A response to Andrew Martin

Why is the word "proof" a poor choice? When you say that "FM or IM is certainly possible" I would expect that you have some evidence supporting that, namely FMs or IMs who starting studying chess seriously at an age >40.

To make it crystal clear: I do not doubt your opinion that "GM is very, very unlikely".

You can still forge your identity card!

"World class" is generally understood to mean super-GM. You hear people talking about "GMs" and "world class GMs", and saying things like "Oh, he's only a regular GM, not a world class player".

I don't accept that, sorry. I have never heard people saying those things, and while some people may indeed have said it, I am not convinced it is generally accepted distinction.

Wikipedia says: "Grandmaster is a title awarded to world-class chess players by the sport's governing body FIDE. Apart from "World Champion", Grandmaster is the highest title a chess player can attain." Strictly speaking, this doesn't mean that the title isn't also awarded to non-world-class players (although it says nothing about this), but it implies there is a high degree of overlap at least.

In any case, taking "world-class" (which does not have a strict definition) to be equivalent to GM (which does) for the sake of argument, finding if there are any GMs who started at OP's age or older would be a step towards doubting Andrew Martin's assertion. Until that happens, I am strongly inclined to believe what he said is correct.

Absolutely.

Bobby was obsessed with Chess as a child, by all accounts he did nothing but for most of his life, had no friends or other interests outside of chess as far as I've been lead to believe in what I've read and seen about him (* I don't claim to be a Bobby expert, but have never heard contradicting evidence).

Children have vastly superior learning skills than we adults. Their brain is still developing (up to the age of about 25 on average) and making new connections, rewiring itself. 

A kid playing chess as obsessively as Bobby apparently did would be physically wiring their own brain to be a chess machine.

An adult cannot do that.

Everyone saying "I think it's possible" are simply wrong. 

It's not. Mr. Martin is exactly spot on. 

The physiology of the human body and brain are what they are. They aren't going to change just because someone wishes it would. 

While there may be the occassional outlier who surprises the world think about what is required for that to happen. They have to be the 1 person in god knows how many who's physiology is so fundamentally different from every other person that pretty muche everything we know about cognitive development and aging doesn't apply to them. Second, they have to be the one chess player in ten thousand who can become a world class player. 

And frankly, when asking someone who is a professional chess player about "world class," the term isn't all that vague. No one who makes a significant portion of their living from chess, as Mr. Martin does, will consider a mere FM or 2000 rated player as "world class." The term will be understood in light of international chess competition. 

So his answer is, again, spot on: study the game, enjoy where you are, and let your talent develop and wherever you end up is fine. That is not to say that a person shouldn't study with goals, but those goals need to be attainable and realistic. And being "world class" when starting in the mid-40s is not. 

Why do goals need to be attainable and realistic?

They don't particularly HAVE to be, but its about enjoyment and satisfaction.

If you're a 44 year old who starts out and is absolutely positive you will become a GM, then you are in for some pretty rapid disappointment and will quite possibly just give up chess as a "stupid game!".

Whereas if you accept that you can improve a bit each year, and set yourself realistic goals that you can acheive, you will more likely enjoy yourself much more and stick it out in the long run.

Lets face it.

Almost none of us on here are Super GMs and will never be World Champions. We play because we love the game, the challenge, the infinite puzzle, the social aspects ... (add your own reasons here)...  and we take (or I hope you do) lots of pleasure from the game and enjoy it for its own sake.

Your advice isn't too good, and even wrong in places. Have you ever even tried or seen this method work? Or did you come up with it off the top of your head and offering it in place of Andrew Martin's?

Even if I was new and didn't realize your advice was bad, for the sake of argument let's look at what qualifications Andrew Martin might have...

"International Master Andrew Martin is a busy guy. Married and father to four young children, he somehow finds the time to teach at eight schools (Yateley Manor, Aldro, Millfield, Sunningdale, Waverley School, St Michael’s Sandhurst, Wellington College, Salesian College), serve as chief coach to the English national junior squad, instruct over twenty individuals from club to international level, and write for three popular websites "

There's really nothing left to say...

Well, you may never make GM...but (like most chessplayers) you can certainly post a lot of prolix blather about it. 

So I can live forever, that's surprising news.

Bernard Hopkins also started Boxing when he was 17 after being sentenced to prison. He trained in prison for 5 years and started professional boxing at 23, which isn't old for professional boxing. Like most contact sports, people tend to spend their teen years and early 20s in amature leagues building up technique.

Using someone who has been doing something successfully for their entire adult life as an example of what a person can do starting an activity in their 40s is completely missing the point.

Again, the physiology of cognitive development is relatively well known. People's brains work differently when you're 40 than when you're 12. Someone starting playing chess as an adult is not going to become a world class player. It just won't happen. The neurons won't let you.

Josh Waitzkin rocketed to the top of Tai Chi Chaun Push Hands World Championship through hard work and good American ethics even though he didn't start training the the womb for it.  That is one fine American.  God Bless.

Yes. An IM has a very, very high skill level - certainly *world class* technique and knowledge [touche].

It's a LOT of work and concepts. No doubt. But in a post-internet world the learning material [including much excellent totally free stuff such as Capa's Chess Fundamentals on the Gutenberg site] can all be obtained. Clearly at 44 the quality of study will have to be very high. That's why I recommended Euwe and Lasker's books in my response. They are not cutting edge theory. But they are very solid authors.

Actually I think that if a beginner who's sincere and industrious is going to run into any problem of becoming an expert/world-class at chess it won't be with technique. It MAY be a practical aspect such as clock-management or a lack of fighting spirit in bad positions. I'm reminded of what the world table tennis champion said once when asked if talent was important. He replied that talent didn't matter; correct technique could be taught and talent developed. But he said that fighting spirit/will to win/never giving up was WAY more important because you can't teach that.

I would certainty advise the OP player to not put too much pressure on him or herself at this stage. He or she should balance chess with other interests; the amount of work involved in this aim - which is certainly achievable - does NOT preclude other activities and interests.

Sigh. Please don't do straw man arguments. I would never say that reading ANY book will "make" someone into an IM. However it will make someone better for the knowledge in it.

Of course I can't name any people who at age 40 have got to 2400 ELo, IM titles etc - it is a very unusual aim for that age. It is unknown territory. Neither do I have to be a coach, top player or anything else. I suppose the 4 minute mile was never going to be broken either.

Certainly you'd  be better off with Lasker's books or Euwe's than the garbage that passes for chess books these days. The number of database dumps in which there is NO discussion of ideas at all. Such so-called chess "authors" such as Nick De Firmian should be made to serve one month as a personal chess slave to Raymond Keen, John Love or Paul Littlewood and the other many fine authors of the 1980's which in my opinion was the golden age of chess writing. These authors could write. They could discuss. They were stimulating to read. De Firmian wouldn't know how to write a chess book if it gave him a proctological examination.

Just something I came across this morning from the web that may be relevant. Note that some of these players obtained their GM titles at an advanced age. Mastering chess while young is surely easier, but it doesn't mean that it cannot be done if you start late.

Joseph Henry Blackburne (1841-1924) played chess until he died at the age of 82. He tied for 1st place in the British championship at the age of 72

Grandmaster David Bronstein was playing chess in his 80s.

Arthur Dake (1910-2000) was the oldest competitive grandmaster in history. He was still playing in international master tournaments in his 80s.

Harlow Daly (1883-1979) played chess for over 75 years. He died at the age of 95. He won the championship of Maine at the age of 77, 81, and 85. He was still playing chess in his 90s.

Arnold Denker (1914-2005) died at the age of 90. He was active in chess until his late 80s.

Gisela Gresser (1906-2000) won the U.S. Women's Championship at the age of 63. She died at the age of 94.

James Hanham (1840-1923) played master level chess until he died at the age of 84.

Rea Hayes (1915-2001) played chess in his 80s. In 1998, at the age of 83,he was the oldest player in the U.S. Senior Championship. He won the Tennessee State championship at the age of 76.

Kirk Holland (1911- ), age 94, is still playing in chess tournaments in Chicago

Mona Karff (1914-1998) won the U.S. Women's Championship at the age of 60. She died at the age of 83.

George Koltanowski (1903-2000) died at the age of 96. He was a chess editor for the San Francisco Chronicle for 52 years. He became a Grandmaster at the age of 85. He was still playing blindfold chess in his 70s.

Edward Lasker (1885-1981) was playing chess until he died at the age of 95. He was still playing correspondence games when he died. He became an International Master at the age of 75.

Emanuel Lasker (1868-1941) played chess until he died at the age of 73. At the age of 68, he took 6th place in the Moscow Intenational tournament.

Alina Markowski (1910- ) is still playing chess in San Diego in her 90s. She started playing postal chess at the age of 61. She now has a chess club named after her.

Jacquest Mieses (1965-1954) died at the age of 89. He was still giving simultaneous chess exhibitions in his mid 80s. He became a grandmaster at the age of 85.

Mario Monticelli (1902-1995) was awarded the Grandmaster title at the age of 83. He died at the age of 93.

Jared Moore (1893-1995) lived until the age of 101. He was still active in postal chess until he was 100 years old. He started playing postal chess at the age of 67.

Walter Muir (1905-1999) played postal chess until he died at the age of 95. In 1997, he wrote his autobiography, My 75 Year Chess Career.

Miguel Najdorf (1910-1997) played chess until he died at the age of 87. At the age of 81, he played in the Artentina chess championship. At the age of 82, he played in the strong Mar del Plata open.

Enrico Paoli (1908-2005) became a grandmaster at the age of 88. He was the strongest active nonagenarian in the world, still playing chess at the age of 97. He died less than a month away from his 98th birthday.

Edith Price (1872-1956) won the British Women's Championship at the age of 76. She was still running her chess club, the Gambit Chess Room in England, while in her 80s.

Samuel Reshevsky (1911-1992) was still playing chess until he died at the age of 81. At the age of 70, he took 3rd place in the U.S. Championship. At the age of 72, he won a grandmaster tournament, held in Iceland.

Oscar Shapiro (1924-2004) was the oldest person to first make chess master. He became a chess master at the age of 74.

Viktor Korchnoi (1931- ) is still playing grandmaster level chess at the age of 75. He is currently the oldest grandmaster on the world chess tournament circuit. In 2005, he was still ranked in the top 100 in the world at the age of 74.

Excellent work! You could add the chess master Muffang who got his title very late at 54.

Citing world-class chess players who played strongly in old age has no relevance whatsoever to the question of whether one is able to start chess as an adult and eventually become a world class player. Becoming a GM later in life is also a very different thing than learning chess as an adult and becoming a GM.

The best I've heard is that Blackburne learned the game when he was about 18 or 19 years old, and he definitely was a world-class player by any standard at the end of the nineteenth century.