lichess.org
Donate

Any masters who started late

Talent plus hard work will equal your score in chess so starting at 20 instead of 10 just delayed your progress by 10 years which is nothing so if you don't have the talent it wont matter if you started playing chess at 10. So if you have the talent and you put in the hard work you could achieve a high score if you have the talent so I think its about your talent not the fact you started at 20.
Good luck I have been playing chess for 50 years and you are already much better then me.
Though this does not seek to answer the OP question, people interested by adult improvement may want to listen to EP.125 of the Perpetual Chess Podcast (omny.fm/shows/perpetual-chess-podcast/ep-125-uscf-master-jason-cigan).

The episode is part of the podcast's "Adult Improver Series" and the guest is 29-year old USCF Master Jason Cigan, who considers he did not begin seriously playing chess until he was 18.

In the past 11 years, he has managed to slowly and steadily gain over 1,000 rating points (http://www.uschess.org/datapage/ratings_graph.php?memid=12717578) while working full time as a software engineer.
Interesting. Why does his FIDE rating decrease steadily? Did he start overrated?

ratings.fide.com/profile/2064022

FIDE 2013 is an advanced player but far away from master in the usual sense.

Thanx for the example. Just another normal case of a rather young player who improved.

PS: I mean, I started at 16yo and became CM at 39 yo!? Full-time job as a scientist in R&D?
He's an American. Under USCF rating standards in effect for decades his 2200+ rating puts him in Master class.
Please, don’t get personal. That’s poor.

The thread is about late-starters vs. mastery. I am an anonymous contributor sharing my large experience of three decades in the chess business, online and offline.

You don’t have to agree - but stay on-topic. Thank you.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.