess training and becoming a master vs 10000 hours of football training and becoming Messi is suspect because Messy could be a Carlsen in the chess world. And sure if you do not have talent and all kinds of other things going for you you will never get to Carlsen level no matter how hard you work, but you can definitely get to Master status. Also do not forget that the ability to work your butt off is also considered a talent. No point if having all the talent in the world if your not gona work on it.
Knowing something, understanding it and then being able to apply it are 3 very different things.
More on that on my Youtube Channel 
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwjjBT5pHEAaXl_hNblli1w
May 26, 2017
0
#45
I don't have time to read the whole thread, but I'm sure someone said it's human nature to dream big and see ourselves get great at something that interests us. I think when a lot of players get past amatuar and into intermediate they start to realize how big of a mountain it is to climb. I'm sure a lot of new players to the game think... I'm smart... how hard can it be, really? But when they get serious about the game they realize it's far from easy to improve a little, let alone a lot.
It makes no sense to be annoyed at the aspirations and dreams. How can you blame someone for wanting to be good? And how can you blame them for not knowing how much it takes when they are just starting out? Who has ever heard someone start something and say "You know what, this is fun! I really want to suck at it some day! I hope I never get good!" A world where no one ever saw the goal far away and dreamed for it would be a world where we wouldn't have shit. So I hope every 400 Elo player thinks about being a master or IM someday.
May 26, 2017
0
#47
If we are not born a virtuoso, we will never become one.
With hard work, we can only walk in their shoes.
Which is plenty reward in of itself.
May 26, 2017
0
#48
Problem is....
with chess
is the mentality to become the best, achieve a high rating,
as if there is something to prove.... "I am smarter than you"
Unfortunately, the vast majority of people lose sight...
it's a pastime;
meant to be just that, a way to enjoyably pass the time
May 26, 2017
0
#49
And here in lies the problem...
With Internet chess...
The anonymity -
Which self promotes cheating... all with a sole interest of one up man-ship.
May 26, 2017
0
#50
I believe ets are amoungst us and like to play chess.bigfoot too
In fact a chimpanzee (if trained) could probably achieve candidate mastery and would probably do great in titled tuesday if it operated with touchscreen.
Mabye the government should train 1 for 10000 hours and have it join the chessclub and give it an ipad for titled tuesday...
Iseriously believe it would work!!
May 26, 2017
0
#51
Nice profile MickenMD.
Enjoyed reading your history.
Yes... really. So few are real people.
Hard work is real
May 26, 2017
0
#52
No need to waste $ on training chimpanzees Amplepawn.
The ample amount of bot's here work for free !
May 26, 2017
0
#53
The playing field is not level when it concerns being at the very best.
Or close to it... the best 10 in the world in math, music or chess.
You are either born with it or not.
Study, hard work will get you close, but it can not replace the natural talent of savants.
May 26, 2017
0
#54
A 13 year old girl was just awarded a masters degree from University in upper level mathematics.
Anyone seriously think they can study for 10 years and understand mathematics what she just knows intuitively?
May 26, 2017
0
#55
MickinMD wrote:
The more of a newbie you are and the less experienced in life, the less you realize how much time and work goes into high achievement in many things. Yes you must have talent, but usually you must start young as well. In my case chemistry, where I am the equivalent of an IM at least, and piano, where I'm roughly a class B OTB player, are good examples.
I was heavily immersed in science beginning somewhere around age 3 by my father and uncles. By age 12 I wanted to be a chemist. When I graduated from high school I thought I knew 90% of all there was to know about chemistry - kind of like the member here who thinks a 1200 online rating makes you an expert. By my 2nd year of college at UMBC, I was doing theoretical research under a professor's grant. In my Senior Year I gave a talk on my research at the Annual Meeting of the American Chemical Society in Washington, D.C. I then got a full scholarship and teaching assistant to the graduate school in chemistry at IIT. Three years after graduating, I was chief chemist of process development for a subsidiary of Dow Chemical where I developed processes for manufacturing non-cancer causing materials for children's flame-proof clothing fibers and I had something to do with the fuel for the Tomahawk Cruise Missile.
How much of all there is to know about chemistry did I know at that point? About 10%. But when I was that egotistical high school kid, I wasn't yet standing on the shoulders of the giants of chemistry and physics and biology so I couldn't see far enough ahead to realize the great amount of learning I had yet to achieve before I could call myself a chemist.
When I began playing piano in my 50's, I began studying piano and within a couple years was granted a position studying under a great classical virtuosa, Frances Cheng-Koors, chairperson of the piano dept in the Adult Division of the World Class Peabody Institute of Johns Hopkins University. After more time I passed the two rigorous auditions to play in Peabody's ACE Recital - which is what I'm doing in my logo, playing Chopin's Prelude in E Minor directly from the music. In addition to piano lessons, I had to take courses in music theory, history, composition, improvisation, and performance technique.
BUT...I realized I wasn't all that. With the wisdom of age and knowing how far I had to go in chemistry, I could see how far beyond me the virtuosos, the Grandmasters of the piano are. When I saw people with virtually now musical skill or experience on American Idol claim, "I'm a musician," I just laughed in disgust. I am barely a musician myself. I've been among the best and there's a major difference. Here's me with the great Chinese piano virtuoso Lang Lang:
Now all you need to do is learn how to fabricate a decent tie knot!
Nah, you guys are all wrong. Some people's brains just need a little time to "learn how to learn", then their ratings will suddenly sky-rocket. I will write a de la Maza-esque book about becoming a master or higher soon when I get there.
alec5371 wrote:
FaceCrusher wrote:
. If you busted your ass you could do it in 2 or 3 years. Hell even sooner
Translation: Johnny Millennial is saying here I busted my ass at Chess for a few years so USCF CFC and Fide you guys all owe me a NM and IM title holding his hand out gimme now!
I don't even know what you're trying to say here. I don't think you do either.
May 26, 2017
0
#59
ProfessorPownall wrote:
No need to waste $ on training chimpanzees Amplepawn.
The ample amount of bot's here work for free !
The american government already wastes money on nasa and a bunch of other shit like building a newwall itd be better to prove monkeys can master chess too. at least itd be something cooler than the trillions of wasted dollars on cancer research , which is a joke in amerikka.
24 hours multiplied by about 417 days =10000 hours .
Goes to show us all ,how amazing chess study resources have improvement for todays youth.
Or the IM from india is probably an extraterrestrial like Nakamura.
Whats impressive about svenmagnus and spassky is that they are human players.
KARPOV KASPAROv yasser the schade twins jen and greg.= alien e.t.s and maurice ashley plays like a computer so i wonder if hes a ufo too?