My free video lessons course explains how I did it and how to maximize your time duplicating it. I believe I have a great program and it's free. you can get my videos in my group, 3rd largest on chess.com. Start with video lesson 001 from the YouTube free video lesson playlist and 37 minutes later, you'll have a plan of action.
Join my group here: http://www.chess.com/groups/join?id=14246
So what does it take to get to a 2000-2200 rated player. No bells and whistels. Straight up, honest truth, no sugar coating.
Studying tactics I know is a good thing as well as analyzing some games. What should I be studying and honestly, how much? Looking for solid answers such as 2-3 hours day on this, and hour a day on this instead of "study as much as you can".
Videos? Tactics? Play time? Books? Game analysis of my games? Analysis of Master games?
I don't know what it takes to be 2200, because I'm not 2200.
And likely, there are many different ways (depending on natural ability, style, and such).
I still think I can give you some "straight up, honest truth" though because before you're over 2000 you have to be 1400, 1600, 1800 etc.
To do this you need to know all the basics and be able to analyze well enough to spot nearly all simple tactics. Why aren't I talking about some advanced text or world-renown coach? IMO many beginners approach chess improvement like a fad. Oh I'll just change my opening, or I'll solve puzzles for 8 hours a day, or I'll buy _____ book or author and get instant improvement... but they neglect picking up all the fundamentals for a tournament player.
So what should you study? Pick something, yeah anything, because you need a little of everything. I'd say spend some time with each of the following: tactics, endgames, master games, strategy, and openings. At 2-3 hours a day I'd spend at least a few months on one subject. During this time play in OTB tournaments and try to find the best moves you can. Do a lot of analysis of positions you find interesting, confusing, or difficult especially when they come from your own games. And re-visit your analysis after you feel you've gotten stronger.
This isn't some whimsical 10,000 hours rule. I say a few months but there's really no time frame. Study a book until you understand most of the material. Maybe that means you skim through it, and maybe it means you read it 3 times.
After you have the basics of a tournament player you'll be in the 1600 to 1800 range and from there to 2200 is, IMO, a matter of free time, dedication, money, and yes some innate ability.
My $0.02
So what does it take to get to a 2000-2200 rated player. No bells and whistels. Straight up, honest truth, no sugar coating.
Studying tactics I know is a good thing as well as analyzing some games. What should I be studying and honestly, how much? Looking for solid answers such as 2-3 hours day on this, and hour a day on this instead of "study as much as you can".
Videos? Tactics? Play time? Books? Game analysis of my games? Analysis of Master games?
The most important part is to play a lot of OTB chess and analyze your games, preferably with stronger players.
For the study part, there is no unique answer. Some people I know study a lot, some barely.
If you want some suggestions of good study material that covers a lot of chess ground, you can have a look at my systematic training thread :
http://www.chess.com/blog/hicetnunc/resources-for-systematic-training
So what does it take to get to a 2000-2200 rated player. No bells and whistels. Straight up, honest truth, no sugar coating.
Studying tactics I know is a good thing as well as analyzing some games. What should I be studying and honestly, how much? Looking for solid answers such as 2-3 hours day on this, and hour a day on this instead of "study as much as you can".
Videos? Tactics? Play time? Books? Game analysis of my games? Analysis of Master games?
The most important part is to play a lot of OTB chess and analyze your games, preferably with stronger players.
For the study part, there is no unique answer. Some people I know study a lot, some barely.
If you want some suggestions of good study material that covers a lot of chess ground, you can have a look at my systematic training thread :
http://www.chess.com/blog/hicetnunc/resources-for-systematic-training
Nice blog post, thanks.
There is so much good advice in this thread that I'll be including for my own learning.
+1 to maDawson..
If only I had a brain...
I've been tottering from 1800s to close to 2100s for years, but only because i lost touch of the game for a while and my reflexes are a little bit dull. Higher rated players are of course very good in evaluating positions but the most that is repeatedly crucial is move selection. Players from this level (2000 - 2200) are very good at identifying forced moves. They can easily reject a move based on process of elimination. They can weight the importance of a move just by comparing it from another, etc. So take time to train in this area. Believe me, it will help you a lot in organizing your thoughts. May i recommend you Soltis' How to Choose a Chess Move. Jacob Aagaard, John Nunn, Mark Dvoretsky have also mentioned something on this topic so you might have to take a look at their books as well.
Why on earth would you want to invest the time in chess to become a 2200?
Man, you're a decent enough player to have fun. Isn't that enough given that it's just a game?
What does it take to run a four minute mile?
What does it take to dunk a basketball?
What does it take to bench 350?
it all depends on who you are. For some its automatic, for the rest it is a certain amount of effort differing from person to person.
So what does it take to get to a 2000-2200 rated player. No bells and whistels. Straight up, honest truth, no sugar coating.
That's a pretty big range. I'll focus on the 2200 mark, because, who doesn't want to become a Master?
It takes Innate ability to achieve and break the 2200 mark. Translation: you ar either born with the ability to be a very strong player, or you aren't. Granted, that innate ability must be cultivated, worked, tested, used on a constant basis, and started at a very early age, in order to realize the reward.
But no amount of lessons, tutoring, books, programs, or studying will take you to Master status if you "Ain't got it in you."
When Magnus Carlsen was born, he was already prewired, had all the necessary components to become the world's best. Good thing he worked at it.
If becoming a Master was as simple as lessons, coaches, tutoring, books, practicing, and hard work, then most everyone would be a Master. There'd be a 2500 in every household, 5 out of 10 people would be a 2200.
I don't know enough about your personal situation (how long you played, etc.) but if you're 1600 now, have been playing for over 5 years, and are over 20 years old, I hate to break it to you, but you will NEVER become a Master. Those inborn traits would have surfaced by now.
What a nonsense. Everyone can reach at least a 2300-2400 rating with the proper training. It is not about innate ability or talent or whatever.
This part of your statment is inaccurate. There are several reasons that someone may not have discovered a talent they have. For example, being buried under other distractions and shortcomings.
We live in a much different world than 20 years ago. Access to chess knowledge and experience is much easier to attain as well as access to playing games more often. And, of course, we have begun to shed ideas like "old dogs can't learn new tricks" as more and more older people are finding talents in things they never knew about in their lives.
If you were to say smething like "It would be very difficult for you to become a Master at this point", then, I would agree with that.
It's going to happen one day; you will start seeing masters who started much later in life.
Wasn't aware site had made changes to posting funny images in threads, my apologies.
Does the site pay attention to moderator behavior? Mod, please explain why you removed the following pic
Maybe they just wanted to keep it so they could order one for you in hopes you will use it on your fingers so we don't have to see any more of your pointless comments or posts.
Try and block me now, troll.
What does it take to run a four minute mile?
What does it take to dunk a basketball?
What does it take to bench 350?
it all depends on who you are. For some its automatic, for the rest it is a certain amount of effort differing from person to person.
There are certainly some people for whom a given skill is simply not possible - a person in a wheelchair will not dunk a basketball, and it would be difficult (though not strictly impossible) for a blind person to become a world class grandmaster. It is also true that certain individuals DO have some kind of innate talent - Michael Jordan and Bobby Fischer simply had a 'spark'....something beyond ordinary. However, the core of every skill is practice, and I am a firm believer that virtually anyone can attain a rating of 2000 if they *really* put the effort in. The average person cannot be Magnus Carlsen - Magnus is at a level beyond what mere 'work' can achieve, but I seriously doubt that this talent threshold applies to anyone below the 2500 mark......the world is covered in master players with 'natural' chess skills that are mediocre at best.
Does the site pay attention to moderator behavior? Mod, please explain why you removed the following pic
Maybe they just wanted to keep it so they could order one for you in hopes you will use it on your fingers so we don't have to see any more of your pointless comments or posts.
Try and block me now, troll.
LOL. What? And yes, have blocked you.
I appreciate all your responses and appreciate your candid responses.
The main thing i think to breaking 2000 or bench pressing or running a 4 min. mile etc. is don't let people tell you it can't be done I am 52 years old and have had tons of people tell me it is impossible for me to ever bench 300 pounds at my age well guess what i currently bench 250 and will not only reach 300 pounds but go beyond that so don't listen to those that say it can't be done they are just pissed off because they don't have what it takes to do it
So what does it take to get to a 2000-2200 rated player. No bells and whistels. Straight up, honest truth, no sugar coating.
Studying tactics I know is a good thing as well as analyzing some games. What should I be studying and honestly, how much? Looking for solid answers such as 2-3 hours day on this, and hour a day on this instead of "study as much as you can".
Videos? Tactics? Play time? Books? Game analysis of my games? Analysis of Master games?