|
|
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
grege79 26-Jan-11, 00:47 |
 Chess skills - Nature or nuture?"Professor Tanaka added that the findings supported the idea that the brain could be trained to be good at spotting patterns - and that it was unlikely that people were born with the requisite intuition needed to be good at board games." www.bbc.co.uk |
||
|
It's funny now. I lost my first 25 games before finding an opponent I could beat. That was in the low 800 rating range. Before long I learned the significance of forming a defense with pawns and the other pieces on the board and my rating steadily rose before peaking around 1400. I took time off and am a little rusty now, but I have no doubt my rating will climb again. I believe there can be a certain degree of talent there that is completely natural. Why can someone have a natural ability to kick a ball or know what stocks to invest in and not have a natural ability at a board game (although I believe chess is much more than a board game). I think that talent was apparent with my rating rise from 800-1400 in little more than a year. It is not of my opinion that someone can be born a GM. But there are many talented children playing chess at a level of which I could only dream. With proper coaching, anyone can improve on their raw talents; that applies to chess or anything else for that matter. |
||
|
No one is a GM straight away, but by the same token I think there are many of us who are simply unable to reach that standard. I think if I gave up everything else in my life and concentrated only on chess I would be a much better player, but I would still fall some way short of GM standard. |
||
|
grege79 01-Feb-11, 11:06 |
information, and perhaps that is pliable within the first few years of life? Would be interesting to see grandmasters first few years of life from their parents point of view. |
