Bunch of discussion on this in the Doug-Daniel Thread. Needs its own thread.

Background (I think):

https://www.pokerstrategy.com/news/w...aster-_115290/

he should just put a time limit on it
lifetime bet is meh for more than one reason

im sure people are super excited to lose more money to someone who clearly knows what they are capable of.

its not like hes going to post a video of him moving a rook diagonally

No idea how you can implement a lifetime bet for 4mm. Does the opponent have to escrow the money until Timex dies? Seems pointless to get 400k now just to lose access to all that liquidity for 50+ years.

He's drawing dead though.

ppl getting tricked into paying this guy to do things he vaguely seems to be interested in doing anyway is not great

Not sure how this is a free roll for Timex. He pays in advance and only collects after he makes GM



https://twitter.com/DanSmithHolla/st...97672863776769

I actually read the discussed terms right after I posted that comment so I had edited it out <3

Has he stated his elo?

The lifetime bet thing is pretty intense... to know that if you book say $100k against him that at any moment in the future you might just owe $1m out of nowhere.

My understanding is that he's about a 1900 level player. If he really decides to pursue this bet, there will be no shortage of action against him.

I thought he had elected against pursuing this simply due to the time committment involved; even if he turns out to be a secret undiscovered chess savant, it's still probably at least a 5-7 year project, and even then his chances are very low. There are some incredibly talented chess players who've devoted their entire lives to it that couldn't do it (speaking as a reasonably talented player who devoted plenty of time to becoming a national master but realized it probably wasn't going to happen and probably wasn't worth it even if it did).

Last part you said “probably wouldn’t even be worth it if you did”. How about if you had an incentive of 5-10 million? Would that peak your interest again?

pretty sure he decided not to do the bet back in october.

A semi interesting aspect to the bet is that let's just say it takes 10 years for him to get there. An interest free loan for the first 10 years isn't the worst thing ever, making the bet never actually as bad as 10:1.

I assume that this takes into account things like brain machine interfaces like Neuralink that may be possible in the future?

I'm just baffled.

Everything you said makes absolute logical sense.

However, when are people going to learn that YOU DON'T BET AGAINST TIMEX???!!!!

Seriously though, he does have a habit of continually demonstrating sufficient focus and effort to pull off surprising results. While I agree completely with all your points, I think it's worth recognizing that people with a decent level of intelligence and insane focus are not to be trifled with...

Im rated 1976 uscf.. in the future if someone wants to bet me on getting to grandmaster with 10 to 1 odds and i have lifetime to do it, ill gladly take the bet. Provided its for enough money, and I know im going to get paid if I win (two big 'if's, I know)

Hey I'm a Chess noob (2000 rated online) but this bet interests me, is it not possible for a smart person to study and improve at a rate of 1 ELO per day? To me that seems reasonable, however I guess this is a rhetorical question as it's clear anyone who doesn't believe he can make GM in 5 years thinks the answer is no.

So I guess my actual question I want to ask for high ELO chess players is:

Question #1, what is a reasonable rate of improvement for a talented person studying? (e.g., 0.1 ELO per 4 hours? This is what I'm most interested in)

Also:

Question #2, how long have solvers been prevalent in Chess? Because as for poker, anyone who starts studying today in 5 years I think can definitely reach levels of play that people who have studied poker for the past 40 years (i.e., someone who grinds hard from 2020-2025 can definitely potentially beat someone who grinded hard from 1980-2020 and stops). I assume many current GMs are getting older etc. so is this a relevant factor?

Question #3, does the recent Chess booms from Twitch and Queen's Gambit pumping more ELO into the system as well make a difference?

Again as someone who is very uneducated on this situation I personally find it surprising that well, gaining 1 ELO per day is seen as such an impossibility. Cheers

Also, looking up his rating.. the only Michael McDonald in the USCF database is rated 1648... not 1900

big difference there

$400k at 7% annual return takes just over 35 years to become 4.4M. So if he takes over 35 years to get there it is free money.

There are no solvers in chess. There are reams and reams of opening theory you have to memorize that has changed somewhat because of computer analysis. But its still lots of memorization.

Definitely there isnt going to be someone who studies 5 years and gets ahead of everyone who has been studying 40 years unless they are one of the top 50 youth talents in the world.

Why is Stockfish not considered a solver?

Let me add in another fact to potentially entice the betting. There are ZERO people in the history of chess rated below 1700 USCF after age 30 that ever became IM much less GM. ZERO.

Because you cant memorize stockfish's moves, theres just way too many positions in chess unlike in poker.

That Max Deustch Guy thought he was going to memorize computer moves to beat Magnus Carlsen after a month of intense study. He never made it past 1200.

Link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFNv...q4Q&index=1036

Question #1: Completely depends on the person, their age, and their talent abilities. Obviously, younger is better. The fastest rate people improve at above 1800 FIDE is probably 1800 to 2000 in one year, then 2000 to 2200 in one year, and then 100 points every year thereafter (GM is 2500 FIDE). This would involve studying chess 40+/hours a week and basically doing home schooling, and this only applies to national prodigies that are under age 16. Timex's FIDE rating is probably 1500 at best if he were to have one.

Question #3:
Thats for online ratings, not for over the board ratings, which are the ones that count for the purposes of grandmaster. So it has no effect.

This is crazy. While I won't say it's impossible to make GM for such a person (I'm sure if every person over the age of 30 in the world tried it a precious few would make it).

But the amount of work it would take will be insane with still very limited chance of success, he's nuts in my opinion to even think to try this.

I'm essentially an International Master, and I know I would still have to put in a ton of work to think about making it to GM - it would require enough work that I'm not even considering it. For a 1700 to think to do it, again that's just crazy to me.

Max Deutsche was delusional.
Dont bet against timex

Essentially an IM to me means you are not an IM, right, so...
Props though, that's pretty cool.