how to not get so mad?

True - the Polgar sisters are all related.... and true --- neurons matter, etc. i guess i'm trying to state my case that study really, really matters. it infuriates me how many players just bemoan the mistakes they make, yet won't put in the time (hours a day) to improve. No, not everyone, or not many, can become GM's. but i think MOST can become A level, including C and D level players who have never really put in the hours. Uh, ok, that might include moi. And I think if Polgar had adopted some kid at an early age, if the kid was of at least above average intelligence, he/she would've become a Master level fairly easily. And I think HOW to study chess, to maximize your time and effort, is at least as mysterious as chess itself. I think a lot has to do with building that pattern recognition in your noggin. I used to think it was actually trying to memorize those patterns, but I wonder if merely being exposed to those patterns over and over, with the right attitude, is the best.... By this I mean doing a certain amount of blitz and not spending a long time laboring over one problem, when one is stumped. I'm trying to spend not more than 5 minutes per tactical problem. I think some people feel less is even better, before giving up and just looking at the answer.

Personally I think that you should take chess a little bit more relaxedly, I mean routine is very stressing, why would you add something else?

My guess is that a person of average intelligence, if they apply themselves completely, can achieve a master title in their lifetime. This is similiar to what other people have said in regards to chess and intelligence.

Someone like me, who does well on IQ tests dealing with social intelligence, but possesses below average spatial intelligence, would be hard pressed to become expert level, regardless of the amount of practice. I'm horrible when it comes to dealing with objects in space. I get lost in my hometown all the time, even after years. I have trouble walking through narrow places without knocking something over. Yet I can take a wonderlic test and score 40+ because it's the type of intelligence I happen to possess.

Chess is not my thing. And it kills me because I really, really enjoy it. And I try very hard.

Besides his titanic driver distance the biggest reason Tiger Woods dominated golf in his early years was because he had trained himself to not get frustrated by bad holes, which happen in every round of golf. He was a master of blowing off steam at a hole he did poorly on and then going to the next hole as relaxed as he was at the start of play. Remember the only thing you control is your own reaction. Own it and move on.

<Rosenbalm> You have an online rating in the 1700s. You can't be all that bad. 

Thanks, I have gotten a little better. I probably should go back and play some blitz and live games to get my other ratings up (I haven't touched them since I was a beginner). But I'm nowhere near where I want to be, and considering the time I have invested into learning theory, I should be far better than I am. My goal is to reach expert level and I'm a long, long way from that right now. I would guess my chess ability is slightly above average compared to the general population, but it's considerably below average compared to everyone who takes chess as seriously as I do.

Had I been born with better mental faculties, I have no doubt I'd already be a grandmaster. I've already played over 250 games of online chess.

That's not true for two reasons. One you state yourself you've only played 250 games online. Compared to most master level players, that's just the beginning. Most of those games, I am guessing, were against weaker players where you didn't really learn much.

There have been studies that show that Intelligence is not nearly as important as practice. Meaning you need to play more. I'd suggest OTB tournaments as much as possible. If you really want to improve your chess.

Losing is bs especially when you lose to an inferior player. It makes me want to viciously beat that specific individual. On another note the en passant should be illegal  idc what you think that move is absolutely bs. 

If you never lose then one of these 3 applies:

-  You are playing opponents far below your own ability, which isn't really much of a challenge.

-  You are Magnus Carlsen. (But then he does sometimes lose)

-  You are cheating.

I wouldn't say this is entirly true

I usually lose but when I do win it's worth all those losses!

How not to get mad?...

Chess is metaphorical combat.  You'll be most effective if you think clearly and you can think most clearly if you don't fear losing.

I'ts only a game! Are you nuts?

yes

I see more experienced players refer to "Black moved" or White moved", not I moved. That might help,

Also, I think I don;t feel so bad when I lose to a computer. I am not ready to play against a person.

Grace Jones, cool.

WOW... We are really OLD!

That's OK.  -  99% of music today is CRAP... derivative, homogeneous "pop-drivel".

I still love Grace. Sally Field is 70 years old

Yeah, she was so cute. 

Still talented, still working. Oscar nomination for Lincoln a couple of years ago and appearing on Broadway next month in a revival of The Glass Menagerie.

Oh come on guys...this is the 21st