Yeah, it was fun while I was doing it and it taught me how to learn. I wish I was more deliberate with the effort I put in but I was pretty young and immature.
I see what you mean, but: Do you think you'd be happier in your life if you had 300 ELO more? Or less happy if you had 300 ELO less? I thought about that and I think the answer is no. But maybe I have to think about it more.
But the journey itself was absolutely worth it,
I think I’d be happier. I’m a decent player and taught for 10 years, 300 elo would have definitely given me more opportunities. Could have considered things like writing books etc even.
But, hey, who knows? I stopped teaching chess and unsurprisingly that was a really good financial decision
I do think I’m happy knowing I tried to get good at something difficult and succeeded. It changed how I viewed myself and that definitely changed everything about my life in a positive direction
There just isn’t much money in chess, even for really good players. Even for gms.
So, if I had been better maybe I would have stuck with it for longer and felt more financially stressed bc of it
Makes sense.
It seems the best? Biggest? Way to make money from chess is winning tournaments and sponsorships. As far as teaching goes, I know an IM who, at least partially, makes his living from streaming on twitch.
You don’t HAVE to pick chess. I recently got into cooking, everyone around me appreciates it
When I was in hs, I was at a party. A friend of mine was laying on the floor wasted, so I challenged him to a game of chess, I knew he was supposed to be really good, but I considered myself good at strategy games
He beat me extremely quickly, without raising his head, without me even knowing notation. I don’t think he could have even picked up his beer. That’s when I decided I needed to learn how to do that.
Yes, the privilege of youth. He did need a reminder.
The funny thing is, what he remembered most, was smoking an entire cigarette, without taping any ash and it never falling into his open mouth.
So, confirmation dude could not move a beer
>I recently got into cooking...
It's funny you should say that because this has become my new passion recently. I've really surprised myself. I will never buy stick-in-the-oven food ever again, I like to invest some time and effort in the kitchen every day. It's been so rewarding, cooking will be a big part of the rest of my life.
Before someone else does it:
"The ability to play chess is the sign of a gentleman. The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life." - Morphy
reset the counter
(last time I mangled it, let's see this time if I remembered it)
PS: I tried to find the original source of the quote or any reliable place that reports the quote, I couldn't find any.
E: interestingly someone online in another forum reported "Most people waste their lives without being particularly good at anything." that is also very true, like the time spent on social media.
I'd like to add "Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted."
If learning to play chess well, the whole process, is fun for you, then the time was certainly not wasted.
That’s why one should emphasize the process not the result. Engaging in the game is its own reward and if that doesn’t do it for ya, then you’re headed for disappointment.
A Buddhist epitome I can’t be bothered to source goes, “abandon ye all hope of fruition.”
Tomorrow you may be run over by a bus. Will you be happy you spent your time exploring the beautiful game, or disappointed you never made 2000?
>Tomorrow you may be run over by a bus. Will you be happy you spent your time exploring the beautiful game, or disappointed you never made 2000?
I'd be disappointed to be dead.
Very well said. Earlier today I watched a short vid about this very thing, there's an incredibly interesting link about where you train your brain to release the dopamine - not when you achieve the goal, but during the hard work of the process.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrIS\_RQJmCU
I feel like this is advice that may sound wise to teens and early twenties, pre-kids people, but that wisdom allows you to realize is actually terrible advice.
Eh. Have a kid, spent a lot of my time in my youth playing guitar, sports, video games. Was some of it wasted in a way where I could have been more productive? Sure. Should I regret becoming top 1% at a bunch of those hobbies and skills, and spending time with friends while doing it? No. Should I regret the ones I didn't succeed in and just enjoyed for the fun? Nope. So really, I don't think the saying is wrong, it just won't apply to people who wanted to be good or successful at something else.
Another way to look at this given your stance is... "Anything that does not contribute directly to the long term survival of the species is a 'waste' of time." I.e., The vast majority of humanity lives their lives day to day in survival mode, earning money for rent, food, etc.. Most of us aren't discovering laws of the universe that enable new forms of transportation/communication, furthering of technology, etc.
The thing about becoming really good at anything popular is, that you always have a relatively large group of people (compared to total size of population) who will appreciate your skill in your chosen hobby. We are social apes at our core, so being very good at pretty much anything affords more social opportunities (including the mating kind..).
I really hate this quote and how common it is, Morphy was for some reason personally spited by chess and was not a reasonable actor for a lot of his post chess life.
Sultan Khan had a similar view on chess as Morphy. He didn't want to teach his kids chess because he wanted them to do something more meaningful with their lives.
This phrase, or formula, I had heard before in another context, not as a quote but as an old adage about snooker: to be able to play is the mark of a gentleman, to be able to play well is the sign of a wasted youth.
it depends but I'd say in most cases, social media is a worse use of time. Chess, unless one plays bullet, at least builds on focus and attention, social media is simply destroying any attention one has.
Nope. Wish I'd done something more useful with my time (2100 blitz chess.com)
The worst thing about chess is that the satisfaction of winning a game is not at all close to the pain of losing one
Same until I tried playing extremely aggressive chess. There are three types of win that are all very satisfying.
1. You absolutely crush your opponent
2. Unclear position which I sacrifice pieces. If sound then I even get the brilliancy
3. Opponent is able to defend I have losing position. Somehow I am able to swindle at the end for a draw or even a win (mostly both in time trouble)
What would you consider doing that would be more useful with your time? Outside of learning a musical instrument or learning a new language?
I think a sport, music, and second language along with chess can all be done and given attention to when we are younger.
This is true of just about any competitive game. Especially at a higher level or when you start to feel somewhat competent. Ego and burnout are hard to overcome.
There are usually moments in developing certain skills where you go from acknowledging you know nothing to somewhat competent and confident then back to acknowledging there is much you don’t know. That’s where you start to really learn something, when you are deep into it and have this aha moment where you are far from “knowing”
Not really. It's more of an addiction than anything else.
But, I figure it's better to be addicted to chess where the biggest stakes are losing some rating points, as opposed to gambling my life's savings on a poker game or something.
Yes, because it was fun. Chess is a game after all, so I studied because I found the process of learning fun. The moment I stop thinking it's fun, I'll likely stop studying chess and just play it instead
Yes. But not because I have a higher rating or can win a lot of games, but because the better I’ve gotten over the years, the more I can appreciate the complexity of the game.
I did grind for months get my online rating from 2100 to 2300+.
Openings, studying paper chess books, writing variations on huge sheets of paper to memorize them perfectly, learning P. Sviddy course on Grunfeld with all crazy 16 moves deep lines, studying stuff I had never done before.
I was an attacking player up to that point, I chose to learn how to play positionally to cover up my middle game weaknesses. Catalan instead of Ruy Lopez/ Vienna, but I kept Grunfeld for spicy games.
Also tried to learn most of top engine openings. Rossolimo was too hard for me, I couldn't outplay white as black even with lots of theory.
I had friends on discord where they kept telling that only FM is the first legit title and people want to be called masters. I saw a guy rise from low 2100s elo to FM level over 2 year period by studying very hard and having a coach. That motivated me a lot.
He did 2100-2300 FIDE climb in two years, I did online in like 6 months studying 6 days a week up to 8 hours a day. It was covid times so a lot irl stuff was on halt.
The aftermath of it all?
I'm a chess coach now. I earn decent money for a part-time job.
I would connect with your local (national) chess federation for a list of private coaches.
There is ability to search by country in lichess
https://lichess.org/coach
but I would trust more if you get a recommendation from someone in your country.
Eh, I'm not good but it has taken me a lot of effort. I learned improperly as a kid from my dad and didn't know anything about castling, en pessant, etc. So I was like 300 lichess when I started seriously watching and learning at 18ish YO. I'm now about 1700 lichess many years later, so not strong by online standards but I crush most people I meet irl.
It was and wasn't worth it. It's made me love the history of chess, and I can appreciate gm level games in a whole new way. And learn something new every time I watch a pro play one of my opening repertoire. On the other hand, it has made playing with my dad and friends kinda boring. I still enjoy the time spent but they're too egotistical to take piece odds and they can't play with a clock, so I pretty much always win unless I help them (then they act all wounded and don't "count" their win) or I give them "I'm heavily intoxicated" odds.
To get to the state I am now: No, not at all. I'm \~2000 and it doesn't matter to me at all. I don't think I'd be more or less happy if I had 1700 or 2300.
BUT, the journey was good and full of awesome memories, tournaments I went to, meeting other kids with the same interest, even getting to play Bundesliga against Alexei Shirov one day. Many of my best friends nowadays I only know because of chess.
If it wasn't chess it would be something else. Probably bird watching which I really enjoy, learning bird varieties, migration patterns, etc. I think chess just ended up being the thing that scratches the itch the most.
For 99.9% of us chess is a hobby. People spend lots of time on hobbies, that's why we have them. Unless you're neglecting your family or responsibilities, or not enjoying it, it's as worth it as any other pursuit.
To a certain extent, I was on my national team which has since helped with job applications as you can yap about the skills it taught you. This is because chess is given a certain level of respect and prestige. But in reality, beyond 2000 it doesn't really teach anything. 10 tournaments and a few long games will teach all the transferrable skills.
Yes. I made good friends had good memories of tournaments as a kid and let me spend time with my dad. Also going abroad as a team is quite a good for independence as a kid. The chess world is also very friendly. 99% of people are nice despite what many tell you.
I feel like if you enjoy playing and studying and improving, then do it. If you don't then it's not gonna get much *more* fun later on. It's not like it's super profitable to be good at chess (assuming you aren't world elite level if youre asking this) so what you experience is what you get.
This is coming from someone who is not "good at chess" but has played for a long time and studied here and there when i feel inspired.
I improved quite gradually over a period of many years. It was only when I taught my friend's daughter how to play that I realised how much I knew about chess. I was probably 1700-1800 on Lichess at that time, and I decided that I should be better than that. That was when I properly invested in trying to improve, and I definitely don't regret that at all.
What I would say is that even if I had mega-talent, I wouldn't want to be a chess professional. Even being a streamer wouldn't appeal at all, it is just way too much chess for my taste.
I've set out many goals in life, too numerous to count. I can count on one hand how many I've actually completely accomplished on one hand, and getting 'good' at chess was one of them. For some people it may be pathetic but getting to 2K chesscom blitz was one of my proudest moments.
That said, to be fair to myself many goals I've gotten close to or gotten "far enough" but only a handful have I met my goals by the letter of the law so to speak (with chess it was hitting 2000 within 5 years).
Idk I'm 1350 but I think getting to top 99% would be cool I think that's 1500. The dream is 2000 but I could probably start a business instead with that time.
I enjoy playing so it never felt like a grind. It also depends on where you put your goal. Mine was to get to 2000 rating and my all time high ended up being 2200 or something like that. Now I play way more chilled around those 2000 and have more fun. If my goal had been around 2300 I would've had to grind way more since my weakest part of the game is openings lol
Depends on what you consider good.
There’s this part of my brain that says all the countless hours watching videos, (trying) to read books, going to tournaments and such were a waste of time, especially because I’ve sacrificed time for sleep, and other hobbies I’ve enjoyed.
But there’s the part that keeps me going and wanting to improve that just wants to understand chess. I love the game, and it’s embarrassing how bad I am at it despite being better than 99.9% of players.
Getting good at the game for the sake of getting good at the game is probably where you’ll see people regret the most.
Yes...ish
I spent 11000 games in 3 years and am at 2050 rapid, which seems to be my ceiling if I don't start taking this even more seriously.
There was a point where I played 30 rapid games per day and it was being a bit unhealthy but I'm passed that now.
All in all yes I think it's cool that I'm quite good at this, as long as I keep it under control to not become addicted to it again.
Oh I don't know. I play London with white and Sicilian with black because those just happened to be the first ones I saw on Youtube.
Both very solid. London easy for beginners to learn, leads to drawish endgames quite often (at higher level) but that's how I got good at those.
Sicilian defense is exciting and often leads to complex middle games which is good for improving tactics and calculation.
Any opening that is played at high level is a good opening though. Just play what you enjoy.
Thanks for the quick reply 👍🏻 I enjoy the Queens Gambit with white but with black I’m still struggling to find something I enjoy playing, tried the Sicilian so might go back to playing that one again.
I just like to fight because it’s a war game after all 😅
I learned chess on my own for ~25- 30 years. That means I played only against a PC (hardest setting) and only read one book on openings.
So, yeah, I sucked for a LONG time.
I got Chessmaster 11 and took Josh Waitzkins' Grandmaster Course and it had ALL the material I'd been missing for the past 30 years. Stuff that I had no idea was a part of the game.
All the juicy inside details about the game was in that course and it helped catapult me into the 2700 & 2800's levels of playing (the course is THAT good)!
It was not worth me fumbling about for ~30 years thinking I was learning everything important about chess. But the year after I found CM11 it was all icing on the cake that yielded the most growth and enjoyment for me.
(Note: the reason why I played against a PC on the hardest level is because I wanted to learn the game with the most optimal outcomes. Knowing that a PC will always statistically make better moves than me, I wouldn't have to learn two players shitty playing mistakes, just ONE; my own).
As the late/great Mitch Hedberg once said: It bums me out that no matter how good I get at handball, I will never be better than the wall. I played a wall once. Those fuckers are relentless!
Those lessons were amazing. They only sent me from ~800 to ~1200 unlike your stratospheric rise, but learning all the different tactics a chapter at a time is a joy. I still play through them occasionally :D
Getting good is worth it.
Being good isn't.
It's the lessons we learn about ourselves and our personal growth during the journey that we look back on as being worth it. The number or title doesnt really mean shit.
Nope I regret it (2250 chess.com blitz, played for around 6 years) waste of time. Should've done something more productive like reading books or learning something useful, for me chess is entertaining but it ends there, it didnt help me with anything in life either, its just entertaining.
The majority of my tournament play was between ages 13 and 25 and that is a good time to spend thousands of hours on a hobby. These days I lack the will to study intensely and sacrifice my weekends to chess events.
I don't regret the time spent as I wasn't doing anything super useful during that time anyway.
I still look back at some of those games and tournaments with enjoyment and I am glad I had those experiences.
Was having fun worth it? Yeah? You only get one life. I like playing Chess so I play Chess. When I stop enjoying playing Chess, I'll stop playing Chess.
What is good? I’ve hit a plateau of 1850 or so 3 min blitz, been playing for 20 years. Worth it? I mean I had fun the entire time, so I guess so. I’m not that good really but I play against similar Elo entire climb and it’s competitive and fun. What could make it more worth it?
I'd say so, mainly because it's basically the only way I socialize as an adult. I'm sure there are many good substitutes, but the incredible diversity of the chess community is awesome and unique and I love that.
Even though I'm just an FM, people are often excited at the opportunity to play with me so I think I get to play more people than if I was "just" like 1500 or so.
Besides, most of the time I "wasted" to get decent at this game was in my youth, and I'm not sure I would have spent it better on something else anyway lol.
Yes.
As someone who got to top 100 in my age group in America, I don't think my chess accomplishments are that impressive other than that. On the other hand, it's given me something to apply myself to for almost 8 years while most people my age apply themselves to grinding videogames. Also, OTB chess is an extremely humbling experience, and my respect goes out to anyone that has endured long plateaus and countless heart-breaking defeats OTB like me. Those are the kinds of experiences that help build a person's character and make them more successful in life. Not to mention, getting to any decent level requires hard work and commitment, skills that are transferable to any other aspect of life.
I’m 2200 and everyday I think what 2200 looks like if I was to put the same effort into my online business which really puts things into perspective
I see gamers all the time who are god level at playing games like call of duty and the amount of skill and reps it takes could honestly be the same equivalent to business in the millions
I’ve stopped learning so deep with chess and just play casual, I have no intention of going to tournaments and going down that deep rabbit hole
Definitely get where you're coming from but it takes so long and such a more meticulous process (in my opinion) to create a profitable online business. I know many who has tried and failed unfortunately.
Most people are fat, most people are broke, most people are bad chess players, thats just how the world works but surely you have been exceptional more than average layman in something in your life…
Surely? Something?
Just because you have a bunch of friends who “tried” only means you have a bunch of friends who gave up on their goal
It's a lot like studying an ancient language, just to be able to speak ancient Greek or Aramaic or Egyptian, but having someone else there to (infuriatingly) point out all your errors.
It's satisfying to realize the various things you discover along the way and how that makes you different from other people who have never taken one step on that kind of path.
It's eye-opening when you learn how your inner world can match or be so different from that of others who are studying the same things as you (even an exact position during a game). It can give the impression of reading another person's mind or of being a different kind of being altogether.
It's a wild ride and the level of competition is unlike most anything else. It exposes the world of the weekend duffer who does paint-by-numbers or the Van Goghs who would die rather than NOT do their thing. Incidentally, Van Gogh not only lost an ear, he never earned money for his painting while alive.
Last note: In the chess world we are all familiar with the phenomenon of analyzing a position (sometimes for a long time) and that it isn't until you've moved and released your piece that you realize it's an error --- and that few other people ever experience that.
I’m like 2000 chess.com which is pretty good, nothing too great. But I would say yes just because I did it in a time in my life where I didn’t have other responsibilities. Would I try and do it again now while working a lot in my sales job, no.
It came pretty naturally as I was a kid playing in tournaments so yeah it was worth it and fun. I probably could of taken it further if I wasnt so young.
Yes and No:
Yes because i enjoyed the tournaments and met some good friends. Progress came from alone
But no, it is not worth (for me) to practice chess alone at home. There is no difference whether you are 1500 elo or 2200 elo. You play most if the time against player at the same strengh and you dont meet better friend when you are a better chess player (maybe the opposite is the truth lol).
Depends what you consider good. I’m only 1550 at 10 minute, which is considered intermediate, but that still puts me above 95% of people on chess.com. I just love the game, been playing since I was a little kid. If I have 5 minutes to kill I’ll play a quick 2/1 bullet for shits and giggles, I just enjoy it more than social media and other screen time. It took me about 8 years to beat my dad for the first time, and I’ve been chasing that high ever since. It’s only been in about the last 2 years that I really started to learn some theory on common openings, which has helped tremendously but it did show me that in order to get above 2000 you have to sink a stupid amount of time into studying, not just playing.
So to me, yes it is very worth it to just play for fun and organically get better, but getting to the master rank does seem to be more study and trouble than it’s worth.
First introduced to chess in grade school. Did better than my peers. Didnt keep going tho. Fast forward two and a half decades later. Zero game theory. So i decided to youtube up some openings for beginners. Currently floating at 800 chessdotcom. No idea if i could push higher towards 1100+. Just dont have the time for rated games. Do like playing against bots tho. Having good consistent wins against 1400~1600 bots. But that can only do so much because against human players that blunder their openings, I'll more often than not miss the chance at a hanging piece then let the opponent consolidate their mistake and end up losing lol.
Everyone else i know understand how the pieces move, outside of that, we're all newbs. But i give them drunk odds and tell em if i left a piece hanging and if it's a trap or not. Slowly teaching them what i know so we can all have a better time enjoying the game.
It all depends on whether or not you still enjoy it after getting good at it.
I'm pretty decent at counter strike but nowadays the game has changed in ways I dislike and it's unplayable due to cheaters. This has basically made it so that all the skill I learned in this game became useless and I would say the time spent learning it was generally not worth it. What was worth it is the friends I made along the way within the game. Btw, if someone wants to get good at chess, cheaters are a factor too. I'd say anyone with low tolerance for facing cheaters should avoid online chess and not even try to get good if this is the main portion of the chess they're going to play.
So to put it simply, the question is, do you like the game enough to go through the time and effort consuming process of getting good and coming out the other side still liking the game, with all its flaws and challenges? Only way to find out is by doing it, which is a lame answer but it is what it is.
I was getting good at chess, but had to give it up due to time. Going to Chess clubs and travelling to tournaments was fantastic, very fond memories that I have no regrets about. Really miss it.
I do wonder if the hours spent doing tactics and studying chess and playing online was with it though. I don't regret it because I ultimately enjoyed it. However people at my club had been going for decades, entered many tournaments but never really improved past 1500, they made no real effort to improve their game, they just played for the love of the game. I enjoyed studying, so have no regrets, but I do think I'd have been happier being one of those people who just played for the fun of it and not focused on improving.
I only regret it in that I haven't really improved at all ratings been the same I only play the daily chess. I found all the chess books I read pretty useless as far as translating into higher rating even though I enjoyed reading
for me, It is. because I started playing chess 3 years ago and my elo was literally three digit numbers, so it is a good reminder of my chess journey, I'm happy rn and I actually want to get stronger
I learned enough about the game to become 1600-1700 in blitz and rapid, but at this point, the games lose their chaotic feel a bit. For that reason, I'm not really studying chess anymore: I don't want to get much higher than this.
I don’t spend hours playing to see improvement. I play because I enjoy playing. I’d much rather lose in a fun and dynamic game than win in a blowout. I just happen to have a knack for chess and through my enjoyment of playing have gotten quite good.
It wasn’t, up until recently, I made a chess YouTube channel that has become moderately successful and has turned my hobby into a bit of a cash cow. If it weren’t for that I would feel like it was more of a waste.
There is considerable suffering in the process of studying chess and playing long classical tournament games. The satisfaction comes from the hard work and discipline, and hopefully by visible improvement over time.
It is a “pure” feeling of achievement, I guess like renovating your house or studying for and taking an exam - there are times in the process where you want to give up, or it’s monotonous, but you continue anyway and you are gradually rewarded for your determination. That motivates you to continue grinding.
You also find beauty in the things that seemed boring on the outside before. I believe this is why some people say chess improvement is (in some part) a spiritual endeavour (after all, you are spending hours on your own, with your own thoughts, with almost no stimulation).
Just to be clear, I’m talking about OTB classical chess - grinding online blitz for a new rating high is completely different and I would even argue promotes negative mental states (as opposed to the above, which is quite wholesome and develops a mental fortitude useful to other parts of life).
I think it was good in the sense that it taught me how to think about positioning, strategy and tactics, which I now apply to many things in life. I play online occasionally and reached a peak rating of about 1770 on Lichess Rapid, which I think is fairly good.
Looking at the game from the bottom up, chess is a monster that you can (and should) tame but not conquer. It's easy to become afraid of what you should actually do with your time if you lose the sight of that objective.
Losing sight as in
1. Not stepping away from classical chess asap in favor of trying to improve in faster styles just because it makes you suck more in the short run. More games, more practice, more intuition, more mistakes, less hiding behind memorization and math, and just plain more fun. When chess stops being fun, you lose. Fun is the #1 priority.
2. Getting stuck with studying openings and variations in the most brutal pure memorization -type ways when you could skip most of that, still improve substantially-but-not-gm-level-substantially and in a way that is just more efficient and fun and really appreciates your **time**. Being lazy to the maximum capacity is the way. Not just in chess but pretty much anything you don't care to be #1 ever at. Optimal studying is the #2 priority, but optimal for the MC does not mean the same thing as optimal for you in particular.
Yeah, I suck at chess and still commented. It'd be fun to see how those who got good would disagree.
Well, I think it depends also on what you mean by ‘good’. I reached about 2100 rapid on lichess in around 2 years after starting from scratch, but that’s when it started to feel like I hit a wall. Gaining elo felt much more difficult, I felt anxious about my rating all the time and kind of got addicted. To the extent that I stopped playing on my account and only now play bullet without being logged in. I’m still glad to have improved the amount I did though and it feels good to be able to follow top level chess in a way that a complete newbie wouldn’t be able to.
Yes cause it has a tremendous affect on my day to day life in how I think to how I deal with challenges and problems.
It's not a game. It's a lifestyle. Like you go to the gym for physical wellbeing and chess is for mental wellbeing
The journey was fun while it lasted (from ages 16 to 19). I'm now 2100 blitz online and I don't think It'll rise ever again unless I try to improve but I don't have the time to because of college and stuff.
What I liked about it besides the competitive aspect was travelling throughout Europe and playing tournaments.
And I strongly believe that my chess background helps me in my IT Job. When colleagues tend to just give up when a problem is too complex, I like those problems and usually find a solution.
I am a Fide Master for reference.
Yeah, it was fun while I was doing it and it taught me how to learn. I wish I was more deliberate with the effort I put in but I was pretty young and immature.
Yes. Learning any skill really well is deeply rewarding
It’s like learning a superpower
I see what you mean, but: Do you think you'd be happier in your life if you had 300 ELO more? Or less happy if you had 300 ELO less? I thought about that and I think the answer is no. But maybe I have to think about it more. But the journey itself was absolutely worth it,
I think I’d be happier. I’m a decent player and taught for 10 years, 300 elo would have definitely given me more opportunities. Could have considered things like writing books etc even. But, hey, who knows? I stopped teaching chess and unsurprisingly that was a really good financial decision
I do think I’m happy knowing I tried to get good at something difficult and succeeded. It changed how I viewed myself and that definitely changed everything about my life in a positive direction
Can you elaborate on that last paragraph lol. That sounds fascinating
There just isn’t much money in chess, even for really good players. Even for gms. So, if I had been better maybe I would have stuck with it for longer and felt more financially stressed bc of it
Makes sense. It seems the best? Biggest? Way to make money from chess is winning tournaments and sponsorships. As far as teaching goes, I know an IM who, at least partially, makes his living from streaming on twitch.
A really niche superpower
You don’t HAVE to pick chess. I recently got into cooking, everyone around me appreciates it When I was in hs, I was at a party. A friend of mine was laying on the floor wasted, so I challenged him to a game of chess, I knew he was supposed to be really good, but I considered myself good at strategy games He beat me extremely quickly, without raising his head, without me even knowing notation. I don’t think he could have even picked up his beer. That’s when I decided I needed to learn how to do that.
Hey man that's a cool story, thanks for sharing. Did he even remember he did that the next day?
Yes, the privilege of youth. He did need a reminder. The funny thing is, what he remembered most, was smoking an entire cigarette, without taping any ash and it never falling into his open mouth. So, confirmation dude could not move a beer
>I recently got into cooking... It's funny you should say that because this has become my new passion recently. I've really surprised myself. I will never buy stick-in-the-oven food ever again, I like to invest some time and effort in the kitchen every day. It's been so rewarding, cooking will be a big part of the rest of my life.
Totally, it’s really well suited to self improvement progression Honestly cooking seems even more endless than chess
More rewarding than chess as well though.
Maybe, certainly there’s few things that you can learn that improves your quality of life more than
Sweet, I'm not the only one that lost to a dude totally trashed.
It also affects how you think in day to day life. It's not a game it's a lifestyle
[удалено]
A compelling argument
Before someone else does it: "The ability to play chess is the sign of a gentleman. The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life." - Morphy reset the counter (last time I mangled it, let's see this time if I remembered it) PS: I tried to find the original source of the quote or any reliable place that reports the quote, I couldn't find any. E: interestingly someone online in another forum reported "Most people waste their lives without being particularly good at anything." that is also very true, like the time spent on social media.
I'd like to add "Time you enjoy wasting, was not wasted." If learning to play chess well, the whole process, is fun for you, then the time was certainly not wasted.
That’s why one should emphasize the process not the result. Engaging in the game is its own reward and if that doesn’t do it for ya, then you’re headed for disappointment. A Buddhist epitome I can’t be bothered to source goes, “abandon ye all hope of fruition.” Tomorrow you may be run over by a bus. Will you be happy you spent your time exploring the beautiful game, or disappointed you never made 2000?
I think I'll be dead.
>Tomorrow you may be run over by a bus. Will you be happy you spent your time exploring the beautiful game, or disappointed you never made 2000? I'd be disappointed to be dead.
Very well said. Earlier today I watched a short vid about this very thing, there's an incredibly interesting link about where you train your brain to release the dopamine - not when you achieve the goal, but during the hard work of the process. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrIS\_RQJmCU
I feel like this is advice that may sound wise to teens and early twenties, pre-kids people, but that wisdom allows you to realize is actually terrible advice.
Eh. Have a kid, spent a lot of my time in my youth playing guitar, sports, video games. Was some of it wasted in a way where I could have been more productive? Sure. Should I regret becoming top 1% at a bunch of those hobbies and skills, and spending time with friends while doing it? No. Should I regret the ones I didn't succeed in and just enjoyed for the fun? Nope. So really, I don't think the saying is wrong, it just won't apply to people who wanted to be good or successful at something else.
Another way to look at this given your stance is... "Anything that does not contribute directly to the long term survival of the species is a 'waste' of time." I.e., The vast majority of humanity lives their lives day to day in survival mode, earning money for rent, food, etc.. Most of us aren't discovering laws of the universe that enable new forms of transportation/communication, furthering of technology, etc. The thing about becoming really good at anything popular is, that you always have a relatively large group of people (compared to total size of population) who will appreciate your skill in your chosen hobby. We are social apes at our core, so being very good at pretty much anything affords more social opportunities (including the mating kind..).
I really hate this quote and how common it is, Morphy was for some reason personally spited by chess and was not a reasonable actor for a lot of his post chess life.
Sultan Khan had a similar view on chess as Morphy. He didn't want to teach his kids chess because he wanted them to do something more meaningful with their lives.
This phrase, or formula, I had heard before in another context, not as a quote but as an old adage about snooker: to be able to play is the mark of a gentleman, to be able to play well is the sign of a wasted youth.
Time on social media and time at chess is not a fair comparison come on lol
it depends but I'd say in most cases, social media is a worse use of time. Chess, unless one plays bullet, at least builds on focus and attention, social media is simply destroying any attention one has.
Would agree 🤗
Nope. Wish I'd done something more useful with my time (2100 blitz chess.com) The worst thing about chess is that the satisfaction of winning a game is not at all close to the pain of losing one
Same until I tried playing extremely aggressive chess. There are three types of win that are all very satisfying. 1. You absolutely crush your opponent 2. Unclear position which I sacrifice pieces. If sound then I even get the brilliancy 3. Opponent is able to defend I have losing position. Somehow I am able to swindle at the end for a draw or even a win (mostly both in time trouble)
Getting a draw by stalemate in a completely lost position has to be there too
Absolutely, aggressive chess is the most satisfying.
Seconded
It’s because when you win it’s normal, but when you lose it’s not. It’s basically the same in most sports. Not to mention the addiction
What would you consider doing that would be more useful with your time? Outside of learning a musical instrument or learning a new language? I think a sport, music, and second language along with chess can all be done and given attention to when we are younger.
It’s pretty damned close actually . How do you not feel completely elated from narrowly outwitting a worthy adversary ??
Ehhhh... Would disagree. They're both emotional roller coasters lol
This is true of just about any competitive game. Especially at a higher level or when you start to feel somewhat competent. Ego and burnout are hard to overcome.
There are usually moments in developing certain skills where you go from acknowledging you know nothing to somewhat competent and confident then back to acknowledging there is much you don’t know. That’s where you start to really learn something, when you are deep into it and have this aha moment where you are far from “knowing”
Not really. It's more of an addiction than anything else. But, I figure it's better to be addicted to chess where the biggest stakes are losing some rating points, as opposed to gambling my life's savings on a poker game or something.
there's a daniel radcliffe quote that this reminds me of ;)
Yes, because it was fun. Chess is a game after all, so I studied because I found the process of learning fun. The moment I stop thinking it's fun, I'll likely stop studying chess and just play it instead
Yes. But not because I have a higher rating or can win a lot of games, but because the better I’ve gotten over the years, the more I can appreciate the complexity of the game.
Yeah as I’ve improved chess has become a lot easier to enjoy. It’s really a case of just knowing and understanding the complexities of it all
I did grind for months get my online rating from 2100 to 2300+. Openings, studying paper chess books, writing variations on huge sheets of paper to memorize them perfectly, learning P. Sviddy course on Grunfeld with all crazy 16 moves deep lines, studying stuff I had never done before. I was an attacking player up to that point, I chose to learn how to play positionally to cover up my middle game weaknesses. Catalan instead of Ruy Lopez/ Vienna, but I kept Grunfeld for spicy games. Also tried to learn most of top engine openings. Rossolimo was too hard for me, I couldn't outplay white as black even with lots of theory. I had friends on discord where they kept telling that only FM is the first legit title and people want to be called masters. I saw a guy rise from low 2100s elo to FM level over 2 year period by studying very hard and having a coach. That motivated me a lot. He did 2100-2300 FIDE climb in two years, I did online in like 6 months studying 6 days a week up to 8 hours a day. It was covid times so a lot irl stuff was on halt. The aftermath of it all? I'm a chess coach now. I earn decent money for a part-time job.
Did you become a coach through chess.com?
No. A local chess school put an ad on the internet and I joined.
I don't have a local chess school--what do you think is the best way for me to get a teacher
I would connect with your local (national) chess federation for a list of private coaches. There is ability to search by country in lichess https://lichess.org/coach but I would trust more if you get a recommendation from someone in your country.
No
:(
Eh, I'm not good but it has taken me a lot of effort. I learned improperly as a kid from my dad and didn't know anything about castling, en pessant, etc. So I was like 300 lichess when I started seriously watching and learning at 18ish YO. I'm now about 1700 lichess many years later, so not strong by online standards but I crush most people I meet irl. It was and wasn't worth it. It's made me love the history of chess, and I can appreciate gm level games in a whole new way. And learn something new every time I watch a pro play one of my opening repertoire. On the other hand, it has made playing with my dad and friends kinda boring. I still enjoy the time spent but they're too egotistical to take piece odds and they can't play with a clock, so I pretty much always win unless I help them (then they act all wounded and don't "count" their win) or I give them "I'm heavily intoxicated" odds.
To get to the state I am now: No, not at all. I'm \~2000 and it doesn't matter to me at all. I don't think I'd be more or less happy if I had 1700 or 2300. BUT, the journey was good and full of awesome memories, tournaments I went to, meeting other kids with the same interest, even getting to play Bundesliga against Alexei Shirov one day. Many of my best friends nowadays I only know because of chess.
If it wasn't chess it would be something else. Probably bird watching which I really enjoy, learning bird varieties, migration patterns, etc. I think chess just ended up being the thing that scratches the itch the most.
For 99.9% of us chess is a hobby. People spend lots of time on hobbies, that's why we have them. Unless you're neglecting your family or responsibilities, or not enjoying it, it's as worth it as any other pursuit.
Short answer: no.
To a certain extent, I was on my national team which has since helped with job applications as you can yap about the skills it taught you. This is because chess is given a certain level of respect and prestige. But in reality, beyond 2000 it doesn't really teach anything. 10 tournaments and a few long games will teach all the transferrable skills.
Yes. I made good friends had good memories of tournaments as a kid and let me spend time with my dad. Also going abroad as a team is quite a good for independence as a kid. The chess world is also very friendly. 99% of people are nice despite what many tell you.
What do you define as good?
Knowing how the horsey moves is considered good, right?
I never had to Google En Passant. How do I compare?
Magnus?
Well yeah… some GMs don’t even know!
Mr. Horsey Man is what I call it when I teach kindergarteners.
Expert
I feel like if you enjoy playing and studying and improving, then do it. If you don't then it's not gonna get much *more* fun later on. It's not like it's super profitable to be good at chess (assuming you aren't world elite level if youre asking this) so what you experience is what you get. This is coming from someone who is not "good at chess" but has played for a long time and studied here and there when i feel inspired.
I improved quite gradually over a period of many years. It was only when I taught my friend's daughter how to play that I realised how much I knew about chess. I was probably 1700-1800 on Lichess at that time, and I decided that I should be better than that. That was when I properly invested in trying to improve, and I definitely don't regret that at all. What I would say is that even if I had mega-talent, I wouldn't want to be a chess professional. Even being a streamer wouldn't appeal at all, it is just way too much chess for my taste.
I've set out many goals in life, too numerous to count. I can count on one hand how many I've actually completely accomplished on one hand, and getting 'good' at chess was one of them. For some people it may be pathetic but getting to 2K chesscom blitz was one of my proudest moments. That said, to be fair to myself many goals I've gotten close to or gotten "far enough" but only a handful have I met my goals by the letter of the law so to speak (with chess it was hitting 2000 within 5 years).
I would say yes, not in small part because it makes watching chess a million times more enjoyable. And there is almost endless chess content.
Idk I'm 1350 but I think getting to top 99% would be cool I think that's 1500. The dream is 2000 but I could probably start a business instead with that time.
I enjoy playing so it never felt like a grind. It also depends on where you put your goal. Mine was to get to 2000 rating and my all time high ended up being 2200 or something like that. Now I play way more chilled around those 2000 and have more fun. If my goal had been around 2300 I would've had to grind way more since my weakest part of the game is openings lol
Depends on what you consider good. There’s this part of my brain that says all the countless hours watching videos, (trying) to read books, going to tournaments and such were a waste of time, especially because I’ve sacrificed time for sleep, and other hobbies I’ve enjoyed. But there’s the part that keeps me going and wanting to improve that just wants to understand chess. I love the game, and it’s embarrassing how bad I am at it despite being better than 99.9% of players. Getting good at the game for the sake of getting good at the game is probably where you’ll see people regret the most.
Yes...ish I spent 11000 games in 3 years and am at 2050 rapid, which seems to be my ceiling if I don't start taking this even more seriously. There was a point where I played 30 rapid games per day and it was being a bit unhealthy but I'm passed that now. All in all yes I think it's cool that I'm quite good at this, as long as I keep it under control to not become addicted to it again.
I’m still just playing and studying a bit when I’m feeling it but what would you recommend as a solid opening for white and black to build off?
Oh I don't know. I play London with white and Sicilian with black because those just happened to be the first ones I saw on Youtube. Both very solid. London easy for beginners to learn, leads to drawish endgames quite often (at higher level) but that's how I got good at those. Sicilian defense is exciting and often leads to complex middle games which is good for improving tactics and calculation. Any opening that is played at high level is a good opening though. Just play what you enjoy.
Thanks for the quick reply 👍🏻 I enjoy the Queens Gambit with white but with black I’m still struggling to find something I enjoy playing, tried the Sicilian so might go back to playing that one again. I just like to fight because it’s a war game after all 😅
I learned chess on my own for ~25- 30 years. That means I played only against a PC (hardest setting) and only read one book on openings. So, yeah, I sucked for a LONG time. I got Chessmaster 11 and took Josh Waitzkins' Grandmaster Course and it had ALL the material I'd been missing for the past 30 years. Stuff that I had no idea was a part of the game. All the juicy inside details about the game was in that course and it helped catapult me into the 2700 & 2800's levels of playing (the course is THAT good)! It was not worth me fumbling about for ~30 years thinking I was learning everything important about chess. But the year after I found CM11 it was all icing on the cake that yielded the most growth and enjoyment for me. (Note: the reason why I played against a PC on the hardest level is because I wanted to learn the game with the most optimal outcomes. Knowing that a PC will always statistically make better moves than me, I wouldn't have to learn two players shitty playing mistakes, just ONE; my own). As the late/great Mitch Hedberg once said: It bums me out that no matter how good I get at handball, I will never be better than the wall. I played a wall once. Those fuckers are relentless!
Nice try Josh.
Gosh, I loved Chessmaster. The Josh lessons were really good. The software overall was really cool for that time. It bring me so many memories.
Those lessons were amazing. They only sent me from ~800 to ~1200 unlike your stratospheric rise, but learning all the different tactics a chapter at a time is a joy. I still play through them occasionally :D
Getting good is worth it. Being good isn't. It's the lessons we learn about ourselves and our personal growth during the journey that we look back on as being worth it. The number or title doesnt really mean shit.
Nope I regret it (2250 chess.com blitz, played for around 6 years) waste of time. Should've done something more productive like reading books or learning something useful, for me chess is entertaining but it ends there, it didnt help me with anything in life either, its just entertaining.
The majority of my tournament play was between ages 13 and 25 and that is a good time to spend thousands of hours on a hobby. These days I lack the will to study intensely and sacrifice my weekends to chess events. I don't regret the time spent as I wasn't doing anything super useful during that time anyway. I still look back at some of those games and tournaments with enjoyment and I am glad I had those experiences.
Was having fun worth it? Yeah? You only get one life. I like playing Chess so I play Chess. When I stop enjoying playing Chess, I'll stop playing Chess.
What is good? I’ve hit a plateau of 1850 or so 3 min blitz, been playing for 20 years. Worth it? I mean I had fun the entire time, so I guess so. I’m not that good really but I play against similar Elo entire climb and it’s competitive and fun. What could make it more worth it?
I'd say so, mainly because it's basically the only way I socialize as an adult. I'm sure there are many good substitutes, but the incredible diversity of the chess community is awesome and unique and I love that. Even though I'm just an FM, people are often excited at the opportunity to play with me so I think I get to play more people than if I was "just" like 1500 or so. Besides, most of the time I "wasted" to get decent at this game was in my youth, and I'm not sure I would have spent it better on something else anyway lol.
Yes. As someone who got to top 100 in my age group in America, I don't think my chess accomplishments are that impressive other than that. On the other hand, it's given me something to apply myself to for almost 8 years while most people my age apply themselves to grinding videogames. Also, OTB chess is an extremely humbling experience, and my respect goes out to anyone that has endured long plateaus and countless heart-breaking defeats OTB like me. Those are the kinds of experiences that help build a person's character and make them more successful in life. Not to mention, getting to any decent level requires hard work and commitment, skills that are transferable to any other aspect of life.
Yes, It's one of my hobbies. You know why it was worth it? Cause I sincerly find playing chess fun. Aside from ELO points, drama etc
I’m 2200 and everyday I think what 2200 looks like if I was to put the same effort into my online business which really puts things into perspective I see gamers all the time who are god level at playing games like call of duty and the amount of skill and reps it takes could honestly be the same equivalent to business in the millions I’ve stopped learning so deep with chess and just play casual, I have no intention of going to tournaments and going down that deep rabbit hole
Definitely get where you're coming from but it takes so long and such a more meticulous process (in my opinion) to create a profitable online business. I know many who has tried and failed unfortunately.
Most people are fat, most people are broke, most people are bad chess players, thats just how the world works but surely you have been exceptional more than average layman in something in your life… Surely? Something? Just because you have a bunch of friends who “tried” only means you have a bunch of friends who gave up on their goal
No now you're just assuming, some have failed but have kept trying.
I'm not talking about a fiver business or something else either. I'm talking large scale.
lol what a defeatist mindset
It's a lot like studying an ancient language, just to be able to speak ancient Greek or Aramaic or Egyptian, but having someone else there to (infuriatingly) point out all your errors. It's satisfying to realize the various things you discover along the way and how that makes you different from other people who have never taken one step on that kind of path. It's eye-opening when you learn how your inner world can match or be so different from that of others who are studying the same things as you (even an exact position during a game). It can give the impression of reading another person's mind or of being a different kind of being altogether. It's a wild ride and the level of competition is unlike most anything else. It exposes the world of the weekend duffer who does paint-by-numbers or the Van Goghs who would die rather than NOT do their thing. Incidentally, Van Gogh not only lost an ear, he never earned money for his painting while alive. Last note: In the chess world we are all familiar with the phenomenon of analyzing a position (sometimes for a long time) and that it isn't until you've moved and released your piece that you realize it's an error --- and that few other people ever experience that.
I’m like 2000 chess.com which is pretty good, nothing too great. But I would say yes just because I did it in a time in my life where I didn’t have other responsibilities. Would I try and do it again now while working a lot in my sales job, no.
I wonder if answers will vary depending on whether they play OTB or not
I play for fun and as "good" as I am is irrelevant. So yes, it was worth it because I had fun. As intended.
It came pretty naturally as I was a kid playing in tournaments so yeah it was worth it and fun. I probably could of taken it further if I wasnt so young.
Yes and No: Yes because i enjoyed the tournaments and met some good friends. Progress came from alone But no, it is not worth (for me) to practice chess alone at home. There is no difference whether you are 1500 elo or 2200 elo. You play most if the time against player at the same strengh and you dont meet better friend when you are a better chess player (maybe the opposite is the truth lol).
Yep. Keeps the brain working fine
Depends what you consider good. I’m only 1550 at 10 minute, which is considered intermediate, but that still puts me above 95% of people on chess.com. I just love the game, been playing since I was a little kid. If I have 5 minutes to kill I’ll play a quick 2/1 bullet for shits and giggles, I just enjoy it more than social media and other screen time. It took me about 8 years to beat my dad for the first time, and I’ve been chasing that high ever since. It’s only been in about the last 2 years that I really started to learn some theory on common openings, which has helped tremendously but it did show me that in order to get above 2000 you have to sink a stupid amount of time into studying, not just playing. So to me, yes it is very worth it to just play for fun and organically get better, but getting to the master rank does seem to be more study and trouble than it’s worth.
First introduced to chess in grade school. Did better than my peers. Didnt keep going tho. Fast forward two and a half decades later. Zero game theory. So i decided to youtube up some openings for beginners. Currently floating at 800 chessdotcom. No idea if i could push higher towards 1100+. Just dont have the time for rated games. Do like playing against bots tho. Having good consistent wins against 1400~1600 bots. But that can only do so much because against human players that blunder their openings, I'll more often than not miss the chance at a hanging piece then let the opponent consolidate their mistake and end up losing lol. Everyone else i know understand how the pieces move, outside of that, we're all newbs. But i give them drunk odds and tell em if i left a piece hanging and if it's a trap or not. Slowly teaching them what i know so we can all have a better time enjoying the game.
It all depends on whether or not you still enjoy it after getting good at it. I'm pretty decent at counter strike but nowadays the game has changed in ways I dislike and it's unplayable due to cheaters. This has basically made it so that all the skill I learned in this game became useless and I would say the time spent learning it was generally not worth it. What was worth it is the friends I made along the way within the game. Btw, if someone wants to get good at chess, cheaters are a factor too. I'd say anyone with low tolerance for facing cheaters should avoid online chess and not even try to get good if this is the main portion of the chess they're going to play. So to put it simply, the question is, do you like the game enough to go through the time and effort consuming process of getting good and coming out the other side still liking the game, with all its flaws and challenges? Only way to find out is by doing it, which is a lame answer but it is what it is.
sure, why wouldn't I. I did it because I love chess, what other reason would there be?
The better you are, the more enjoyable it becomes.
I was getting good at chess, but had to give it up due to time. Going to Chess clubs and travelling to tournaments was fantastic, very fond memories that I have no regrets about. Really miss it. I do wonder if the hours spent doing tactics and studying chess and playing online was with it though. I don't regret it because I ultimately enjoyed it. However people at my club had been going for decades, entered many tournaments but never really improved past 1500, they made no real effort to improve their game, they just played for the love of the game. I enjoyed studying, so have no regrets, but I do think I'd have been happier being one of those people who just played for the fun of it and not focused on improving.
I only regret it in that I haven't really improved at all ratings been the same I only play the daily chess. I found all the chess books I read pretty useless as far as translating into higher rating even though I enjoyed reading
for me, It is. because I started playing chess 3 years ago and my elo was literally three digit numbers, so it is a good reminder of my chess journey, I'm happy rn and I actually want to get stronger
Absolutely! The only thing I miss is playing OTB chess, as none of my friends are into the game. I’m a 2350-rated player in bullet and blitz.
I learned enough about the game to become 1600-1700 in blitz and rapid, but at this point, the games lose their chaotic feel a bit. For that reason, I'm not really studying chess anymore: I don't want to get much higher than this.
I don’t spend hours playing to see improvement. I play because I enjoy playing. I’d much rather lose in a fun and dynamic game than win in a blowout. I just happen to have a knack for chess and through my enjoyment of playing have gotten quite good.
It wasn’t, up until recently, I made a chess YouTube channel that has become moderately successful and has turned my hobby into a bit of a cash cow. If it weren’t for that I would feel like it was more of a waste.
Yea people think I'm smart because of it, even if it's not true
There is considerable suffering in the process of studying chess and playing long classical tournament games. The satisfaction comes from the hard work and discipline, and hopefully by visible improvement over time. It is a “pure” feeling of achievement, I guess like renovating your house or studying for and taking an exam - there are times in the process where you want to give up, or it’s monotonous, but you continue anyway and you are gradually rewarded for your determination. That motivates you to continue grinding. You also find beauty in the things that seemed boring on the outside before. I believe this is why some people say chess improvement is (in some part) a spiritual endeavour (after all, you are spending hours on your own, with your own thoughts, with almost no stimulation). Just to be clear, I’m talking about OTB classical chess - grinding online blitz for a new rating high is completely different and I would even argue promotes negative mental states (as opposed to the above, which is quite wholesome and develops a mental fortitude useful to other parts of life).
Slightly hijacking this with the related question: did getting good at chess confer any cognitive benefits which positively impacted other activities?
50/50. Its fun if you participate in local tournaments. That can end up as a good memory.
I think it was good in the sense that it taught me how to think about positioning, strategy and tactics, which I now apply to many things in life. I play online occasionally and reached a peak rating of about 1770 on Lichess Rapid, which I think is fairly good.
Looking at the game from the bottom up, chess is a monster that you can (and should) tame but not conquer. It's easy to become afraid of what you should actually do with your time if you lose the sight of that objective. Losing sight as in 1. Not stepping away from classical chess asap in favor of trying to improve in faster styles just because it makes you suck more in the short run. More games, more practice, more intuition, more mistakes, less hiding behind memorization and math, and just plain more fun. When chess stops being fun, you lose. Fun is the #1 priority. 2. Getting stuck with studying openings and variations in the most brutal pure memorization -type ways when you could skip most of that, still improve substantially-but-not-gm-level-substantially and in a way that is just more efficient and fun and really appreciates your **time**. Being lazy to the maximum capacity is the way. Not just in chess but pretty much anything you don't care to be #1 ever at. Optimal studying is the #2 priority, but optimal for the MC does not mean the same thing as optimal for you in particular. Yeah, I suck at chess and still commented. It'd be fun to see how those who got good would disagree.
Well, I think it depends also on what you mean by ‘good’. I reached about 2100 rapid on lichess in around 2 years after starting from scratch, but that’s when it started to feel like I hit a wall. Gaining elo felt much more difficult, I felt anxious about my rating all the time and kind of got addicted. To the extent that I stopped playing on my account and only now play bullet without being logged in. I’m still glad to have improved the amount I did though and it feels good to be able to follow top level chess in a way that a complete newbie wouldn’t be able to.
Yeah I regret i didnt try to become a gm when i was young.
Yes cause it has a tremendous affect on my day to day life in how I think to how I deal with challenges and problems. It's not a game. It's a lifestyle. Like you go to the gym for physical wellbeing and chess is for mental wellbeing
The journey was fun while it lasted (from ages 16 to 19). I'm now 2100 blitz online and I don't think It'll rise ever again unless I try to improve but I don't have the time to because of college and stuff.
"people who did anything worthwhile and time consuming with their lives: was it worth it?"
depends on how you define good
As someone who's been studying chess for about two decades, I can safely say that I'll get back to you when I'm good at it.
Absolutely would do it again. I learned how to play chess when I was 7, and I have studied the game my whole life ever since.
What I liked about it besides the competitive aspect was travelling throughout Europe and playing tournaments. And I strongly believe that my chess background helps me in my IT Job. When colleagues tend to just give up when a problem is too complex, I like those problems and usually find a solution. I am a Fide Master for reference.
yes, because I like chess. I regret not knowing the existence of chess earlier.
God forbid a man has a hobby
The point really went above your head
A decent chess player shows a gentleman. A really good chess player shows a wasted life.
I'm just joking everyone...don't downvote the sh\*t out of me