Do you think I can get 2000 rating?

pl.lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/guide-to-become-2000-book-advertisement#1

Yes you can. Complex answer you can find here for 1$.
I am not 2000 player... yet. But I agree with author in most of his ideas. In fact doing more or less the same as he advise (but at that time that knowlege comes to me intuitively) I raise my ranking at lichess from ~1350 to 1700+ very easy.

Now I have some own thoughts and ideas about trening but... You know, everyone have slightly diffrent view.

@Treksy

First someone has to demostrate objective fact that someone can reach 2000 from any level. If it is not possible to be demostrable, then it must be considered false.

@PositionalWizard Don't know a lot about chess research but Had seen some at study topics especially mathematics and there is no doubt that trening to increase mental skills exist.

It may help or "assist" on mental exercises, spatial view and logic; and it can be even healthy; but I do not think there's a method to improve systematically at chess. And those who say -not you, those one that try to sell us (the amateurs) something- "this method works", I bet they are lying.

@lamper_ph I think you can get to 2000, but it might not be likely.

@PositionalWizard ("I do not think there's a method to improve systematically at chess.")

Just because you haven't found a systematic way to improve your chess doesn't mean that methods and systems to improve don't exist for others.

@PositionalWizard I don't know if I get your point of view. What is your claim about chess skills improvement?

You say that "their methods don't work" but there are no universal method for sure. Trening is about getting experience at problem solving through individualized work that focus on instruction, good lvl of effort and formal answer with explanation given in right time. Rest is about good thought process which is form of critical thinking. There is no magic in chess trening. Books, courses and videos is only material to work and get experience. And I see nothing wrong about that.

Yes, if you focus correctly and have enough time you could become 2.000 (Please note the sentence "enough time", this is necessary until they discover how to adquire knowledge using pills like in the Matrix where they just insert information directly to your brain a moment before you get killed by agent Smith). So, let me answer for you the following questions:

Is a 2.000 player way stronger than a 1.600? Yes, in terms of probability, a 2.000 player has 91% chances of winning vs a 1.600. (If you want to calculate more of those odds go to http://www.3dkingdoms.com/chess/elo.htm)

Elo rating has a mathematical calculation and meaning in real life; this is, if you know the Elo of two players you could estimate their winning odds. Even though, you wouldn't know the final result for every game because that depends on many other circumstances including your opponent quitting the competition because his girlfriend got pregnant and he has to get a job and start doing something profitable.

So, what would a 2.000 mean in terms of players, lichess and winning chances? Well, it means you have a higher probability to win against other people than a 1.600 player does. Right now being a 2000 in this site means to be better than 90% of the players. Righ now I see about 20.000 players in the site, so you would need to be better than 16.000 of them approximately. (This is: They shouldn't be able to beat the crap out of you so easily)

How can I defeat all those people? In chess almost everything is about not making mistakes, whoever makes them has to pay, and managing your time is also important. So, if you make two perfect moves but it took an hour for you to make them you will lose the game (Assuming you are playing with time control).

If you want to defeat them you will need some tools. If you work on the following list you will improve and if you focus enough you can get to 2.000 according to your learning speed:

1. Chess. What is this about? Is it worth it or should I better get a life? (I'm serious about this last part of getting a life, chess can consume a lot of your life)

2. How can I think better in general terms and what should I learn to start improving in chess? (At this point you will need at least one book, choose whatever you like but choose something more than just playing others, playing is fun but you're not necessarily learning from your mistakes, and learning is mandatory if you want to improve. Sometimes learning means to review your games and understand a little bit more of what is going on and why you are having such a hard time winning vs a 10 year old little russian girl)

Warning: Books needed also for the following subjects:

3. Opening. What is this about? What is good what is bad?
4. Middle game. What is this about? What is good what is bad?
5. Ending. What is this about? What is good what is bad?

If you don't improve after researching and trying to improve, just keep trying and researching even more, don't you like winning? Then stop whining and learn how to beat more players.

You're welcome!

No, you can't! So convince us of the opposite! :)

@Dionysus_god Show me one, a real and demostrated one and I will try to "think about it". Certainly talking from idealism is useless, especially if you have never been reached 2000 rating. I did not find one, I did not want to search it and I am happy with my natural rating -I have never trained, and I have never studied-.

It's like finding god, useless.

@Treksy : I will note your nickname and in one year I will check your profile again. Let's see what your training is going to do for your rating.

_

Chess for fun, or chess for fun and money -for those titled and +2700 GMs-; Chess does not reserve anything else than the aboves.

#19 has closed his account so i guess we might not see the epic conclusion to this bet