@xi_32 I think what makes the difference is starting from the endgame like the Russians did, not the silly modern way of focussing on tactics all the time
It is well known that Russians do not do tactics and can't calculate...
I have not read the entire thread. I read up until post #15 (also by the OP).
There is a relatively simple answer to the question:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hou_Yifan
Read the "Live Outside of Chess" section (permalink) ...
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hou_Yifan&oldid=839586632#Life_outside_chess
Some select quotes ...
"Hou has attempted to balance chess with life outside of it."
"Compared to the best professional male players who dedicate their lives to chess, Hou's split focus puts her at a disadvantage."
"However, they recognize that while Hou can probably remain the best female player in the world without extra effort, she cannot compete with the best male players unless she dedicates herself to chess.[16] Hou is aware of this as well, but nonetheless chooses to treat chess as a hobby, not a career.[17]"
POINTEDLY:
Even though this subjective paragraph provides citations (from interviews, no less) ...
Hou Yifan's attitude toward chess is that it is not a permanent fixture. (That of realizing that with age, chess ability initially increases, and then decreases.) -- Even more to the point, good decisions aside, she has the aptitude for both high-level chess play, and education. (Cannot be said for everyone.)
As in the sports analogies, athletes realize that there is a time-limit on their physical abilities in a sport. The smart ones finish their education so they have something to fall-back-on later. (So to speak; not everyone puts their college degrees to good use; whether retired athlete, or average person.)
For any intellectual discipline, ability to absorb the necessary information (i.e. to get a degree, or become a GM, if aptitude is there in the first place) is easier at a younger age as the brain is still developing, and at peak performance.
Further, some people have an aptitude for certain skills and traits. Others do not have the same. Not everyone can become a GM, let alone the top-10. I am not a good chess player. (But, I love chess and continue to play even though I suck.) I'm not much of a talker, I could never do "sales." But, I know the things I'm good at. As in professional sports (of any discipline, be it Chess, or Professional Athletes of physical sports) ... there are only a certain number of spots, provided by competition. Otherwise, it's commonly said (though a misnomer) that education is key to a better life. (And then we could get into arguments about big-name business tycoons who make tons of money and dropped-out of college or high-school, etc.)
Chess is for smart people. High-level chess is for smart people with a particular aptitude that has been properly nurtured at just-the-right-time in early development. The same can be said for anything else, such as educational ability, business savvy or acumen, or that of comprehending basic logic and being able to write and articulate ideas and questions clearly, etc. (Not everyone is capable of the same, and most comparative statements and arguments lacking acknowledgement of such basic tenets of life and experience belie the unintelligent straw-man fallacy of "average" people struggling, and thus "grasping at straws" -- in attempt to help themselves feel better.)
And, for those of you who got all of that, or the little stab there at the end -- sorry for being a bastard in my remarks.
There is a relatively simple answer to the question:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hou_Yifan
Read the "Live Outside of Chess" section (permalink) ...
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hou_Yifan&oldid=839586632#Life_outside_chess
Some select quotes ...
"Hou has attempted to balance chess with life outside of it."
"Compared to the best professional male players who dedicate their lives to chess, Hou's split focus puts her at a disadvantage."
"However, they recognize that while Hou can probably remain the best female player in the world without extra effort, she cannot compete with the best male players unless she dedicates herself to chess.[16] Hou is aware of this as well, but nonetheless chooses to treat chess as a hobby, not a career.[17]"
POINTEDLY:
Even though this subjective paragraph provides citations (from interviews, no less) ...
Hou Yifan's attitude toward chess is that it is not a permanent fixture. (That of realizing that with age, chess ability initially increases, and then decreases.) -- Even more to the point, good decisions aside, she has the aptitude for both high-level chess play, and education. (Cannot be said for everyone.)
As in the sports analogies, athletes realize that there is a time-limit on their physical abilities in a sport. The smart ones finish their education so they have something to fall-back-on later. (So to speak; not everyone puts their college degrees to good use; whether retired athlete, or average person.)
For any intellectual discipline, ability to absorb the necessary information (i.e. to get a degree, or become a GM, if aptitude is there in the first place) is easier at a younger age as the brain is still developing, and at peak performance.
Further, some people have an aptitude for certain skills and traits. Others do not have the same. Not everyone can become a GM, let alone the top-10. I am not a good chess player. (But, I love chess and continue to play even though I suck.) I'm not much of a talker, I could never do "sales." But, I know the things I'm good at. As in professional sports (of any discipline, be it Chess, or Professional Athletes of physical sports) ... there are only a certain number of spots, provided by competition. Otherwise, it's commonly said (though a misnomer) that education is key to a better life. (And then we could get into arguments about big-name business tycoons who make tons of money and dropped-out of college or high-school, etc.)
Chess is for smart people. High-level chess is for smart people with a particular aptitude that has been properly nurtured at just-the-right-time in early development. The same can be said for anything else, such as educational ability, business savvy or acumen, or that of comprehending basic logic and being able to write and articulate ideas and questions clearly, etc. (Not everyone is capable of the same, and most comparative statements and arguments lacking acknowledgement of such basic tenets of life and experience belie the unintelligent straw-man fallacy of "average" people struggling, and thus "grasping at straws" -- in attempt to help themselves feel better.)
And, for those of you who got all of that, or the little stab there at the end -- sorry for being a bastard in my remarks.
Very broadly...
Intelligent people will find it easier to be good at chess, but that does not mean chess players, or even good chess players, are intelligent.
Intelligent people will find it easier to be good at chess, but that does not mean chess players, or even good chess players, are intelligent.
Well from your explanation it seems like you are equating being smart to having a degree. Which is not true, just cause you have a degree doesn't mean your smart and because you don't have one doesn't mean you aren't smart. Hope this clarifies this topic.
@lovlas true! Indeed it is well know that most Russians cannot even play chess! :)
@xi_32 after seeing you play, people definitely shouldn't think it's for smart people.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.