Good luck!!
Chess prodigies took years, not months or hours per day of training to reach the master levels. To reach any rating level, you have to be close to it to reach it.
Start be applying 5 hours per week on your knowledge of principles & methods into each game and watch your rating level off. Then you know ... you do not have all the knowledge required to reach 3000.
Good luck in discovering what knowledge you are missing or need to hone your skills.
To win games, it's all about how we perceive the chess positions. Some see so clearly, what is needed to win. It takes minutes to learn knowledge and years to master it. Some have learned the methods required to win end games. Learned the tactics of middle game and learned the principles of play.
Enjoy honing your combination chess skills to win more games.
I guess ratings could be closely comparable to age.
So heres my graph comparison:
My rating system vs Age to reach that rating.
3000 : 32-33 years old
2800 : 30-31
2600 : 28-29
2400 : 26-27
2200 : 24-25
2000 : 22-23
1800 : 20-21
1600 : 18-19
1400 : 16-17
1200 : 14-15
1000 : 12-13
800 : 10-11
600 : 8-9
400 : 6-7
200 : 4-5 years old
Start be applying 5 hours per week on your knowledge of principles & methods into each game and watch your rating level off. Then you know ... you do not have all the knowledge required to reach 3000.
Good luck in discovering what knowledge you are missing or need to hone your skills.
To win games, it's all about how we perceive the chess positions. Some see so clearly, what is needed to win. It takes minutes to learn knowledge and years to master it. Some have learned the methods required to win end games. Learned the tactics of middle game and learned the principles of play.
Enjoy honing your combination chess skills to win more games.
I guess ratings could be closely comparable to age.
So heres my graph comparison:
My rating system vs Age to reach that rating.
3000 : 32-33 years old
2800 : 30-31
2600 : 28-29
2400 : 26-27
2200 : 24-25
2000 : 22-23
1800 : 20-21
1600 : 18-19
1400 : 16-17
1200 : 14-15
1000 : 12-13
800 : 10-11
600 : 8-9
400 : 6-7
200 : 4-5 years old
Ugh, this post was just because I was annoyed that these posts were everywhere. "CAN I REACH XXXX AFTER STUDYING X HOURS PER DAY IN X MONTHS." I swear.
@Toscani with an Age of 13 you should at least have 2000, strong Players are GMs with 13, 1000 is too Low in my Opinion
The strong GM's are exceptions to this spread of age in this rating system.
They were most likely child prodigies in chess. So they followed their own pace.
Average player or late bloomers can progress at a constant pace. Every year is a gain of 100 rating points. Which seems an easily goal to attain. Especially when you learn something new every year and constantly apply the new knowledge during that year.
If you can squeeze it in less time, great for you, but keep pace. Keep the pace, like you were running a marathon or progressing in school grades. If you're not keeping pace, you will fall behind and then your rating will reflect that.
If I was to put a major subject between each rating I would start with:
Rating / Subject to learn (Principles or Methods)
50 Mobility - Chessboard orientation & co-ordinates
100 Mobility - Pieces & Values
150 Mobility - Attack or Counter-Attack
200 Mobility - Defense by protecting or Blocking
250 Mobility - Captures, En passant
300 Mobility - Castling maneuvers
350 Activity - Draw or Checkmate
400 Activity - Three golden rules
450 Checkmate - Common 2 pieces checkmates, 1 move deep.
500
550
600
650
etc....
Any one else interested to add a main subject title required that a student show have already learned by a given rating. No need to detail the subject titles. Just don't repeat a title. Since it should have already been learned by the time the chess player reaches that rating.
Example: Triangulation or Opposition should be learned before or at what rating?
They cannot be put all on the same rating. So spread them out by 50 rating points so people can see which one must be learned before the other. That way the hours of training per day can be new subjects.
They were most likely child prodigies in chess. So they followed their own pace.
Average player or late bloomers can progress at a constant pace. Every year is a gain of 100 rating points. Which seems an easily goal to attain. Especially when you learn something new every year and constantly apply the new knowledge during that year.
If you can squeeze it in less time, great for you, but keep pace. Keep the pace, like you were running a marathon or progressing in school grades. If you're not keeping pace, you will fall behind and then your rating will reflect that.
If I was to put a major subject between each rating I would start with:
Rating / Subject to learn (Principles or Methods)
50 Mobility - Chessboard orientation & co-ordinates
100 Mobility - Pieces & Values
150 Mobility - Attack or Counter-Attack
200 Mobility - Defense by protecting or Blocking
250 Mobility - Captures, En passant
300 Mobility - Castling maneuvers
350 Activity - Draw or Checkmate
400 Activity - Three golden rules
450 Checkmate - Common 2 pieces checkmates, 1 move deep.
500
550
600
650
etc....
Any one else interested to add a main subject title required that a student show have already learned by a given rating. No need to detail the subject titles. Just don't repeat a title. Since it should have already been learned by the time the chess player reaches that rating.
Example: Triangulation or Opposition should be learned before or at what rating?
They cannot be put all on the same rating. So spread them out by 50 rating points so people can see which one must be learned before the other. That way the hours of training per day can be new subjects.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.