This blog is going to be an ongoing journal of my chess career in it's entirety. A 2+2 member suggested in the FAQ thread that I make a blog like this and after giving it some thought, I agree that it's a great idea.

I will be updating this with information and thoughts as time goes on. To start here, I will tell you that I'm a 32 year old with very, very little chess experience prior to December 1st, 2014 other than knowing how the pieces move my whole life (learned when I was 5) and maybe a couple of dozen games online during that entire span. I will get into the details of why I decided to commit to chess at this point in my life and how I came about getting to where I am now over the course of the thread.

For now, as I'm in the middle of a busy day with study and play, I will say this: Many, many adults have wondered if they can truly get up to a 2200+ rating if they hadn't played the game much already and wanted to start up at 25+ years old. I can't find any record of anyone who had done that and I'm not saying that means nobody has, I'm just saying - not many have. If someone can find any information on the oldest person to start playing chess seriously and eventually reach a title status, I'd be quite intrigued.

So, considering this, my goal is to hit 2200+ in the USCF by the time I turn 40 years old which is basically just over 7 years as I turn 33 soon. Doing so would grant me the lifetime title of "National Master" which is comprised of the top 1% in the nation. I believe this goal is attainable and I realize how much time and effort it's going to require but I welcome it all. I absolutely love the game of chess and as a kid, wished I had been pushed in it's direction and not some other direction. Now's my chance to accomplish something in chess I can feel great about and at the same time - learn an absolute ton that I can pass onto others in my wake.

I started playing on December 1st here this month (2014). I play on Chess.com, ICC, and FICS. My ratings so far are as follows:

FICS = 1334 non provisional (16 games)
ICC = 1242 non provisional (6 games)
Chess.com = 1224 non provisional (9 games)

I am playing standard time controls anywhere from 30/0 to 60/5 and am about to try out the 45/45 pool soon and seek some 30/30 games, as well. I am avoiding blitz chess entirely at this point and focusing on long games as I have been advised and have learned in my research. My plan OTB is also to focus entirely on USCF "quick" and "regular" ratings or "rapid" and "standard" chess.

I am playing a ton, analyzing my games, researching the openings played out and their variations, starting two Seirawan books, reviewing master games, and doing tons of tactical puzzles on ChessTempo. I'm having an absolute ball and learning a ton. A few weeks ago I would have been beat by a 1000 1/3rd of the time and now I'm banging heads with 1350 - 1500 rated players on ICC.

As said, I will keep this updated but I wanted to get the ball rolling. I am about to put in a heavy day of chess and look forward to it, as well as my big picture goal here, tremendously. Thanks for anyone out there who's paying attention and I'll talk to you soon!

Hello, welcome to to the forum and good luck on your quest I'm actually in a similar boat and started a thread on the topic about 4 years ago. Here's a link to it.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/14...c-goal-961318/

I'm 30 now (still don't like typing that, haha) and have been plateau'd around 2000 USCF for quite some time. I'll say the biggest struggle trying to get to 2200 has been finding the proper time for chess. As an adult, it's much more difficult due to work and family obligations.

With that said, improvement is still very much possible. I play in Dallas where there are quite a few kids that play, and have been improving at the rate of the majority of the youngsters. Don't let anyone tell you adults can't make significant progress, it's just a matter of how bad you want it.

Good luck to you. If I could pass along just one thing, and I can't stress this enough, it's to make sure that chess stays fun to you. If you let it become a job or an obligation, or start to look at it as an obstacle you dislike, your results will suffer. Keep it fun and enjoy the journey.

Thanks for the welcome and the good wishes, Tex!

All of my research prior to this has led me to find people saying exactly what you just have: Time is the biggest hurdle. Well, time and of course the game at 2000+. My situation is pretty good in this regard though as I am self employed, control my schedule, and am not married nor have kids. I do have a girlfriend of almost four years now but neither of us are in any rush to have children or buy a house or anything like that. We're just trying to enjoy life right now.

Obviously, the key here is tactics right out of the gate. I've been working ChessTempo heavily and have bought their Gold subscription so I can fully utilize the site and it's endgame trainer. My estimated FIDE on there bounces between 1385 and 1460 currently.

I'm going to link the 30/0's that I played on chess.com yesterday to show where I stand now and as a marker of my progress thus far. My strength has been in using all of my clock efficiently and at endgame. Compared to other C and D class players, my endgames have been fantastic.

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=999430912

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=999511895

This morning I've started out with coffee and ChessTempo again. I'm going to review a couple of the problems that I found the most complex and then set up another 30/0 or two on chess.com to warm up for the day. Later on, it's ICC and 45/5+ time controls so I can really dig deep and work on my calculations against better players.

My plan here is to start my USCF career on December 28th in Binghamton where there is a 65/5 swiss style tournament. I'm going to look up all the details of this event and confirm that it's appropriate for me right now but it looks like it is so far. This would give me another twelve days to prepare and as I already feel good to go now, I'm positive I'll be ready by then.

6.-Nc6 blocks your c7-c5 pawn break. Similarly, White's 2. Nc3 isn't the most ambitious way to play the double queen pawn opening.

14.-Qe7 is well played. The b7 pawn isn't really hanging because lines like 15. Nxb7 Rab8 16. Qf3 Rxb7 17. Qxc6 Rxb2 preserve your advantage.

15.-Ne5 doesn't give you enough compensation for that pawn, though.

18.-Rd5 loses material to 19. c4 (removal of e5's guard), I think. 19.-Nxc4 20. Qxc4 Bxa1 21. Rxa1 probably isn't the end of the world though (20.-Rd4 21. Qe2 Rdxb4 doesn't work because of 22. Rac1). You could sac the exchange immediately with 19.-Rxc5 too, I suppose.

22.-a5 is maybe too fancy. I can't spot anything wrong with taking the c4 pawn.

24.-c5 is cool, but ... oh wait, I see that White played the correct line. (I'm commenting as I go .)

29. Qb5+ is a big blunder -- the pawn ending is winning for you if you take his queen. e.g. 29.-Qxb5 30. cxb5 Kd7 31. Kg2 Kc7 32. Kf3 Kb6 33. Ke4 Kxb5 34. Ke5 Ka4 and good game. a2-a4 is always met by the en passant capture. Pawn endings tend to be very decisive even with equal material, whereas the piece+pawn vs. piece+pawn endings they arise from can be pretty drawish. So the decision to liquidate into one is generally a very critical moment.

Anyway, good luck with your goals.

What I'm most curious about is why not 3. Nxe4? Your second move attacked his pawn, and then he didn't defend it. So what kept you from following through on your previous move?

gl bud

Best of luck with your quest! It's definitely doable, and also will definitely be very hard. I suspect that your biggest challenge will most likely be to stick with it when, at some point, you inevitably feel like you're no longer making progress. Part of the reason this road is so rarely traversed to completion is that many people reach those points and quit, deciding chess "isn't for them after all", or some variation of that excuse.

Stick with it, and you can definitely get there!

nice wins! I think you instinctively choose good moves, which is good for an improving player.

Rei put his finger on the key moments in the first game: 15...Ne5?, 18...Rd5? 24...c5? and 29...Qd7? are all moves that turn good or drawn positions into losing ones. I'd add 36...e3?, where you have a chance to repeat moves by checking on the light squares but instead allow him to start checking. To understand this it is necessary to understand how bad your position is in the queen ending, when he has the safer king, a passed pawn and potentially an extra pawn if he can manoeuvre just right,

I think all of these 5 moves are well within your ability to calculate and assess as bad. In a different light, you would find them as easy or moderate puzzles on chesstempo. And yet each of these mistakes is worth 100 rating points: if you advance to the stage where you make 0 such mistakes per game instead of 5, you could be 1750 instead of 1250 without needing to improve your positional understanding, opening knowledge, etc.

Don't find it dispiriting that we dwell on mistakes instead of everything you did right. It's just the nature of chess that the turning points in the game are necessarily mistakes and not good moves.

The best way to work on your games afterwards is for you first to review the game and note where you think you went wrong and why (and post your thoughts here, because we are interested). Noting good moves is also good at this point, but it only makes sense if you contrast them with alternatives you were considering that you decide are weaker. Then you get to compare your decision-making during the game with your judgment in hindsight afterwards, plus you get to compare your judgment with that of a stronger player like Rei.

Good luck. You won't make it, but good luck.

I didn't play my first tourney until I was almost 19, and I made it by age 26. You can too, if you have time for it, are willing to put in the work, and have some talent.

There was a great article I read many years ago, charting the progress of many top players, and in most cases, there was a 7-8 year window of improvement; after that, it was very common to plateau out. As it turned out, it was very applicable in my case, and my ability in my mid-late 20s was pretty much as good as it ever got. Good luck and don't hesitate to ask questions.

Cool thread - GL

No, believe me - I'm extremely thick skinned and when it comes to this project of mine here, I know that I'm going to need a lot of constructive criticism to come anywhere even close to hitting my goal. I appreciate any/all criticism. I just want to get better.

Over the past few days I played a couple of games OTB against friends, and have done a TON of chesstempo tactics. The major hurdle and stumbling block that I'm facing here is definitely in tactical vision. This is what holds all of us back from progress at my age. We can study as many opening lines and books on positioning as we want but until we can speak the tactical language of chess on a certain level, we simply aren't going to improve.

Pattern recognition is difficult to attain later in life and the more puzzles you do, the smaller the window you have in which to improve. I have done some additional research on this and according to a thread on chesstempo, adult improvement after 4000+ tactical problems is still possible, it just required a massive amount of problems to be done in a short 1-2 year window after that. I am more than willing to put in this kind of work.

In the meantime, I'm absolutely improving. I'm seeing and understanding the game on a different level each new day.

In regards to my first USCF games: I scratched Binghamton as there's a Quad on Saturday the 27th in north Jersey that is even better suited for me and the distance is far closer. I will be going to this event, and spending the rest of the week here preparing for it and celebrating the holidays. Tournament is 65/5 so I'm going to keep playing 30/0's, 45/5's, and 65/5's online and OTB to get ready.

That's why I had to set out on this quest. I wouldn't be anywhere as interested in accomplishing it if it were any easier. I have poked around the chess and poker world for a couple of years and this would be, by far, my most enjoyable achievement in either. I love the games of chess above all others and would be thrilled to rise to the mastery level one day.

In addition to my current play and studies, I ordered the following two books online, too:

http://www.uscfsales.com/winning-che...lliancies.html

and

http://www.uscfsales.com/winning-chess-endings.html

I thought these two books would compliment my current play and tactical study quite well. Brilliancies covers 12 of the best games ever, move by move, with in depth annotation and discussion each step of the way. Endings is, well, a book a endgames. I have started Brilliancies already and the first game in the book that they cover is Game 6 of the 1972 World Championship between Fischer and Spassky. I'm working my way through this as I continue to hit the tactics hard and, of course, play chess!

Exactly and that's why I thought setting the goal of 2200+ by 40 to be just about perfect. It gives me just over 7 years to hit that mark, after which my improvement would more than likely decline noticeably anyway. The good thing is that decline sets in at a much later age. So, even if I don't hit my goal of 2200, I'll still wind up being a very strong chess player for many years.

Still, I'm going to hit my goal

Admittedly, I haven't gone over that game using your lines and recommendations yet as I've just been so busy studying and playing, continuing to move forward. I will try out your variations and suggestions, though. I always do and I genuinely appreciate any and all help people can give me on this. I'm going to need it.

Once again though, this is all a matter of tactics. Sound principles, fundamentals, and improving tactics is what I need to worry about at this point. My endgames are great compared to other players at this level and I go over the opening played out after each game, analyzing and studying different variations off of the main line, and possible transpositions. I'm going to see the highest ratings boost by improving my tactical vision and comprehension and I'm using ChessTempo and the review of rapid/long games to accomplish this.

I thought that I would share this here, too in case anyone else was interested:

I went a little crazy on the chess stuff the past couple of weeks lol. In addition to the two books I bought there, I bought two chess clocks (Excalibur GametimeII and DGT 960 Pocket), a both green/white and blue/white regulation silicone boards, the Reykjavik, Fischer 4.0", Hastings, and Collector's 4.0" plastic tournament pieces, and a one year premium membership to the USCF. I also bought a few videos from ICC and went full blown nerd and ordered one of their knit hats for the winter (they actually looked nice). Lastly, I bought some 120 move score books and learned how to keep algebraic notation during my games.

I've been quite busy...

Thanks!

Thanks. What do you think will be my biggest mountain to climb (other than "all of it" lol)?

That sounds incredibly pessimistic. You need to try to differentiate between what's possible with average training methods and what's possible with good training methods.

After all, Richard's last paragraph in this thread is:

Improvement discussions, on the ChessTempo forums included, tend to have a very pseudoscientific bent to them. 99%+ of people aren't strong enough metacognitively, and that will be their main long-term hurdle, not any arbitrary walls measured in years or number of tactics solved.

Well, that sounds very much in line with what I've witnessed in other venues, as well. My thought may have been incredibly pessimistic, but your words here have been incredibly encouraging.

Agreed, in just about every ultra challenging and competitive venue, the masses blame their shortfalls on uncontrollable factors rather than acknowledge their own personal failures that contributed to the lack of accomplishing their objective.

Let me ask you - What do you think of my training methods thus far? What would you supplement them with, if anything?

Thanks

I've seen dozens of these projects, and they've all failed. Usually it falls into three areas:

1) They just don't have the right type of brainpower at that age. It's not like getting a degree where if you just keep studying, you'll get there. A lot will get to the 1800-2100 range and just stop improving no matter how hard they try.

2) No matter how big their talk about commitment at the beginning, they trail off. Most of these adult-master projects come from people who have never really reached the pinnacle of a competitive field before and want this to be their big hurrah. Then they have kids or jobs or significant others or other hobbies. It's a lot more fun to write blog posts about how you're going to make it and bask in the support than it will be in year 3. (I actually subscribe to the theory, which has some evidence behind it, that sharing your goals is counterproductive, because the emotional satisfaction of sharing the goal erodes the drive to complete it).

3) Not the right competitive makeup. 2000+ is where the ratings curve start to be a bit of a bitch. It's not going to just be about taking a lesson or reading a book or solving a problem. It's going to be about sitting across the board from a human being who has probably studied as much or more from the same age or younger, and grinding out hours of high-quality moves and maintaining your psychological edge. Over and over and over and over again for hundreds of games.

tl;dr: People talk big, but they overestimate their own smarts, competitiveness and drive.

Which isn't to say you should be dissuaded. By all means do your best for as long as you can. But don't be too disappointed when you never see 2200, and be very proud of whatever you do accomplish.

This is a great post and I appreciate it. Thanks for answering me.

I've seen a ton of these projects online, too and yeah...they all trail off at some point. I've seen what you describe: Guys hit 1800-1950 or so and just realize that it's becoming a crazy, arduous grind and also they begin realizing that they might just not be good enough to get to 2200. I understand this is pretty typical. Indeed, however, I'm going to push forward and pursue this but rest assured that I have extremely realistic expectations out of this and fully realize that I may very well fail. That's what makes it exciting and challenging too though, you know?

Most recent game. Just ended. Opponent flagged in a 30/0.

http://live.chess.com/live?v=2014121901#g=1005475323

They seem fine. I'd supplement them with Dan Heisman's Novice Nooks, which are now behind a paywall. You can access them via the Wayback Machine as well (replace the "01" with progressively bigger numbers).

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=1005616285

45/0 win. Opponent resigned on move 16. Bishops were monsters again.