Only Chess
23 Oct 19
@anderssen saidYour goal is pretty realistic. It will take a combination of consistent study and tournament play-
Thanks for answering.
My goal is 2000 so it's not unrealistic and maintaining that shouldn't be to unrealistic either...
I hope 🤔
-the thing that defeats most on the path to 2000 is the "consistent" part.
Best of luck 🙂
28 Oct 19
@anderssen saidThe psychologists divide intelligence into fluid and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence is raw problem solving ability, this declines with age. Crystallized intelligence increases with age, it is experience - but experience that's been integrated in a useful way. If you get to whatever benchmark you're hoping for then you'll keep your chess strength (less a couple of hundred points or so) up to issues of stamina and generalized dementia. Having said that, there was a guy in the pub who had Alzheimer's disease, despite being in the grip of the illness actually beat a reasonable player (who'd rate about 1750 here). So don't think old age is of necessity a barrier.
I was afraid of that answer.
I'm still seeing improvement...about 100 rating points every 3 years on average and I'm only 40 so no decline yet but it would be unfortunate to work up to a rating of 2000 only to start losing it again because of old age.
Hopefully I am one of the old ones who stay strong 😊
29 Oct 19
1 edit
I think it's mostly because the attitude of most people as they grow older is that a chess game that provides no financial reward for winning is just a game, and they don't feel as great a need to win but just want to enjoy playing, so they don't put as much effort or time into winning as they used to.
For people who are professional chess players, the decline with age won't be as great, although it does take a great deal of energy to play chess at a top level, so if physical energy declines (at any age), so will top play at the higher levels.
As for me, when I started on this website over a decade ago I was playing in the 1600s and (sometimes) 1700s, and now I'm playing in the 1300s and 1400s. But I think I'm enjoying it more.
29 Oct 19
@ohforf saidI don't think it's all to do with age.
I think it's mostly because the attitude of most people as they grow older is that a chess game that provides no financial reward for winning is just a game, and they don't feel as great a need to win but just want to enjoy playing, so they don't put as much effort or time into winning as they used to.
For people who are professional chess players, the decline with age won' ...[text shortened]... and (sometimes) 1700s, and now I'm playing in the 1300s and 1400s. But I think I'm enjoying it more.
It's mostly about how competetive you are and the desire to win.
I play crown green bowls and some of the most competetive players I have played have been in their nineties.
I appreciate concentration is more intense in chess but the principal of staying focused is the same.
Personally, I don't have the overwhelming desire to win in any game or sport which all the top professionals must have to be successfull
30 Nov 19
@handyandy saidAndy are you afraid of the truth?
Are you filling in for VR in his absence?
As we get older body parts do deteriorate , we can't help it all part of the aging process.
-VR
30 Nov 19
@paul-leggett saidAppears you use to be closer to a master level than expert level you now seem to stay around! 😉
I was going to share some thoughts on how my chess has evolved as I have gotten older, but I forgot what I was going to say...
-VR
@very-rusty saidI have peaked at 2120 twice, usually after some rare wins or (or sudden opponent resignations against higher players occurring around the same time. Once was just this last year, so the only real pattern is a cyclical one.
Appears you use to be closer to a master level than expert level you now seem to stay around! 😉
-VR
My peak USCF OTB rating is 1887 (which I hit relatively late, only in the last two years or so) and I tend to hover between 1750 and 1850, but I am erratic.
My RHP rating tends to be between 100 and 250 points higher than my OTB rating at any given point in time, which is part of why I don't take RHP ratings all that serious- they only really compare against other players on the site, but not anywhere else.
I think overall I am stronger than I have ever been OTB in any one game, but I have to really rest before a tournament in order to play several good games in succession. Fatigue leads to lapses in concentration, and one sloppy move erases 40 good ones.
I think my improvement with age is due to learning much more about parts of the game not related to calculating, especially when I can leverage that knowledge to identify and exploit errors from my opponents. It's how GMs win simuls most of the time, and it is a useful mindset when I remember to focus on it.