You first have to be born with a high level of talent. Talent is everything. No amount of work will make up for lack of talent. If you have actual talent at something, you will recognize it early on. Then, you will work hard and become a master. However, if you are wondering if you have talent, then, you don't have talent. If you don't believe me, try excelling at something you know you suck at. See how far that gets you.
How to become a GM
Sort:
Agreed with #6. There are other ways to enjoy playing Chess. It's not only about winning.
Aug 20, 2019
0
#4
There are no keys or tricks to master the game. It's mostly about increasing the understanding of several aspects of the game, which implies a lot of hard work, as well as in the own character and attitude towards competition. And all apply for those with a huge amount of natural talent too.
An example. Some hours ago I was watching Carlsen's game against Magerramov and the comments from some Chess.com's 1800s–1900s towards the ending (with a pawn advantage for Carlsen but opposite color Bishops), quite a few didn't have it clear if it was a draw or not, and why. This may sound trivial but such endings, as drawish as they may be, aren't always a draw, and strong titled players put a lot of work studying the situations and procedures because they don't want to figure it out how to produce gunpowder when they know that several recipes exist since long ago.
In that game it was an ending, but it may be spending time to decide which is the right plan in a typical position while not being aware of it's "typical" nature, or maybe not training the concentration to calculate with precision long and difficult tactical lines... or maybe not caring that much about the physical condition thus getting sleepy after a couple of hours in an OTB game.
Talent for the game helps to speed up some aspects of mastering it, but the player's character (willingness for hard work, self-discipline, etc.) plays an important part too.
Aug 20, 2019
0
#5
Andrii0708 wrote:
My mom said I have a talent in chess. everybody is! You just need to find the key and open it.
Not all moms can handle the truth, leave alone speak it
Aug 20, 2019
0
#6
Andrii0708 wrote:
My Chess.com rating was 1700 now 1100 .I have no idea how that happened. And what after that? there are 1800+ rating people reading this. Every body wants to be a GM, but how?
not everybody wants to become a GM...
Nicator65 wrote:
Good comments. As a matter of fact, when asked about talent, it was Kramnik that said that talent was the ability to learn something quicker than normal. To the original poster; you seem to be a young person. If you are even 10 years old and not at least an expert, do yourself a favor. Stay in school. Get a certificate or degree at a skill you like. The way life is, is there are people born who are super geniuses. Most people are not. It might seem to suck if you're not rich and famous, but if you're making enough money to pay the rent and save for retirement, you're doing alright. Good luck.
There are no keys or tricks to master the game. It's mostly about increasing the understanding of several aspects of the game, which implies a lot of hard work, as well as in the own character and attitude towards competition. And all apply for those with a huge amount of natural talent too.
An example. Some hours ago I was watching Carlsen's game against Magerramov and the comments from some Chess.com's 1800s–1900s towards the ending (with a pawn advantage for Carlsen but opposite color Bishops), quite a few didn't have it clear if it was a draw or not, and why. This may sound trivial but such endings, as drawish as they may be, aren't always a draw, and strong titled players put a lot of work studying the situations and procedures because they don't want to figure it out how to produce gunpowder when they know that several recipes exist since long ago.
In that game it was an ending, but it may be spending time to decide which is the right plan in a typical position while not being aware of it's "typical" nature, or maybe not training the concentration to calculate with precision long and difficult tactical lines... or maybe not caring that much about the physical condition thus getting sleepy after a couple of hours in an OTB game.
Talent for the game helps to speed up some aspects of mastering it, but the player's character (willingness for hard work, self-discipline, etc.) plays an important part too.
I am not a GM, but I would think that becoming an extremely good chess player would be your first--and most important--step
Aug 21, 2019
0
#9
I have a FM rating. No title, but 2300+ elo. it took me like almost 5 years. You will need a lot of time to fulfill your fm dreams or maybe gm
Aug 21, 2019
0
#10
You need to like chess enough to study it. Probably just aim at 100 points higher than your current rating and keep going.
Aug 21, 2019
0
#11
The rating shouldn't mean something by itself when developing a young player, as the rating talks about the results only.
When I began playing chess I was decent on placing my pieces properly but rather weak on spotting tactical blows. One of my coaches, back then, insisted that I should play the Deferred Steinitz with Black as my main against 1.e4, as it lowers the tactical chances for both sides at the beginning of the game. But I wasn't happy with the type of positions I got from it so I decided to work on something with more complexity, both in strategy as in tactics. I studied hundreds of games until I could spot the ideas and tactics in GMs' games long before they appeared over the board. Yes, I was still somewhat weak on tactics, but not when playing that Sicilian variation, and it helped me to go from FIDE +1800 to +2200 in less than a couple of years. In the meantime, I worked hard in my tactics to avoid "surprises" when not in familiar waters, and also in the handling and mastery of typical positions and endings.
As you can see, the rating wasn't part of the plan but a measurement of an organic development seeking to hide my own weak points while getting stronger overall. Funny thing, when my rivals began preparing exhaustively against my main Sicilian, I used the Deferred Steinitz, the Philidor, and the Old Indian, putting in practice the ideas taught to me by that IM when I was a teen.
No way to do it without natural Talent forget about it
Aug 21, 2019
0
#13
Simplisticus wrote:
No way to do it without natural Talent forget about it
thats mean
Possibly of interest:
"... the NM title is an honor that only one percent of USCF members attain. ..." - IM John Donaldson (2015)
http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Reaching-the-Top-77p3905.htm
What It Takes to Become a Chess Master by Andrew Soltis
"... going from good at tactics to great at tactics ... doesn't translate into much greater strength. ... You need a relatively good memory to reach average strength. But a much better memory isn't going to make you a master. ... there's a powerful law of diminishing returns in chess calculation, ... Your rating may have been steadily rising when suddenly it stops. ... One explanation for the wall is that most players got to where they are by learning how to not lose. ... Mastering chess ... requires a new set of skills and traits. ... Many of these attributes are kinds of know-how, such as understanding when to change the pawn structure or what a positionally won game looks like and how to deal with it. Some are habits, like always looking for targets. Others are refined senses, like recognizing a critical middlegame moment or feeling when time is on your side and when it isn't. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093409/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review857.pdf
100 Chess Master Trade Secrets by Andrew Soltis
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708094523/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review916.pdf
Reaching the Top?! by Peter Kurzdorfer
"... On the one hand, your play needs to be purposeful much of the time; the ability to navigate through many different types of positions needs to be yours; your ability to calculate variations and find candidate moves needs to be present in at least an embryonic stage. On the other hand, it will be heart-warming and perhaps inspiring to realize that you do not need to give up blunders or misconceptions or a poor memory or sloppy calculating habits; that you do not need to know all the latest opening variations, or even know what they are called. You do not have to memorize hundreds of endgame positions or instantly recognize the proper procedure in a variety of pawn structures.
[To play at a master level consistently] is not an easy task, to be sure ..., but it is a possible one. ..." - NM Peter Kurzdorfer (2015)
http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2015/11/16/book-notice-kurzdorfers-reaching-the-top.html
http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Reaching-the-Top-77p3905.htm
"Yes, you can easily become a master. All you need to do is some serious, focused work on your play.
That 'chess is 99% tactics and blah-blah' thing is crap. Chess is several things (opening, endgame, middlegame strategy, positional play, tactics, psychology, time management...) which should be treated properly as a whole. getting just one element of lay and working exclusively on it is of very doubtful value, and at worst it may well turn out being a waste of time." - IM pfren (August 21, 2017)
"Every now and then someone advances the idea that one may gain success in chess by using shortcuts. 'Chess is 99% tactics' - proclaims one expert, suggesting that strategic understanding is overrated; 'Improvement in chess is all about opening knowledge' - declares another. A third self-appointed authority asserts that a thorough knowledge of endings is the key to becoming a master; while his expert-friend is puzzled by the mere thought that a player can achieve anything at all without championing pawn structures.
To me, such statements seem futile. You can't hope to gain mastery of any subject by specializing in only parts of it. ..." - FM Amatzia Avni (2008)
https://www.chess.com/blog/EOGuel/so-whats-been-up-with-me
"... Though being a chess pro might sound romantic (it certainly did to me when I was young), the romance quickly melts away when you realize that you’re broke, starving, and living in a hovel. Iif you live in America, then you can forgot about health insurance … way, way too expensive. Other than the top 10 or 20 grandmasters, most of the rest will never make a lot of money. As a result, grandmasters usually have to teach chess and write chess books. It wasn’t what they wanted to do when they started out, but when reality hits you in the face, you have to bow to it.
Of course, being a grandmaster and teaching students and writing books isn’t that bad. But you would make far more money and have much more security if you went to university and got a great career. And don’t forget that very few people ever become international masters and grandmasters. Keep in mind that there are 600 million to 800 million chess players in the world and only 1522 grandmasters.
It's not all bad news!
Mr. BeekeeperBob, let’s discuss this in a positive light. I’ve known many very low-rated chess teachers who are absolutely excellent. Teaching is a skill, and even if you’re rated 1500, you might be just what the doctor ordered for children or beginners of any age. …"
https://www.chess.com/article/view/can-anyone-be-an-im-or-gm
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kids-fight-stereotypes-using-chess-in-rural-mississippi/
http://brooklyncastle.com/
https://www.chess.com/article/view/don-t-worry-about-your-rating
https://www.chess.com/article/view/am-i-too-old-for-chess
https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-can-older-players-improve
Train Like a Grandmaster by Kotov
Becoming a Grandmaster by Keene
What It Takes to Become a Grandmaster by GM Andrew Soltis
http://www.chessmastery.co.uk/chess-books/book-review-what-it-takes-to-become-a-grandmaster-andrew-soltis/
"BENJAMIN FINEGOLD (born Sep-06-1969 ...) ... Ben became a USCF Life Master at 15, USCF Senior Master at 16, an International Master in 1989, and achieved his final GM norm at the SPICE Cup B Section in September, 2009. ..."
http://www.chessgames.com/player/benjamin_finegold.html
"MARK IZRAILOVICH DVORETSKY (... died Sep-26-2016 ...) ... He was ... awarded the IM title in 1975. Dvoretsky was also a FIDE Senior Trainer and noted author. ... During the 1970s, Mark was widely regarded by the strongest IM in the world, ..."
http://www.chessgames.com/player/mark_izrailovich_dvoretsky.html
"To become a grandmaster is very difficult and can take quite a long time! ... you need to ... solve many exercises, analyse your games, study classic games, modern games, have an opening repertoire and so on. Basically, it is hard work ... It takes a lot more than just reading books to become a grandmaster I am afraid." - GM Artur Yusupov (2013)
http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/QandAwithArturYusupovQualityChessAugust2013.pdf
https://www.chess.com/blog/smurfo/book-review-insanity-passion-and-addiction
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/09/26/books/books-of-the-times-when-the-child-chess-genius-becomes-the-pawn.html
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2017/05/05/making-a-living-in-chess-is-tough-but-the-internet-is-making-it-easier/#4284e4814850
https://www.chess.com/news/view/is-there-good-money-in-chess-1838
"... Many aspiring young chess players dream of one day becoming a grandmaster and a professional. ... But ... a profession must bring in at least a certain regular income even if one is not too demanding. ... The usual prize money in Open tournaments is meagre. ... The higher the prizes, the greater the competition. ... With a possibly not very high and irregular income for several decades the amount of money one can save for old age remains really modest. ... Anyone who wants to reach his maximum must concentrate totally on chess. That involves important compromises with or giving up on his education. ... it is a question of personal life planning and when deciding it is necessary to be fully conscious of the various possibilities, limitations and risks. ... a future professional must really love chess and ... be prepared to work very hard for it. ... It is all too frequent that a wrong evaluation is made of what a talented player can achieve. ... Most players have the potential for a certain level; once they have reached it they can only make further progress with a great effort. ... anyone who is unlikely to attain a high playing strength should on no account turn professional. ... Anyone who does not meet these top criteria can only try to earn his living with public appearances, chess publishing or activity as a trainer. But there is a lack of offers and these are not particularly well paid. For jobs which involve appearing in public, moreover, certain non-chess qualities are required. ... a relevant 'stage presence' and required sociability. ... All these jobs and existences, moreover, have hanging above them the sword of Damocles of general economic conditions. ... around [age] 40 chess players ... find that their performances are noticeably tailing off. ..." - from a 12 page chapter on becoming a chess professional in the book, Luther's Chess Reformation by GM Thomas Luther (2016)
http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/ebooks/LuthersChessReformation-excerpt.pdf
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/world-chess-championship-inside-the-business-of-chess-magnus-carlsen-maurice-ashley-hikaru-nakamura-154502738.html
Aug 21, 2019
0
#15
snacktime10101 wrote:
Simplisticus wrote:
No way to do it without natural Talent forget about it
thats mean
@Andriod708....You will never in a million years make GM and if you had to ask the question it means you already have no natural talent.
Give up now.
If you follow my advice and stop trying to do the impossible it will save you thousands of hours wasted on chess study.
Even if by some bizarre miracle you manage to reach GM in 10-15 years from now, then what? Will it bring back your lost youth, make you money or provide you with any kind of happiness? We both know it won’t do anything for you.
It is up to you man, but don’t let some cc patzers give you false hope.
Andrii0708 wrote:
Almost all of the people who play chess want to become a GM.
Really? I play chess, and enjoy it a lot but I have no ambition of becoming a GM. I might one day try for a 2000 online rating,- yesterday I broke 1600 - but beyond that the time commitment would just get too crazy. And if I would have what it takes to become GM would I want to? Probably not. The countless hours spent poring over endgame manuals and master games could have been better spent learning to program, learning a language, or learning calculus imo.. No way I would be able to handle a full time job, a healthy relationship to my wife, and other commitments with studying and playing tournaments for a FIDE rating of 2500 and GM norms.. I don`t know how old you are but at some point reality hits you in the face and you either go all-in and devote your life to chess, or you keep chess as a hobby while working a job to make ends meet. Even if you have talent, it`s not enough by itself. A lot of people have talent, if it`s not coupled with grueling hard work, you`ll never be able to live off of chess.
Do a lot of people care what - say - the 98th ranked GM in the world is doing? A quick search reveals it is a certain Movsesian Sergei. Have you ever heard of him? Just being a GM isn`t a guaranteed moneymaker, nobody is going to stand there and hand you a bag of money, you have to win against granite hard competition, perform at your peak for long hours in far flung torunament halls accross the world - and at the end of the day you might have nothing. Doesn`t sound like much fun to me.
In addition there are few auxiliary benefits to play chess. It does nothing for your physical health and very little in terms of finding a boyfriend/girlfriend. If your chess career fails you have nothing to fall back on. "I have 2500 ELO rating" isn`t going to be a shining spot on your resume..
Why does a title mean so much to you? For most of Chess history, there was no such thing as a Grand Master. Did that stop anyone enjoying chess? I question what the need for such a title is anyway.
Like Nakamura said, 'Play your way to 1800, and then study like hell.' So, 1800 is your first goal. Good luck.