I can't say I understand devoting such time to learning a completely useless, extremely narrow, skill. Learning mathematics is useful. Learning to play a guitar is useful. Learning to program is useful. I came to this conclusion in college. It was hard enough learning math, thermo, physics, etc., and seemed a complete waste of time to get better at chess. The former consumed my mental energies.
Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
41–50 of 83 posts
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#42I can't say I understand devoting such time to learning a completely useless, extremely narrow, skill. Learning mathematics is useful. Learning to play a guitar is useful. Learning to program is useful. I came to this conclusion in college. It was hard enough learning math, thermo, physics, etc., and seemed a complete waste of time to get better at chess. The former consumed my mental energies.
How are guitar playing skills useful if you don't plan to be a professional musician?
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#43Chess is an utterly unforgiving game: I have played many more hours of things like Magic: the Gathering in my life, the creator of which quite rightly understood that adding variance to a game means lower skilled players actually have a chance (and some actual fun) against higher skilled ones. Navigating a child's demands that you "play your hardest" against them can be quite difficult. The thing I hate most about chess is that you can play well, perhaps for _weeks_ in a correspondence game, and then one mistake undoes it all, with no hope of coming back (but then again, never resign).
The lessons you need to learn are all very valuable: the pure skill of calculation is extremely difficult but if you can teach yourself to concentrate, visualise positions and juggle the variations, I think these are actually brain powers you can take into other aspects of your life.
The rote learning aspects aren't that fun, but again, being able to memorise literally hundreds of branching openings not only buys you free wins, but teaches you a lot of patience and general schemes for memorization (or so I imagine, I am terrible at this, especially on shorter time controls).
Learning to lose is very difficult, but the one kindness chess does is that there is (at lower levels of play) almost always a reason your lose.
The interplay of tactics and strategy is very satisfying, knowing when to use your instinct or general heuristics, instead of when to brute force calculate a move, is again the type of skill you find yourself more aware of in other pursuits.
The best thing about learning chess in 2019 though is there is so much great content. Thousands of hours of stuff from the St Louis and Atlanta Chess Clubs, coverage of every major tournament on Chess24 and myriad Twitch channels, and games of every possible skill level, variation and time control at your fingertips. ChessKid is also an excellent app + educational environment for kids.
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#44I can't say I understand devoting such time to learning a completely useless, extremely narrow, skill. Learning mathematics is useful. Learning to play a guitar is useful. Learning to program is useful. I came to this conclusion in college. It was hard enough learning math, thermo, physics, etc., and seemed a complete waste of time to get better at chess. The former consumed my mental energies.
Well, some people want to devote themselves to joy, rather than usefulness.
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#45I can't say I understand devoting such time to learning a completely useless, extremely narrow, skill. Learning mathematics is useful. Learning to play a guitar is useful. Learning to program is useful. I came to this conclusion in college. It was hard enough learning math, thermo, physics, etc., and seemed a complete waste of time to get better at chess. The former consumed my mental energies.
Chess is just about the most highly refined competitive intellectual task / "sport" you can ask for (by sheer weight of the number of serious players, and the level of play, though a similar argument can be made for Go). In and of itself, that could be an interesting concept to explore. And if we reject it, I suspect we'd also have to reject other competitive endaevours, like soccer, tennis, etc. To be honest, I some…
I have found it interesting to write software to play chess for me. The last few times I tried to play chess, my mind would just drift off designing a program to do it so I wouldn't have to bother.
I don't play video games, either. It takes about 3 minutes for one to bore me to tears. Part of that is I had a job in college testing video games - that sure ruined it for me.
The universe is full of puzzles that mean something to solve. Why not work on those instead? Why would those be less interesting than a contrived set of rules?
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, some people want to devote themselves to joy, rather than usefulness.
I find joy in programming, and it's useful, too! For example, the other day I was pretty excited to figure out a solution to a long standing programming problem.
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#47Has anyone taken up a hobby for the sole reason of staving off a neurodegenerative disease such as Alzheimer's?
Flying as a Challenge
If you go to the local general aviation airport, you'll find lots of guys in their 60s and 70s who are tackling challenges that are way beyond your own capabilities. Certainly these guys are much sharper and in better mental and physical shape than the average person of their age. Flying requires mental acuity and real-time decision-making that seems to keep pilots young. A lot of older folks seem to be preoccupied with trivial matters, such as organizing their junk mail or minutia within their childrens' lives. Old pilots don't seem to be subject to these preoccupations and the topics of their conversations have more in common with young pilots than with other old people.
The very process of training to be a pilot is challenging and inherently motivational. The FAA sets up milestones and checkpoints: Private Pilot, Instrument Rating, Commercial Pilot, Multi-Engine Rating, Helicopter Rating, Seaplane Rating, Airline Transport Pilot. A desire to excel was probably a factor in your ability to retire young. If you have that desire, the FAA rating system gives you a lot of opportunities to improve and prove yourself.
One of the tragedies of getting older is the narrowing of one's activities. An elementary school kid will write poetry, paint, play music, do math, write prose, etc. An adult will do three or four things that he or she can do at a professional level of competence. These are the things for which an adult draws a paycheck or these are the things that the adult finds rewarding because they can be done so well.
Learning to fly is an opportunity to go back to elementary school. No human is a natural aviator. Everything has to be learned, which by itself is stimulating.
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, some people want to devote themselves to joy, rather than usefulness.
I find joy in programming, and it's useful, too! For example, the other day I was pretty excited to figure out a solution to a long standing programming problem.
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chess is just about the most highly refined competitive intellectual task / "sport" you can ask for (by sheer weight of the number of serious players, and the level of play, though a similar argument can be made for Go). In and of itself, that could be an interesting concept to explore. And if we reject it, I suspect we'd also have to reject other competitive endaevours, like soccer, tennis, etc. To be honest, I some…
I long ago lost the remotest interest in who wins a baseball/tennis/football/olympic game, as it's meaningless. I know people get all wrapped around the axle on who wins, and the ludicrous propaganda of "medal counts" in the Olympics. But it's not for me. I have found it interesting to write software to play chess for me. The last few times I tried to play chess, my mind would just drift off designing a program to do…
Re: Learning Chess at 40 (2016)
#50I have some personal experience that gives me a different perspective. I learned chess when very young (~5) but I failed to be a successful prodigy -- my rating capped out around 1100 USCF. Every few years I would pick the game back up and play a few tournaments, and each time I improved a bit. I love chess, but it's never been anything like the central focus of my life. In my late 20s I moved to California and also…
A famous competitive programming prodigy is tourist[1]. You can find his rating graph starting from 2006 on topcoder when he was just 12 years old: https://www.topcoder.com/members/tourist/details/?track=DATA... He's now indisputably the best competitive programmer in the world. But it's comforting to know that he too had to slowly grow over many years starting from a mere mortal 1200 rating. [1] https://en.wikipedia…