Maybe they should have an AM title, Adult Master.

Google can answer your question. Here's an article from this very website which shows up on the first page: chess-legends-started-late.

Did you read it? They were: 12, 17, 16, 20 (but learned it very early), 16, 14, 12, 15, 34 (!), 12, 17 & 14 years old when they started. So this is already considered late!

So Rani Hamid is the only one who started after 20, she was 34 years old and became a Woman International Master (WIM).

Theoretically you can, but practically it is almost impossible (to be a GM if you started late, FM for instance, probably there are some people who have achieved something like this - getting 2 300 FIDE rating is still difficult though).

First things first, chess is not a profitable profession (for a player). If you were guaranteed to earn, let's say 500K per year, once you become a GM (and still earn at least decently if you get titled), I am pretty sure we would see a few late blooming GMs.

But that is not reality, so people after the age of 20 will try to make their ends meet in some other way. So becoming a GM is not only difficult, but people do not have a real reason to go for it, or at the very least, people have a strong reason to not go for it.

This is the main reason why there are no real cases of GMs that learnt to play chess later in life.
If you were a well off person who doesn't need to earn for a living and can easily support your chess playing habit, plus you have a passion and talent for chess, and you are ready to live and breath it multiple hours per day, every day, then you would have a marginal chance of becoming a GM if you start later in life.

Stuart Conquest learned chess at the age of 18 and eventually became a Grandmaster. His story is often cited as an example of achieving a high level in chess despite starting relatively late.

In 1981, at the age of 14, he won the World Youth Chess Championship in the under-16 category.

So, it seems that he learned to play chess pretty young, if he won u-16 world championship at the age of 14.

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Conquest

Sorry, I had a wrong source. Maybe this can be helpful instead: https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-legends-started-late

I mean he mainly frequents the circle of top chess players. Those guys all started young.

It has to be a huge exaggeration.

For starters, I think Stjepan Tomic (Hanging pawns) didn't play as a kid (I am not completely sure, but I think he talked about it in some podcast. Now I might be mistaken, but I am sure there are a lot of people who started late that are significantly over 1 500 OTB.

This has to be the case especially since the chess boom in 2020. And if somehow playing chess would magically become profitable (say you are more or less guaranteed to have a certain income when you hit 2 200 OTB, better income when you hit 2 300, etc.), some people who started late would emerge. How high would they be able to get... who knows.

But as is, it is highly unlikely that such individual will emerge. Optimissed said that IM is highly unlikely as well, and he is probably correct, because apart from a great 2 400 rating, one has to have 3 great tournaments, and that requires a lot of money from some adult improver.

@12

"one has to have 3 great tournaments, and that requires a lot of money"
Going to 3 tournaments as a player costs no more than going to 3 football games as a spectator.

Depends from what country you are. I am from Serbia and there are plenty of tournaments you can go. I am sure the same is for you. But some people from Asia or USA for instance have to get here to acquire norms, and the cost for them could be massive. So it is not that simple. That is why in some cases it requires even more money and of course it is more difficult to get to 2400 anyway.

@15

"But some people from Asia or USA for instance have to get here to acquire norms, and the cost for them could be massive." ++ There are many tournaments in the U.S.A. If you are on the road to a title, then you usually also win some money prizes that help. Rising stars also get invited and receive complimentary accomodation and even a starting fee.

"it is more difficult to get to 2400 anyway" ++ Yes, that is the main point.

Rising stars yes, we are talking here about some potential adult improvers.

So yeah, sometimes they would be able to find some tournaments relatively nearby. For instance one person from Asia asked me about the cost of coming to Serbia so he can play a tournament or 2. That kind of thing is not cheap. Of course for some people, it is not like that, they could go for norms in the radius of 300 kilometers or so.

And having to get to 2 400 and getting 3 norms means more tournaments. More tournaments means more money as well.

@17

"And having to get to 2 400 and getting 3 norms means more tournaments."

++ Ideally you get the 3 norms and the 2400 in 3 tournaments.
Money is not the issue. The adult improver usually has some job. Any hobby costs money.
The real issue is getting to the playing strength for 2400 and 3 norms.

But look at the ages they mention. The people in this article, started "late", at the age of 12, 17, 16, 20 (but learned it very early), 16, 14, 12, 15, 34 (!), 12, 17 & 14 respectively. So this is already considered late! Rani Hamid is the only one who started after 20, she was 34 years old and became a Woman International Master (WIM).

Plus, many of these people are not from modern chess times. Today there are a lot more people playing chess so competition is greater.

And as for WIM, that title is equal in strength to CM title, which is 2 200 FIDE. Still a great success, of course.

@tygxc

Agree to disagree I guess.

@nklristic

You make great points and I completely agree that there is no incentive to do so.
But still I wonder. Take ballet for example. It is believed to be impossible to reach the same level as other professionals if you only start after the age of twenty. Simply because your body is no longer flexible enough. Couldn't it be the same with your brain (or similar)?

Maybe the magic is in streaming? If someone starts late and gets really good, and documents their process, maybe they would be able to make a living from it?

.

Well, I didn't say you could ever get to world class level and go for 2 700 or something like that. And most of the people would fail to get anywhere near 2 500.

I am just saying that if there was a real incentive for someone to get to 2 500, I think that some person talented enough to get to let's say 2 700 - 2 800 if he started as a kid, could possibly emerge as an adult improver and get to 2 500 (after all, the world is a pretty big place and there are some incredible people in it). But as is, it seems unlikely.

As for streaming, sure, there are people that could support themselves that way (and some people are earning a lot probably), but it takes time away from chess learning, and it would probably prevent one from achieving GM level of play.

Plus, streaming is not a sure thing in terms of making money. In a normal type of 9 to 5 job, you get some steady income. Streaming is not like that. One can get really wealthy while most will not earn much if at all. So another reason that would be a deterrent for a lot of people.

In order to get to that GM level, one would have to focus a lot of effort into it. Streaming is basically a full time job as well (for successful streamers, they probably work significantly more than 8 hours a day in total).

Let's take the example of IM Levy Rozman. He semi seriously made an effort to go back to OTB play and try to be a GM. But as a full time streamer, he actually lost some rating points, as he just doesn't have the time to make a real, serious effort.

Someone starting from scratch would have it much tougher than him in that regard.