Carlsen said something to the effect of an adult who started learning as an adult already can get to 2400 or so, but not to very strong GM level.
In my field of work where if there was ELO I would be 2800 at my peak and 2600 on a bad day it’s the same thing, if you’re not amazing by 17 years old you have ZERO practical chance to become elite level. NEVER EVER happened in history and never will. In fact if you’re not really good by 12 years old they say you gotta re-think wether you want to continue down that path or pick a new thing to do in life. Having taught hundreds of students in my field of every age and level from total beginners to world’s best I can confirm that the brain of a child and adult is just completely different. The biggest difference I notice is in memory and physical coordination. As well as elasticity of the hands required for my line of work, probably drop in the collagen production with age as well as loss of flexibility and mobility.
To minimize this effect of losing your learning ability as you age all you can do is try to keep yourself as young as possible! Exercise hard, get tons of fresh air, sleep 8 hours every night, eat a healthy diet full of green leafs and dead animals. Supplements, no smoking or drinking etc.
I learned to play chess at 35 I'm now 88 and play in the A:M -- P:M don't care about GM or IM just like to play the GAME !!!
There was this one thread on
chess.com where they were trying to find ANYONE that learned chess after 30 and got above 2000. They are still looking.
#13
That’s too much, i learned most of the rules as a teenager, but never played, started to learn the game really only a few years ago, I’m in my 40s, and I peaked recently at 2120 bullet so far without any serious study. At first a year ago I think I was 1600 and climbing, don’t remember anymore. I solve tactics and read a few books. But this isn’t serious study. I never played over the board or took a lesson. From my bullet and blitz games VS 2200s and 2400s on this website a few of whom I beat (mostly by flagging them in hopeless position for me lol) I can see clearly that 2200-2300 would be VERY easy to achieve if I devoted a couple of hours daily to chess and got a private teacher.
So it’s really not true that adult can’t get over 2000 if he learned as an adult.
I suspect I would be stuck at 2300 and up thou since I simply have no speed of chess comprehension to understand what’s going on on the board VS those folks. This is where it would be helpful if I learned as a young child. I suspect I would be a LOT faster at recognizing the relationships between the pieces in a chess position, who is defending whom, how many times, which squares can my king be checked from? All that takes me seconds, but it needs to be instant :( Not much I can do about that. Essentially I have an “accent” and speak the language of chess slowly, since I learn as an adult, while 2300 and up are native speakers.
You have a great start to love chess game. If chess school, children 6-17 years studying chess with a coach and reading chess books. Then you need to do everything yourself, no worse than they are. I know many peers in chess school who reach the level of candidate master of sports in chess by the age of 17. For chess school, it is a kind of standard dealing with CM title. Many after 17 years throw chess, as they enter into adulthood. If it becomes tactically sharp, then your ranking will be on lichess 2100-2200, which corresponds to the title of CM.
NO its never to late. I started playing chess just last summer and im now 1600 rating which I consider as a big improvement. im 13 BTW. if U really want to be good u need to spend a lot of time on chess.
It’s also interesting to assess what one considers “good” at chess or anything else for that matter. With my 2100 I know that I’m VERY bad at chess. I was surprised to hear some people talk about how they are good at chess and take lessons and go to tournaments (never did either) and they are 1400... So “good” is relative. Good compared to whom?
"There was this one thread on
chess.com where they were trying to find ANYONE that learned chess after 30 and got above 2000. They are still looking." - Challenge accepted!
Tons of world class Grandmasters started chess at 15 or later and they didn't have access to computers, so no excuses.
"There was this one thread on
chess.com where they were trying to find ANYONE that learned chess after 30 and got above 2000. They are still looking." - Challenge accepted!
Challenge accepted and conquered already, and I’m sure I’m far from the only example. 2000 is VERY VERY easy to get to by yourself without any lessons or even many long games at an adult age. I don’t know what the big deal is. 2000 is literally a few hundred puzzles done 6-10 times over until instant recognition, 2 or 3 general chess books, a few thousand blitz and bullet games, and maybe a few youtube videos on openings. 2000 basically means one knows a little bit about the game and has some experience.