7 ms·

What makes it even harder is that chess elo is a zero sum game. You not only have to reach a certain level of skill, you have to be better than other people and

What makes it even harder is that chess elo is a zero sum game. You not only have to reach a certain level of skill, you have to be better than other people and beat them. Those other people have also been training for 10 years since they were four years old. There has never been a person who became a GM who started chess older than 17; other than him it's almost exclusively under 14. If you aren't top 5% (~1900 FIDE) within the first year of starting to play, you don't have the talent. I cannot stress enough how impossible it is for anyone as a late teen or older to decide to become a GM. It has never happened. You might as well be 22 and decide you're going to start training for the olympic ice skating team. It's just not going to happen.

bjourne 5y ago
A Croatian player named Stjepan Tomic is trying to do exactly what you are claiming is impossible: https://www.youtube.com/c/HangingPawns/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/HangingPawns/videos The odds are clearly against him, but we'll see how it goes.
- blindmute 5y ago
  I know, I watch his channel a lot. He has been training hard for three years and is still only 19XX elo. He doesn't have a chance. He may get a FM title eventually though.
  - bambax 5y ago
    I just watched his most recent game (153) where he makes a mistake he says he "can't explain" (starting at 18 minutes) and that after having made it he immediately resigned (apparently not even waiting for his opponent to play). He also says at other moments in the video that he was "terrified" of this or that. Isn't it possible that superior players simply have "better nerves" and self-confidence that let them stay calm in stressful situations, and avoid mistakes that other players make sooner or later?
    - bsder 5y ago
      > and that after having made it he immediately resigned This is an absolute mistake and is a bigger reason that he won't become a GM than his age. Most chess players should NEVER resign. Ever. I mean it. 1) Chess below grandmaster is a game of mistakes. It's actually one of the things I hate about chess and why I don't regard it as so much of an intellectual pursuit as people think. You can be playing an amazing game and then suddenly one thing you missed will kill you. GM Ben Feingold has a great quote (paraphrased): "The reason why you are rated 1900 is that you will play a bunch of moves, finally hang a piece and I will beat you. The reason why I am rated 2400 is that Magnus will play 80 moves that are all slightly better than mine and I will lose." 2) Your opponent has to be able to capitalize on the mistake If you hang a piece, the opponent cannot disregard the fact that it is a trap. At 1400, it's probably a hung piece. At 1900 it has a 40/60 chance of being a trap. At 2100, it has a 60/40 chance of being a trap. Your opponent doesn't know you made a mistake so don't tell them. Pull out your poker face and play on. I have won countless games that I should have lost because of this. 3) Playing down a piece actually makes you a stronger player Okay, you're down a piece. Are you just going to sit there and lose? You might as well try something first. Maybe there's a positional upside, maybe the defense got weakened, etc. Sure, you're normally going to lose. However, being down a piece has a way of knocking you out of your normal play style. 4) Being unable to convert an advantage makes the opponent frustrated The number of people who get complacent after taking a piece is quite large. Lots of people lose after being up a piece because they let down their guard. And then they lose. And there is nothing more frustrating than being up a piece and playing someone who is mounting an excellent defense. Your instincts are screaming that you shouldn't be having to put in this much effort and you have to resist them. 5) People play computers so often that they forget that playing a human is a completely different game People get tired. People get frustrated. People get inattentive. People want to go home already. All of these things can lead to mistake. Below Grandmaster, chess victories generally go the person who makes the second to last mistake. You're always the last mistake if you resign. Never resign.
Lordarminius 5y ago
> I cannot stress enough how impossible it is for anyone as a late teen or older to decide to become a GM. It has never happened. I have been a serious chess amateur for the past 20 years. I am now stronger than I ever have been (mainly because access to training materials has improved greatly in that time), I have no doubt that I could improve more if I devoted time and effort into more focused training like I have done during competitions. I know one or two people like me. I think the thing stopping me and the other people I mention from climbing the Elo ladder is lack of interest and motivation, not ability. You develop different vistas concerns and interests at 35 to 40 than you did at 12 to 20 My point is that with time, it is possible to improve and stating categorically that because no late teenager has ever become a grandmaster, none will sounds wrong. At one time we believed that ladies couldn't become grandmasters, the chinese could not beat westerners, grandmasters could not be minted before the age of 15 etc.
- ZephyrBlu 5y ago
  Unless we reach a truly post-scarcity society where people don't have to work, I doubt that someone who has picked up chess as an adult will be able to become a GM.
t0mbstone 5y ago
Neural pathways have to be formed while the brain is still malleable
CydeWeys 5y ago
> What makes it even harder is that chess elo is a zero sum game. It's not zero-sum though, because as more Chess players enter the ranks the pie itself grows larger, meaning there will be more total players who can attain an Elo of 2,500+ and thus become a Grandmaster. Zero-sum typically means that the entire pool is of fixed size, but that's not the case here. I'd say that Chess is win-lose but not zero-sum.
ZephyrBlu 5y ago
> If you aren't top 5% (~1900 FIDE) within the first year of starting to play, you don't have the talent People will think this sounds insane, but it's so true. Honestly top 5% even sounds a bit low. Everything gets exponentially harder the higher up you get. If you're not dominating immediately you're quite literally never going to reach the very top (Like >0.1% kind of top). The caveat to this is that it's a year of dedicating yourself to the thing, not doing it on and off casually for a year.

bjourne 5y ago

A Croatian player named Stjepan Tomic is trying to do exactly what you are claiming is impossible: https://www.youtube.com/c/HangingPawns/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/HangingPawns/videos The odds are clearly against him, but we'll see how it goes.

blindmute 5y ago
I know, I watch his channel a lot. He has been training hard for three years and is still only 19XX elo. He doesn't have a chance. He may get a FM title eventually though.
- bambax 5y ago
  I just watched his most recent game (153) where he makes a mistake he says he "can't explain" (starting at 18 minutes) and that after having made it he immediately resigned (apparently not even waiting for his opponent to play). He also says at other moments in the video that he was "terrified" of this or that. Isn't it possible that superior players simply have "better nerves" and self-confidence that let them stay calm in stressful situations, and avoid mistakes that other players make sooner or later?
  - bsder 5y ago
    > and that after having made it he immediately resigned This is an absolute mistake and is a bigger reason that he won't become a GM than his age. Most chess players should NEVER resign. Ever. I mean it. 1) Chess below grandmaster is a game of mistakes. It's actually one of the things I hate about chess and why I don't regard it as so much of an intellectual pursuit as people think. You can be playing an amazing game and then suddenly one thing you missed will kill you. GM Ben Feingold has a great quote (paraphrased): "The reason why you are rated 1900 is that you will play a bunch of moves, finally hang a piece and I will beat you. The reason why I am rated 2400 is that Magnus will play 80 moves that are all slightly better than mine and I will lose." 2) Your opponent has to be able to capitalize on the mistake If you hang a piece, the opponent cannot disregard the fact that it is a trap. At 1400, it's probably a hung piece. At 1900 it has a 40/60 chance of being a trap. At 2100, it has a 60/40 chance of being a trap. Your opponent doesn't know you made a mistake so don't tell them. Pull out your poker face and play on. I have won countless games that I should have lost because of this. 3) Playing down a piece actually makes you a stronger player Okay, you're down a piece. Are you just going to sit there and lose? You might as well try something first. Maybe there's a positional upside, maybe the defense got weakened, etc. Sure, you're normally going to lose. However, being down a piece has a way of knocking you out of your normal play style. 4) Being unable to convert an advantage makes the opponent frustrated The number of people who get complacent after taking a piece is quite large. Lots of people lose after being up a piece because they let down their guard. And then they lose. And there is nothing more frustrating than being up a piece and playing someone who is mounting an excellent defense. Your instincts are screaming that you shouldn't be having to put in this much effort and you have to resist them. 5) People play computers so often that they forget that playing a human is a completely different game People get tired. People get frustrated. People get inattentive. People want to go home already. All of these things can lead to mistake. Below Grandmaster, chess victories generally go the person who makes the second to last mistake. You're always the last mistake if you resign. Never resign.

Lordarminius 5y ago

> I cannot stress enough how impossible it is for anyone as a late teen or older to decide to become a GM. It has never happened. I have been a serious chess amateur for the past 20 years. I am now stronger than I ever have been (mainly because access to training materials has improved greatly in that time), I have no doubt that I could improve more if I devoted time and effort into more focused training like I have done during competitions. I know one or two people like me. I think the thing stopping me and the other people I mention from climbing the Elo ladder is lack of interest and motivation, not ability. You develop different vistas concerns and interests at 35 to 40 than you did at 12 to 20 My point is that with time, it is possible to improve and stating categorically that because no late teenager has ever become a grandmaster, none will sounds wrong. At one time we believed that ladies couldn't become grandmasters, the chinese could not beat westerners, grandmasters could not be minted before the age of 15 etc.

ZephyrBlu 5y ago
Unless we reach a truly post-scarcity society where people don't have to work, I doubt that someone who has picked up chess as an adult will be able to become a GM.

t0mbstone 5y ago

Neural pathways have to be formed while the brain is still malleable

CydeWeys 5y ago

> What makes it even harder is that chess elo is a zero sum game. It's not zero-sum though, because as more Chess players enter the ranks the pie itself grows larger, meaning there will be more total players who can attain an Elo of 2,500+ and thus become a Grandmaster. Zero-sum typically means that the entire pool is of fixed size, but that's not the case here. I'd say that Chess is win-lose but not zero-sum.

ZephyrBlu 5y ago

> If you aren't top 5% (~1900 FIDE) within the first year of starting to play, you don't have the talent People will think this sounds insane, but it's so true. Honestly top 5% even sounds a bit low. Everything gets exponentially harder the higher up you get. If you're not dominating immediately you're quite literally never going to reach the very top (Like >0.1% kind of top). The caveat to this is that it's a year of dedicating yourself to the thing, not doing it on and off casually for a year.