Of course I can only speculate but I think that age may be important but perhaps not quite as important as it seems. I think it has a lot to do with ones approach to the game, how they are taught, how motivated they are, etc. .....
I rarely see an older person who is motivated the same way a younger person is. I have seen kids and teenagers obsessed with different games, sports, chess, and other things. But people in their 40's and 50's you rarely see this. Of course perhaps this makes your point - motivation may be one of those things that we "lose" as we age. We may also rely on old habits and thought patterns that hold us back - but some people are far more flexible than others in this regard and that may have to do more with personality than age. One thing I heard of in chess was a kid who was around 1500 ELO strength and never improved. He played all the time, loved the game, spent time every week in the local club playing speed chess and went to every tournament he could. This is not my own experience but a master friend of mine related this to me. When he was around 30 he decided that he wanted to become a master and within a very short period of time went from around 1500 strength to nearly 2400 ELO. I don't know how short "short" is, but it's my understanding the speed of the progress was amazing. So although I believe there is some truth in the age factor, I believe the most important element is a strong focus and determination. Not just wanting to improve (who doesn't want to improve?) but actually being willing to work really hard at it and super-committed. And even just putting in a lot of time is not the same as working hard at it. I don't care how many books you read, how many teachers you have, you don't make very much progress unless you really drive yourself hard. Kids are also more easily guided by older ones - they are malleable in the sense that will let parents or other role models set goals for them and they want to please these people and will embrace those goals for themselves. And they are far more susceptible to expectations. When you expect a lot you generally get a lot, but older people are less susceptible to this as they tend to be less concerned with other peoples expectations. By the time you are an adult your life has gotten much more complex and there are generally more obstacles in your way such as marriage, children, making a living, etc. ... I'm not real big on natural talent either. I know it exists but it is somewhat over-rated. The people who are really good at anything invariably worked pretty hard to get there - and the natural talent aspect may simply be internal drive - the ability to focus on what needs to be done. So I do believe that some people have more talent than others but maybe it's a bit over-hyped. Bobby Fischer is said to have been absolutely obsessed with chess as a boy - an obsession you don't usually see in an old man or woman. Was he talented? I'm sure he was, but this insane obsession was probably more important to his success than his natural talent. Don On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Petri Pitkanen <[email protected]>wrote: > > > 2012/8/10 Mark Boon <[email protected]> > >> It's hard to find people at age 20 or 30 to start to devote their life >> to something new. But it does happen on occasion. About 10 years ago >> there was someone like that at the Amsterdam Go Club. Strong chess >> player. Well over 30, unemployed I believe, who spent day and night >> studying Go and playing online. At the time I told him the same I have >> been saying here. But he didn't believe me. I think some 2 years later >> he was 1-dan, which was already very promising. But I think becoming >> 2-dan then took another two years. I don't know what happened after >> that, but I believe he got stuck at 2 or 3 dan. >> >> Mark >> >> > Age has an impact for sure. In learning new skill there is myelin > involved. Last time person gets bigger influx of myelin is around 30's. So > up to taht learning skill should be quite doable. But doable does not mean > easy. Proper training is hard and annoying. I do not know what is best way > to train for go, but one thing dor sure it will not involve huge amount of > playing go, obviously that will not hurt but that cannot be the best way. I > and I do doubt if best method is well known at all. > > In one of the best music schools i read about had a good definition: If > passer by can tell what song what was played by practising > violin/cello/whatever player, then that is NOT practising. > > So 10000 hours for person about 10-20 year of age, maybe 20 000 for 30's, > not doable in 50's. At around 50 person start lose myelin at the rate he > gets new. UNless you do try to learn something new. But yes learning is > more tedious but there are no hard limits. Soft limits will get hard enough > though. > > PP > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
