Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 01 Mar '09 15:03
    Now is the time for my second SCHOLARLY post on chess.

    Chess GREATNESS cannot be taught or learned, you either are born with it or not. Now, for clarity, let me define “greatness” as the chess ELITE. I’m not talking about some 2300 ranked player (there is one on every street corner). I’m not talking about some 2500 GM (they are a dime a dozen). I’m TALKIN’ about the 2700+ player.

    FACT, there are only 30 players in the WORLD ranked above 2700

    http://ratings.fide.com/top.phtml

    FACT, if hard work, dedication and study ALONE were all it took to break the 2700 barrier, there‘d be MILLIONS of 2700 elite players. Heck, I WOULD BE ELITE. I have studied this great game longer than most of you have been ALIVE. (30+ years) .I submit to you that if you took 1 million children and had a dream team of teachers, all of history’s greatest players (Kasparov, Fischer, Anand, etc.) teach them for years upon years, NOT ONE OF them would break the 2700 mark. Statistically, this is as logical as “I think, therefore I am.

    So, what are the MAIN traits that make up an ELITE chess master? Hold on. Let me first preface my argument by illustrating the following. Let us use Athletic sports as an analogy. Not every one can become an NBA superstar. If you only grew to 5’5”, you will NEVER EVER EVER become an NBA superstar. If you are born without the use of your hands, you will NEVER EVER EVER become a superbowl MVP wide receiver. If you were born with gigantism and grew to 7’7”, forget the dream of being and NHL goalie…ain’t gonna happen. EVER!!! You can be dumb as a stump with the IQ of 90 and throw a 100mph fastball and sign with the Yankees and go on to fame and fortune because intelligence is not a prerequisite of being a sports HERO. See where I’m going? You must have been born with the PRIME REQUIREMENT to become ELITE at whatever it is you want to be elite at. What’s the prime requirement of being a supermodel? DUH--good looks. You are either born with it or not. Same with world class chess players. A red flag should go up when a 12 year old can become a GM. What does that say to the credibility of chess? It says that the standards are LOW. What’s next, a CAT being awarded GM status?

    FACT, the MAIN trait needed to become an elite player is a PHOTOGRAPHIC MEMORY. Computers are not smart. They don’t have a brain. The reason why computers are better than humans is that they draw NOT from knowledge, but from a massive database of moves/positions. That is how photographic memory works, like a computer….a database.

    http://www.exforsys.com/career-center/memory-skills/photographic-memory.html

    Of course, dedication to the GAME of chess is needed if you want to have the POTENTIAL to become ELITE, but dedication alone will not take you there. If you have the innate ability to draw upon your memory in the ways that 95% of the population simply cannot, if you possess desire and dedication, then and ONLY then can you break the fabled 2700 mark.

    Did you all know that if you took ANY dime-a-dozen GM in the chess world and sat them at some random game in progress they could look at the board and INSTANTANEOUSLY (I love that word, it contains all 5 vowels) comprehend the game and begin to play at their GM level. It’s all about them accessing their internal photographic database of positions.. It cannot be taught. They were BORN with it.

    I ALWAYS use the case of Josh Waitzkin as my whipping boy. Here is a kid who possessed every quality of being the next Bobby Fischer ( drawing a game at age 11 vs. Kasparov, won the U.S. Junior Chess championship 2 years in a row, defeating a titled MASTER at age 10, etc etc etc). But he never broke a PALTRY 2500 rating. WHY? Did he not study hard enough? HARDLY, he lived, ate, breathed chess.. Was he not smart enough? He was a chess GENIUS. Was he not schooled well enough? One word: Pandolfini. He hit his personal ceiling. He went as far as He could go. That was it. He lacked the photographic memory. His brain did not possess any more room to store chess information. Not his fault. He knew it and ADMITTED IT (The Art of Learning). Being one of the chess ELITE was not in the cards for him, hence his abandoning it in favor of martial arts.


    Now, if you choose to dispute this claim, I DEMAND you to cite your sources as I have. I deal only in facts and not theory or conjecture. So far, you all have made FOOLS of yourselves. I’m sick and tired of seeing crappy topics like “What is your favorite opening move?” or “Who is your favorite player?” Is everyone here 12 years old?

    SUBSTANCE, people, SUBSTANCE.
  2. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    01 Mar '09 15:06
    okay, you got to say your piece. now f off.
  3. Standard member ivan2908
    SelfProclaimedTitler
    01 Mar '09 15:17
    hahaha
  4. 01 Mar '09 15:44
    Dear cheater #1,

    I have read all of your forum posts here on RHP. At first I thought you were a somewhat deranged, perhaps even suffering from a bi polar disorder, personality. But as your forum posts continued I changed my opinion. You're not mad, but simply ignorant about chess. There is not one word that you have posted that comes even close to teaching about chess. I think I have finally figured it out. You are not a cheat at chess, but just a cheat. Proclaiming false information about who you are and what you have done, for reasons beyond me.

    I truly wish you a life. That's all. Not succes, good luck or best regards, but just simply a LIFE.

    Ps. I hope some forum moderator will shut you up, because you are clearly just agonizing people and I that must be against forum rules.

    @Cheater1: please don't bother to reply to this. I will not spend any time on reading whatever you have to say.
  5. 01 Mar '09 15:51
    What a loser.
  6. 01 Mar '09 15:53
    Originally posted by wormwood
    okay, you got to SAY your piece. now f OFF.
    Fixed.
  7. 01 Mar '09 15:55
    Quote:

    "Chess GREATNESS cannot be taught or learned, you either are born with it or not."

    Correct. And that is all you really needed to say.

    You seem to try and squeeze a lot into one post thus making them
    totally unreadable.

    Stick to one or two liners - then if anybody wants to debate,
    you can shows them your facts.

    What you have done is fire all your shots in one go.
    Somebody could come along and find one wee hole in your argument,
    refute it and give the appearance the whole post was nonsense.

    It appears as if you have limited access to a computer and when you
    finally do get on line you vent everything in one long post.

    Got me thinking about what kind of enviroment you may be from.
    A net cafe that opens one day a week, a prison, a lunatic asylum?

    Have you been trading your medication for computer time?
  8. 01 Mar '09 16:03
    Originally posted by cheater1
    Now is the time for my second SCHOLARLY post on chess.

    Chess GREATNESS cannot be taught or learned, you either are born with it or not. Now, for clarity, let me define “greatness” as the chess ELITE. I’m not talking about some 2300 ranked player (there is one on every street corner). I’m not talking about some 2500 GM (they are a dime a dozen). I’m TALKI ...[text shortened]... “Who is your favorite player?” Is everyone here 12 years old?

    SUBSTANCE, people, SUBSTANCE.
    I think what torques everyone off about your posts is the superior, "holier-than-thou", confrontational tone of the posts. (And if you don't learn some humility soon, I won't bother responding to your posts in the future.) I have news for you - Based on what I've seen so far, you're not nearly as smart as you think you are.

    But I'll respond to this post in a serious manner. (It may be the last time I do that.)

    I agree with most of your position in this post. I believe (but can't prove) that in order for a person to get to the elite GM level, he must possess some talent beyond mere hard work. However, what I can't necessarily agree with is your contention that this talent is found in the form of photographic memory. I believe that the elite GM does possess some kind of above-average memory skills, but I'm not sure the exact mechanism has been discovered yet.

    Oh, and you wanted us to cite sources, right? I could cite some papers from leaders in the field of cognitive psychology, but I don't even need to do that. I'll simply cite the same source that you cited. (Did you even read the source that you cited?)

    http://www.exforsys.com/career-center/memory-skills/photographic-memory.html

    In the fifth paragraph, it states:

    "A study was conducted on a number of chess Grandmasters, and while they are able to recall large amounts of information about positions, they performed like people who weren't masters when they were presented with chess piece positions that would not exist in a real world situation."

  9. 01 Mar '09 16:07
    Originally posted by Nordlys
    Fixed.

    lol
  10. 01 Mar '09 16:09
    I took ALOT of time to write that article. Sure I come across as arrogant and conceited, but that's who I AM. I am not a nice person, both on this thing we call the world wide web, and in REAL LIFE.

    But one thing I AM NOT is a troll or flamer. If I am to be silenced, then I think about 90% of the other users of this site should be too. I neither use FOUL language nor do I personally attack anyone. The same can not be said for EVERYONE who responds to my topic. Do you all see the hypocrisy here? You all spout your HATRED of me and then say I should be silenced for something as trivial as not liking what I write.

    What is your agenda? HELP ME UNDERSTAND. I'll admit I am an A**hole. I'll admit that I think that I am smarter than everyone here. I'll admit that I would clobber my own grandmother over the head with a two by four and take my inheritance early if I could get away with it. I have only two people in life that I can call friends and they are blood relatives. I have no kids and never married because I am a misanthrope.

    But wanting me banned just because you dont like what I say or how I say it is akin to the time in AMERICA when blacks couldn't even use the same restroom as whites, out of fear. Dont hate me because you fear me. I don't bite. I am an EXPERT debater. I dont lose arguments. Just because I say WHAT OTHERS FEAR TO SAY, don't lash out, out of jealousy. HAVE the courage to stand up. Debate me if you will. I will WIN, but you may learn a thing or two about life in the process.
  11. 01 Mar '09 16:12
    Well now we know he is black.

    Next he'll be demanding his reparations from slavery.
  12. Standard member RECUVIC
    international loser
    01 Mar '09 16:12
    There are a few ocassions only when I will reply to unsatisfactory postings and this is just one such rare ocassion.The original poster of this thread has stated that chess greatness is reliant entirely upon a photographic memory. This is not a correct factual statement. Photographic memory of various chess positions to one degree or another, speaking as I can only do from personal experience is an extremely useful tool in chess play and is of great assistance,but is only one of the tools required to become a great or better than great chess player.My own experience teaches me that many very good highly rated titled and non-titled chess players do not have much better than an average ability for photographic memory,and rely therefore instead on their intuitive knowledge and experiences of what is correct and incorrect chess play.It is also correct to say that not all players currently rated over 2700 use photograhic memory as a main play tool whilst actually deciding on their moves, as there are positions which they must face not previously encountered and therefore not stored in memory cells. Memory storage and retrieval ability is unique to the individual player, and some of the greatest players in the history of modern chess have been shown not have have had any better than average memory capabilities.--------------
  13. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    01 Mar '09 16:16
    Originally posted by cheater1
    Now is the time for my second SCHOLARLY post on chess.

    Chess GREATNESS cannot be taught or learned, you either are born with it or not. Now, for clarity, let me define “greatness” as the chess ELITE. I’m not talking about some 2300 ranked player (there is one on every street corner). I’m not talking about some 2500 GM (they are a dime a dozen). I’m TALKI ...[text shortened]... “Who is your favorite player?” Is everyone here 12 years old?

    SUBSTANCE, people, SUBSTANCE.
    I agree with you. I don't think it's necssary to get quite this intense about it though...do you? You might consider some deep breathing exercises, or yoga.
  14. 01 Mar '09 16:19
    REsponse to MAD ROOK. Yes, Mr. Mad Rook, I have read the 5th paragraph. As they stated, they were presented with positions that would not exist in real world situations, meaning ILLEGAL positions.

    The fact is that they were NOT just presented with goofy, mixed up positions (which CAN occur in real life) but with positions such as having TWO kings. Positions involving 11 rooks. Positions with MORE than 16 pieces on their side. THAT is what not real world situations means. OF COURSE they will not move like a GM because they were not presented with a situation that would occur. DUH!

    Would you all expect TIGER WOODS to be even in the top 100000 golfers in the world if he had to play using a ping pong ball as a golf ball and an oak tree limb as a driver? OF COURSE YOU WOULDNT!!!

    I am trying to control my blood pressure...hold on.....1...2......3.
  15. 01 Mar '09 16:19
    Originally posted by cheater1
    I took ALOT of time to write that article. Sure I come across as arrogant and conceited, but that's who I AM. I am not a nice person, both on this thing we call the world wide web, and in REAL LIFE.

    But one thing I AM NOT is a troll or flamer. If I am to be silenced, then I think about 90% of the other users of this site should be too. I neither use FOUL ...[text shortened]... e me if you will. I will WIN, but you may learn a thing or two about life in the process.
    Get a hamster.