0 seconds ago
Levy,
At 64, soon to be 65, I find that I have a different perspective on things.
I play chess for fun and to learn. I am always learning. If it ever felt like a job, I wouldn't find it worth playing. After all, jobs aren't supposed to be fun.
At my age, I deal with enough minor physical issues that attending tournaments feels like unnecessary work and a time-consuming burden. Unless I were to make significant progress, I have nothing to prove by going to a tournament. I could spend an entire day or weekend at a tournament, possibly gaining 8 rating points, or losing more than that. What would I really accomplish?
Tournaments used to be fun, but they're better suited for younger people with more energy to spare. I haven't given up on tournaments completely, but I'm waiting for the right time.
When I returned to my home state after 22 years, I noticed that many of the players I used to compete against were still playing in tournaments, and their ratings were exactly the same as when I left. My rating had fluctuated quite a bit, but ultimately ended up around the same level. It seemed like we were all chasing a higher rating for 22 years—and making no real progress. That's a lot of effort for no return.
People often go to tournaments thinking they're the key to increasing their rating. But what really matters is whether a person has the skill to reach their goal. Either they have the skill, or they don't. If someone is GM-level, the title will eventually come.
Chess is a game, and like any skill, it can be improved through practice. Some people become exceptional at video games after practicing for hundreds or even thousands of hours. So, I have a theory that I can improve by practicing against the computer and analyzing my games.
I'll let you know if it works.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
