what?? You can learn at whatever age you are!! Generally, the older you are, more you have studied and learned!! Take any great thinker of mankind, the older they get, the smarter they get!!! There isnt an age when you start to get dumber! please.....
Well definetelly in elderly years people lose memory, but besides that... it's just crap
(that was a reply to jvanhine)
Originally posted by Red Nightyes.... and 40years old nobel prize winner Einstein was dumber than 30 years einstein....
Einstein did most of his work before the age of 30.
At 30, Mozart was dead.
just like 30 years world champ Capablanca was dumber than 20 years old capa...
and what's the deal with mozart death? lol
Originally posted by ih8sensWell I am 49 and would love to belive that you were correct, but realistically it's just not, of course they will be exceptions as there always is in life, but children learn much faster than adults and also it's much more common at chess clubs for players in their 60's to be playing at a significantly lower level than when in their prime. It's not an easy concept to accept at my age, but it is reality. I am still improving because I am learning and therefore have not peaked yet, but my speed of improvement is likely to be much lower than someone below 18. I am teaching my 9 year old god daughter and at some point she will be a lot better than me I think, just not sure when, she opens the game well now but plays a poor middle and endgame, but that's probably down to my inadequte teaching than her learning ability.
So by the time i'm 30 i'll be lucky to be alive, let alone playing chess!
ahh it's all coming together now. 🙄
it's obvious you're under 30.
Originally posted by kmac27Just because a young kid is good doesn't mean he is going to be great. Look at Josh Waitzkin. Great as a young player but not a GM. Although IM is pretty good. I think being good more has to do with your work ethic and willingness to learn then age. The reason why we don't see many more old people bursting onto the chess scene may be because they don't want to spend 10 years trying to be good at something, where a kid can spend a few years and if it doesn't work out(Josh) can still move onto other things.
children are able to learn FASTER!!! It may take a year to go from 1500 to 1650 but a kid that is still developing their brain at such a fast pace could do that in less than half the time.
Your brain doesn't stop growing...geez. Hippocampal cells are continually made otherwise it would be pretty damn hard to form new memories. Maybe no new neurons are made but that is up top debate, but obviously they are not produced in the copious amounts that we all enjoy during growth spurts. Also, hitting your peak depends a lot more on psychological factors like motivation, will and the amount of effort you put into improving, along with physical exercise which increases the size and efficiency of neurons and neuronal communication. Don't sell yourself short, experience can often win out over talent, see Korchnoi. There are "average" people who have risen to world class status due to sheer determination and ambition, even without this "innate talent" that nobody can pindown but hold in such high regard. Talent is great but is absolutely nothing without the psychological aspects. Check into Jacob Aagaard and his studies into NLP which he claims catapulted him into a 2600 TPR for several tournaments until other matters interceded. Anyway, sorry for the ranting. Good day peeps
Just read some of the other posts, sorry if this was redundant😛
Originally posted by ih8sensYes, he wrote some of his best works at the age of 35. He was almost 36 when he started decomposing.
I should also add that Mozart was far from dead @ 35. In fact, if my history practice means anything he was still composing. He died of a severe fever (known as military fever I believe) @ the age of 35 in 1791. Correct me if i'm wrong....