- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by HFRorbisMight be of intrest to you, although personally I think he has his head stuck where the sun dont shine.
Is being a chess master (over 2000) a matter of gift or a matter of work/training ?
The more you train the stronger you are , is that true ?
Otherwise no matter how hard you train you will never get over 2000 elo because being good at chess is a matter of gift ,true or not ?
What do you think ? (jokes apart)
http://www.jlevitt.dircon.co.uk/iq.htm
Originally posted by Bedlam"Everybody was fairly impressed by this quick and crafty answer and the conversation moved on"
Might be of intrest to you, although personally I think he has his head stuck where the sun dont shine.
http://www.jlevitt.dircon.co.uk/iq.htm
eh, what a bunch of dumbasses if that impressed them. 😀 (I doubt it did...)
talking with an iq-believer is like talking with a religious fanatic. no matter how dubious the concept of iq is shown to be, how impossible to measure something which cannot even be defined properly, still nothing leaves a dent into an iq-believer's armour.
talking with an iq-believer is like talking with a religious fanatic. no matter how dubious the concept of iq is shown to be, how impossible to measure something which cannot even be defined properly, still nothing leaves a dent into an iq-believer's armour.[/b]The concept of intelligence has been shown to be dubious? When, and by who? Are you saying there is no such thing?
Wow.
1 edit
Originally posted by RahimKGood question. When Oppenheimer was 15 years old, he played against the great Gyula Breyer in a simultaneous when Breyer was touring, so he obviously had an avid interest in chess at an early age. He played against Albert Einstein in a Harvard chess club tournament almost twenty years later, indicating a continual interest in the game.
How do I know he actually studied chess? I mean truly studied chess??
But you're right, we don't know how much he really studied or applied himself, but he did play chess throughout his life, and totally sucked at it. The two games mentioned are available on the net, if you want to look them up. Oppenheimer played as badly at 35 as he did at 15.
Originally posted by General PutzerPlaying chess is one thing. You can play chess and not make any real progress. That I agree with. You see a lot of people playing thousands of online game, blitz etc... and never get better.
Good question. When Oppenheimer was 15 years old, he played against the great Gyula Breyer in a simultaneous when Breyer was touring, so he obviously had an avid interest in chess at an early age. He played against Albert Einstein in a Harvard chess club tournament almost twenty years later, indicating a continual interest in the game.
But yo ...[text shortened]... le on the net, if you want to look them up. Oppenheimer played as badly at 35 as he did at 15.
But if you truly study the game, and you can't get over 1200 then you have a serious problem. So if someone tells me that they studied chess but can't break the 1200 mark, I won't believe them. Unless they have some kind of disorder. Even then it depends. I know 1 person at our chess club with a mental disorder and he's at 1300, he gets lessons now and then and has memory problems along with some other stuff. I only played him twice but I heard he has other problems also.
Originally posted by RahimKI was thinking to do a joke about this post , but it wouldn't be political correct ! 🙁
Playing chess is one thing. You can play chess and not make any real progress. That I agree with. You see a lot of people playing thousands of online game, blitz etc... and never get better.
But if you truly study the game, and you can't get over 1200 then you have a serious problem. So if someone tells me that they studied chess but can't break the 1200 ...[text shortened]... along with some other stuff. I only played him twice but I heard he has other problems also.
Originally posted by RahimKSome players can truly study the game and train for years everyday, and yet they won't reach 2000 elo.
Playing chess is one thing. You can play chess and not make any real progress. That I agree with. You see a lot of people playing thousands of online game, blitz etc... and never get better.
But if you truly study the game, and you can't get over 1200 then you have a serious problem. So if someone tells me that they studied chess but can't break the 1200 ...[text shortened]... along with some other stuff. I only played him twice but I heard he has other problems also.
Why ?
Of course 1200 elo is that low that anybody can reach it and overcome owing to a a good training.
my question is,
is anybody (anyone who is mentally normal) able to reach 2000 elo without this gift that some seem to have but with a lot of hard work/training ?
Is there a elo limit for us non gifted players ?
Originally posted by wormwoodHow do you tknow hat hard work wins talent every time ?
I believe hard work wins talent every time. nobody ever got good without an incredible amount of work. no matter how talented. [...]seirawan's "winning chess openings" has some hilarious anecdotes about his own struggle as a starting player. it's clear that he was just as bad as anybody when starting, and now he's one of the world's top GM's.
[...]
I know quite a lot of players who have been playing chess for dozens years and study really hard , and yet they still haven't reached 2000 elo.
I think that there are some brain skills (good memory,spatial skills,logic) involved when playing chess,and those who are gifted at chess use them well while the non-gifted players lack a good use of these skills.
Originally posted by KnightloreHow is it relevant for the topic ?
Can't be bothered to look up the exact quote but Botvinnik once said of Reshevsky that he was the most talented player in the world but didn't work hard, Botvinnik did and therefore was world champ.
Could you expand ?