Jim et al,
Very nicely said. Exactly what this group needs.
Tyson
On 21 November 2020 at 07:46 JT <hazelnutt2001@xxxxxxxxx
mailto:hazelnutt2001@xxxxxxxxx ;> wrote:
To echo Tyson's sentiment, I was talking to a master about a year ago. I
said I was interested in retaining a coach, that I still held some ambition
of earning, if not a master's rating, at least an expert rating. However, I
observed that, having passed my sixty-ninth birthday, I was getting worried
that neither of those aspirations had much of a chance for fruition. He
disagreed. But he was quick to point out that one doesn't just achieve an
expert or master rating, just by playing a lot of chess. He had looked at a
couple of my games and observed that he thought I still had a chance,
certainly of attaining expert level. However, it would require many, many
hours of dedicated study. I had an opportunity, when I was at the French
National in 2018, to talk with a good friend. I asked him what he did when he
wasn't doing chess. His answer was a wry, "I don't do anything other than
chess." I have little doubt that, were I to disconnect myself from the other
things I enjoy doing,were I to devote to chess all of the hours that my wife
could be persuaded to allow me to devote to chess, and if I used those hours
to study seriously, I suspect I could still get into the Class A, and maybe,
possibly, perhaps, into the Expert Class. And it's worth noting that, while
disciplined study is essential, it is quite likely even more essential to
recognize the impact upon oneself of personal environment and family
dynamics. One of my favorite lines from one of my most favorite movies: "A
League of Their Own," from Jimmy Dugan, "Of course baseball is hard. If it
was easy, everybody'd do it." And that applies to chess, as well.
Cheers,
Jim T
-----Original Message-----
From: usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ;
[mailto:usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ;
mailto:usbca_chess-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ] On Behalf Of mordue andrew ;
(Redacted sender "tyson.mordue" for DMARC)
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 5:47 AM
To: usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx mailto:usbca_chess@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ; David ;
Rosenkoetter <davidrosenkoetter260@xxxxxxxxx
mailto:davidrosenkoetter260@xxxxxxxxx ;>
Subject: [usbca_chess] Re: Each Generation of Players Is Better Than the
Previous One
Hello folks,
This fascinating stuff. I took my car in for it's MOT on Wednesday and
the garage owner, a chess player, said that he was watching the series. I
actually read the book by Walter Tevis many years ago.
The general pattern is accurate. If one looks at World Champions then Tal
became WC at age 23, Karpov at 24 and Kasparov then broke Tal's record.
Subsequently Carlsen lowered it again. Most other post WW2 champions gained
the title in their 30s.
Maintaining their strength through to their 50s is also typical.
Botvinnik won a WC match against Tal at the age of 50 and Smyslov qualified
for the Candidates in his 60s. I would also add Korchnoi and Portisch, who
weren't WCs, as fine examples of longevity. In particular Korchnoi, although
he is rated as briefly World no 1 by Chessmetrics in the mid 1960s, actually
improved as a player in the 1970s and went on to play two WC matches.
However, for the purposes of this group I would strongly discourage
anyone from thinking that they can't improve after the age of 30. It is very
likely that you can. My own peak FIDE Elo was 2317 in 2008 at the age of 46,
while Chris Ross currently has an ECF grade of 211 which converts to an Elo
of 2288. Chris is now in his forties, low forties.
I can give many examples of people improving after they retired from
working. The point is that they had more time to both study and play.
Incidentally Korchnoi's improvement in the 1970s coincided with him giving up
smoking. Lewis Hamilton, the F1 World Champion, went on a vegan diet several
years ago and has dominated the sport ever since.
With any pursuit you get out of it what you put into it. There's no
substitute for hard work but do try to ensure that your outlook is positive.
Set yourself targets and be objective about analysis and opinions. At the
risk of sounding ambiguous 'the more you go forward then the more you will go
forward'.
Regards,
Tyson
> > On 20 November 2020 at 01:57 David Rosenkoetter
<davidrosenkoetter260@xxxxxxxxx mailto:davidrosenkoetter260@xxxxxxxxx ;> wrote:
Thanks, Evan, for the article. I think that along with the more
hours
spent on training an the vast amount of resources available to
younger
players today, the amount of time players today spend in actual
competition has increased today thanks to the internet's chess
servers
like the ICC, Lichess, et al.
Add to that, the serious younger chess players today are often avid
video gamers and you get folks whose quick analysis puts true genius
on display. both at the casual club level and the among the younger
pros, you don't find many folks who are pure bookies, studying every
line till their eyes glaze over without testing it against a server
or
live opponent online.
The type of players today like the Beth mentioned in the series are
folks like Irina Krush, Jennifer Yu, or Annie Wang all of whom play
for our U.S. women's national teams. Wang, in fact, along with
another
gal who's name I can't remember right offhand, were the youngest
women
chess experts at the tender age of eight.
Pretty cool stuff. OK, time to head for Lichess for some duels.
David
On 11/19/20, Evan Reese <mentat1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:mentat1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ;> wrote:
> > > Hey Guys,
> > > Thought some of you might enjoy this short article from
> >
the most
recent issue of The Economist magazine.
> > >
> > >
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/11/13/the-queens-gambi
t-is-right-young-chess-stars-always-usurp-the-old?utm_campaign=the-e
conomist-this-week&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=salesforce-marke
ting-cloud&utm_term=2020-11-19&utm_content=ed-picks-article-link-8&e
tear=nl_weekly_8
> > >
> > > We watched The Queen's Gambit on Netflix, with audio
description by
the way, and we enjoyed it very much.> > > *
> >
o *
> > >
> > > “The Queen’s Gambit” is right: young chess stars always
usurp the
old> > > Champions decline with age and each generation is better
> >
than the
last
> > >
> > > FROM THE very first episode of “The Queen's Gambit”, a
hit Netflix
miniseries about chess in the 1960s, it is clear what a> > > The seven-episode drama has received universal acclaim
precocious
talent Beth Harmon is. Before her tenth birthday, she has
learned to
beat the janitor at the orphanage in Kentucky where she
resides.
Soon she takes on an entire college chess club in simultaneous
matches, winning each one easily. By her troubled teenage
years, she
is vanquishing all comers, including stalwarts who are
considerably older.
After Beth wins a gruelling two-day match against one
silver-haired
champion, he gracefully concedes: “You are a marvel, my dear.
I may
have just played the best chess player of my life.”
> >
from critics:
of the 58 reviews gathered by Rotten Tomatoes, an> > > recent paper <https://www.pnas.org/content/117/44/27255>
entertainment
website, every one was positive. But it has also been praised
by
chess aficionados for its accuracy (doubtless helped by
having Garry
Kasparov, a former world champion, as a consultant). And a
> >
> > > by three economists confirms that the series’ portrayal
> >
of a young
upstart vanquishing her elders is exactly what happens in real> > > The study, published last month in /Proceedings of the
chess, decade after decade.
> >
National
Academy of Sciences/, analysed 24,000 matches involving world> > > These results produced two clear conclusions. First,
champions between
1890 and 2014. To assess the performances of the champions
and their
opponents, the academics compared their 1.6m moves against
Stockfish
8, a chess-playing program that computes the best possible
move for
a given configuration of pieces on the board. The players were
scored according to how often they picked Stockfish 8’s
optimal
moves. (The researchers also estimated how each move affected
a
player’s chance of winning and how often they made
catastrophic
mistakes.)
> >
players tend to
reach their peak early in their careers, with little> > > The authors reckon that the early-peak effect can be
improvement
after their 30s. (There are even signs of a decline after 50.)
Second, each generation comes closer than the last to
Stockfish 8’s
benchmark of optimal play. Professional players born in the
1950s
had already reached a higher average level of performance by
the age
of 25 than those born in the 1920s ever did.
> >
explained by
the fact that the human brain’s problem-solving ability (or
“fluid
intelligence”) reaches its high point at around the age of
20. As
for the long upward trend in performance through the decades,
the
authors suggest that more rigorous training is probably the
cause.
Indeed, modern chess masters can study the machines that now
tend to beat them.
If Beth were playing a methodical young champion today, she
might
surprise them with unorthodox play—but she would make enough
mistakes to lose most of her games.
> > >
> > >
<https://s100.copyright.com/AppDispatchServlet?publisherName=economi
st&publication=economist&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Queen%E2%80%99s%20Gamb
it%E2%80%9D%20is%20right%3A%20young%20chess%20stars%20always%20usurp
%20the%20old&publicationDate=2020-11-13&contentID=%2Fcontent%2Fa2m0l
98ihal7bpi3bpkr4740m3k787ns&type=A&orderBeanReset=TRUE>
Evan
> > >
>
