Which rating can be reach without learning ?

In your opinion which rating can be reach without learning openings or analysing games. With practice only

Depends on the time control.

637, with luck 684. only question is why would you want to keep playing if you don't learn openings or analyze games ??

That's difficult to say... only playing mindlessly won't take anyone very far. If you play a lot, you are forced to analyse the positions on the board. You should improve. But this question is difficult to answer. If you could study everything there's available, how much would you improve? You either could be a GM or just a 1900 player. It depends also on how you do it...

Depends on the depth of your perception and whom you're practicing with.

Say you've reached 2000 [Rank: Candidate Master / Expert] with practicing only. Note that beyond that point, the people you'll face will have experience from practicing -- just like you, plus the skills they've learned from what they analysed/studied.

You tell the difference.

You can become a grandmaster without study of openings, as Kasparov recommended.
However you will not get beyond 1800 without knowledge of endgames.
As Capablanca said: a beginner should not be allowed to play a game of chess until he can checkmate KBN vs. K.

You can reach 3000+ rating if you are very, very patient.
( Just create multiple accounts and challenge your real account and keep resigning until your rating becomes 3000+)

I know a guy on here who is 1900 uscf, 2300 here (blitz and lightning). He can probably get 2200 uscf now if he wants it. He has no real formal training. No openings, no endings, and has only practiced to learn what he knows. I know him personally, so I talk to him all the time. I told him once he reminds me of a weak Capablanca or Carlsen. Some people can simply play and understand the game. Some people, like me, have to spend years studying only to barely pass expert ratings. It really depends on who you are. Don't expect that just because someone else does it you can do it. You have to find how you learn.

from my sort of limited experience... 1700 ucsf. that's about it - no learning of openings, not a lot of practice with opposition or end games, etc... lots of playing. the guys or gals i no above 1800 i think all know various openings, endings, etc.

yup... to me, 1700 uscf, with a lot of experience playing.....but not much study...... that's about the limit. hovering in the 1500 to 1700 range...............that's it, aint it????

Thanks for answers.

"Some people can simply play and understand the game." I don't know how much and how deep I can understand the game but this is what interesting me the most and why I don't want understanding of others (opening theory...) to influence my perception of the game. In fact I try to understand life more than that so I don't put so much energy on chess but this is the way I do in chess for the moment.