Why do you have to be good at a young age?

Hi guys,

I was just putting the question out there:

Why do you have to be very good at chess at a young age to become a master (generally speaking)? Surely if you are, say 2000 by the age of 14, then surely within say, 10 years of picking up chess, any talented person (perhaps in their 20's) can gain the same rating, and go on to become a master?

What is your opinion?

Probably better when they're young because I feel the child would be less prone to be vulnerable to drug influence, given an out in release.  As far as gameplay itself, kids are such clear thinkers.  Some kids come up with great ideas, as they are without prejudice, relative to adults anyway...If I remember my A&P, a child's capacity for multi-process peaks about age 12.  Even learning languages is supposed to be harder once you're past adolescence.

I thought people could be a master, with very hard work, even if they started late. I thought it was grandmaster, that you get into that rarified air, where you pretty much have to start very young?

 +1

 I guess it is true about the languages, but many/most adults still can, and do, pick up a second language. I don't see why there are almost no (if any) masters that started playing chess at an age of 15+ (or even 10+!).

I think you can also start late and become very good. But probably it's more easy to become a real master if you start as a child, experience is really important in chess and you can only gain experience by playing and practising.

Yeah, obviously it is easier to become a master if you start at a young age, but I don't see why it gives them such an advantage, and people make such a big deal over it: "If you aren't ____ by ____ years old then you will never be a master."

I've met professional footballers that started playing aged 16 - what is the difference?

I have a friend who learnt the game at 24. By 30 he had a South African rating of almost 2000. (correlates quite well with FIDE ratings, +- 150)

And there he's been stuck for 6 years.

Sometimes early success is no predictor of later achievements.

Jordy Mont-Reynaud set the record of youngest USCF master at age 10 but he maxed out at age 16 at 2380 while still playing plenty.

Even if he felt burnt out, I'd have expected a bigger rating from him at that stage.

His successor to youngest USCF master title, Vinay Bhat, managed to get to over 2600 and a GM title.

I suppose the ability to think in 'depth' or rather 'moves ahead' is the most vital part (or if you will the 'talent mass') which is required to succeed..?

A fork, pin, skewer, outpost, discovered check etc. is pretty simple learning, you basically just have to see an example and you'll understand. Spotting the odd opportunity to apply such technique during games, also relatively simple.
Applying it as a part of a larger plan is more difficult or at least that's what my experience tells me.

I'd recommend researching limiting beliefs and also learning how to get rid of such beliefs, but that's likely to be a rather subjective opinion. Have a look at the dream mile history - shortly after it was first accomplished, all of a sudden everyone and their grandma had done it. Weird huh? :)

Disclaimer: I'm not saying it isn't an elephant, I'm simply suggesting that thinking "I can't do it" wont help at all.

Set smaller goals. Figure out why you want to be a GM. Do your best and be happy that you did. Outcome dependency is rarely a good motivator.

Wow, that is interesting, thanks guys! It seems that:

Tchigorin took to chess at 24.

Blackburne learned aged 18.

Do you think that something such as this is less likely to happen today?

 I guess so! My Mum always said "Do what you love doing." (She obviously assumed that I was not into criminal activies) :D

My mom always said: Just wait till your father gets home!

Ah, memories.....

Perhaps one small factor is simply time available.  We know it takes a huge amount of total devoted time simply to study with coaches and review enough games to become exceptional.  This must certainly be easier to do when you're not having to concern yourself with such distractions as working to pay for your food and shelter.  If they have the opportunity to study throughout their youth, anyone with enough potential to be a GM is going to be far enough along the path by the time he leaves home to be able to earn at least some of his upkeep from chess itself as he continues his studies.  A person who does not begin serious study of chess until after he's an adult either has to be independently wealthy, or has a limited amount of time which can be alloted to chess study.

 So basically, if you are of mature age and want to become a chess master, you'd better hope that you are friendly with your parents, because you are going to be staying with them =]

 I wonder if that's better or worse than criminal activities.

I agree totally. I think another factor is you have to love the game, and if you love the game chances are you will find it 1 way or another while your young. I had to basicly beg my father to teach me but he kept telling me I was to young (around 6) so he taught me when I was 7 or 8. The major thing (I think) is when your that young members of the opposite sex aren't going to dirstact you like they do latter on. Kinda hard to tell your parnter that "Hey I'm just going to spent 12 hours a week playing this borad game try not to disturb me" and see how it goes down lol

 Haha yeah, I can see the problems associated with that :D

Great topic. Like most professions "the earlier you start the earlier you finish" (and then you can start earning money). Chess is no different. 

The learning curve at a younger age will give you and advantage, but the distractions at a later age is what most coaches consider (marriage, kids, financial responsibilities etc.). The fact is however, that at any age you start...put in enough work and you might become a master.

It will obviously take far longer to become a GM, and even a super GM.

But what is the objective? Only the top GMs can make any real money in this sport. Other than these...everyone else must have an additional income source.

For just "the love of the game" you can start at any age, and even become a master. But as a career...you must start very young...and hope that "the force" is with you...

Maybe money is not the objective to playing chess, or doing anything. Personally, I think that people are too focussed on money in today's society. I feel could write an essay on this... Oh wait, I did, in an exam a couple of weeks ago. Haha.

The objective is to do something you love doing, and if you are good enough, get paid (secondary benefit).