07 Dec 09
Originally posted by wormwoodYou think Polgar was the only man to try this?
take three children. don't select them from 'talented ones', but instead take the three you happen to have yourself. decide to make them genius. at what? doesn't matter. but when one of them finds a chess board, you decide that chess is as good as any other discipline.
you're not a good player yourself, but it doesn't matter. start training your daughter ...[text shortened]... ed of the three, yet she never made GM.
talent is nothing, hard work is everything.
Many try with there kids and most fail...just because it worked for Polgar doesn't mean it will work for everyone.
Maybe him and his daughters already had what it took to be great...all they needed was a little push in the right direction.
By your logic a Midget could be trained from a young age to be the worlds fastest man.
Some people just don't have what it takes to be good...the ones that do have it obviously enjoy it more and succeed.
07 Dec 09
Originally posted by wormwoodrecommended.
take three children. don't select them from 'talented ones', but instead take the three you happen to have yourself. decide to make them genius. at what? doesn't matter. but when one of them finds a chess board, you decide that chess is as good as any other discipline.
you're not a good player yourself, but it doesn't matter. start training your daughter ...[text shortened]... ed of the three, yet she never made GM.
talent is nothing, hard work is everything.
The proof is in the pudding as they say. Very good post wormwood, although I disagree
as to which Polgar sister is the most "Talented".
The most "talented", is the most charismatic student.
-GIN
07 Dec 09
Originally posted by AlexanderAlekhineI think most here would agree with you that the idea that anyone can achieve anything they put their mind to is false. However, hard work not only fulfills potential but develops it. The talented can coast for awhile (some longer than others), but in the end those that work hard almost always end up surpassing those that don't. It's the rare "natural" genius that is never eclipsed...so rare, I can't think of any!
You think Polgar was the only man to try this?
Many try with there kids and most fail...just because it worked for Polgar doesn't mean it will work for everyone.
Maybe him and his daughters already had what it took to be great...all they needed was a little push in the right direction.
By your logic a Midget could be trained from a young age t ...[text shortened]... have what it takes to be good...the ones that do have it obviously enjoy it more and succeed.
07 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by AlexanderAlekhineYou can click on his user name to see his RHP rating 🙄
What is your otb rating? Could you give us your uscf or fide number so we could look? Blablabla You say hard work, so let's see what your 4 years of hard work has accomplished.
07 Dec 09
2 edits
Originally posted by AlexanderAlekhinenot recommended.
You think Polgar was the only man to try this?
Many try with there kids and most fail...just because it worked for Polgar doesn't mean it will work for everyone.
Maybe him and his daughters already had what it took to be great...all they needed was a little push in the right direction.
By your logic a Midget could be trained from a young age t have what it takes to be good...the ones that do have it obviously enjoy it more and succeed.
Nobody has tried what Laszlo Polgar has. They have tried studies which are similar
however no other has done what he has. Most trials have lead to failure due to a lack of
understanding from the trainer. Not a lack of understanding in the subject matter, but
instead a lack of understanding in high performance training.
Somewhere in this thread and many others the idea that only children can learn at
high levels has been leaked out. While being partially accurate, the context it was
used in was completely inappropriate. Children have faster learning curves for many
reasons, most of which is due to the lack of finite understanding. A child does not
have the ability to continue through a full day with only memorized cognition's.
Therefore a child is continually activating his higher cerebral functions in order to
create relations between patterns and cognition's. Therefore the difference between
the child and the adult is not the brain functionality. Rather it is an issue of having
the will power to continually challenge the brain in a like manner. The facts are that
the brain doesn't lose its ability to learn at that high efficiency level. Instead, we
allow our brain to dull, and allow it to become more focused on reiterating and
disseminating information which is already recovered. Firing off the same synapses
continually does not built new neural networks, and does not create any mental
flexibility. Chess is a game where patterns must be recognized, and therefore the
study of the brain which is important for chess; is cognition.
The ability to recognize an object is central to the study of chess. The ability to continually
re-cognize data. Children luckily have less disabling mental factors.
As most high performance trainers know, a childs ability to absorb is often limited
only by the childs emotional discipline. In adults we have issues disconnecting,
rearranging, and perhaps most importantly, intiating intersynaptic relations in the
inner cerebral cortex.
In adults when trying to raise efficiency of recognition, patterns are
often attached to emotion. Why? Emotion exists in an area of the brain seperate of
the cerebral cortex. Emotion acts as a trigger, while still an independent factor, of
cognition. Often the best training regimen's will include highly memorable situations
in which initial cognition takes place. This allows recognition to be triggered WHEN
an emotion takes place. It also can be used to stimulate periods of cognition.
The emotive periods can be created by strenuous physical activity, music, art, or any
available outside stimulant. Once again, patterns being recognized, and the brain
creates a relationship to which each can be attributed.
Fischer listened to music in his room blaring loudly
Usian Bolt does exercises with croud noise on an ipod which slowly grows louder
Michael Phelps also an avid ipodder plays music loudly and psyches himself up using
a private routine in order to get himself ready to swim "like a machine"
Many "greats" have had similar training schedules. Even in the chess-master Josh
Waitzkin's book; he lists and describes being taught these very keys from multiple
schools designed to create successful training regimens.
Note:Edit:Add:Whatever: Strong players also attack these very interior issues.
Often players discuss "psychological moves". Why are they Psychological?
1 e4 e5 2. Qh5 is an idea tied to an emotion, therefore we can verify we have
triggered something. We can't know what, but most likely its not related to a useful
cognition. Its probably tied to a loss once a very long time ago, unjustly swindled.
How about the color and size of the chairs? If your reminded of 5th grade
science class, how will it effect your play? With these factors in mind, the surrounding
area of games played becomes just as important, if not more-so for master players.
They become an area for the war to be waged, with even more indefinite results.
-GIN
07 Dec 09
Originally posted by AlexanderAlekhine4½ years since I learned how the pieces moved. I don't play OTB, but I'm currently rated 2056 here.
You started in 2005? 4 years of chess or more?
What is your otb rating? Could you give us your uscf or fide number so we could look?
You say hard work, so let's see what your 4 years of hard work has accomplished.
07 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Nowakowski
The proof is in the pudding as they say. Very good post wormwood, although I disagree
as to which Polgar sister is the most "Talented".
well that's just who the polgars themselves think is the most talented sister. my own take is that sitting on a chair and pushing through hard rock is the best talent of all by far, and judit is known to be the hardest worker of the three. but that's not what most people consider a talent. pretty much the opposite, really.
07 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by wormwoodOriginally posted by Nowakowski
[b]
The proof is in the pudding as they say. Very good post wormwood, although I disagree
as to which Polgar sister is the most "Talented".
well that's just who the polgars themselves think is the most talented sister. my own take is that sitting on a chair and pushing through hard rock is t ...[text shortened]... three. but that's not what most people consider a talent. pretty much the opposite, really.[/b]True enough.
Which do you personally admire of the three as such?
Add: It almost sounds as though you (like me) appreciate Judit the most?
-GIN