Late-starting chess players with grandmaster potential?

[Roger de Coverly]

it might be worth looking at Tony Kosten's record.

John Saunders has a review of Murray Chandler's games and career at
https://www.saund.co.uk/britbase/pgn/ch ... iewer.html

In it the results of a 1975 Kent Junior event are quoted as

1st Kent Junior Chess Association Championship, Tunbridge Wells (27-28 Oct 1975, 18 players) - U18: 1 MC [sic] Chandler (Charlton) 4½/5*, 2 LT Canham 4 (Data given thus in BCM, Jan 1976, p15 & CHESS, Dec 1975, p99, though they also seem to think there was play on the 25th which would be inconsistent with MC playing the Southampton Open on that day) (results - 1 v MA Seton, 1 v AC Kosten, 1 v MCL Read, 1 v JJ Ady, ½ v LT Canham) (* The Kent U16 ran over six rounds so perhaps this was also out of six)

Kosten's year of birth is 1958, so evidently playing outside of school chess at the age of 17.

[Ian Thompson]

In connection with the original thread title only, it might be worth looking at Tony Kosten's record. I don't have any games of his before Manchester 1981 but next time I looked in about 1990, at age approx 32, he was a GM. Relying on memory here so will check and repost if incorrect unless someone does it first.

Old grading lists say his grade was:

1976-77: 156
1977-78: 185
1978-79: 188
1979-80: 205 (possibly subsequently corrected to 208)
1980-81: 210
1981-82: 209
1982-83: 216
1983-84: 217
1984-85: 224
1985-86: 225
1986-87: 232
1987-88: 237
1988-89: 241
1989-90: 239

and the online grading list shows his highest ever grade being 245.

I don't have anything earlier than 1976.

[David Sedgwick]

About 10 years ago, all players found guilty were stripped of their titles also.

Given my FIDE position at the time, I'm surprised that I didn't know about that.

Do you mean you were completely unaware of the Myanmar scandal (which I thought was quite common knowledge (or at least gossip) at the time) or just the suggestion that FIDE took any action over it?

I too was puzzled for a bit. It is not always obvious when Nick is being ironical.

Nick was the FIDE official responsible for the action taken against Myanmar. He knows exactly what action was or was not taken, and which posts on this thread are tantamount to fantasies.

[David Sedgwick]

it might be worth looking at Tony Kosten's record.

John Saunders has a review of Murray Chandler's games and career at
https://www.saund.co.uk/britbase/pgn/ch ... iewer.html

In it the results of a 1975 Kent Junior event are quoted as

1st Kent Junior Chess Association Championship, Tunbridge Wells (27-28 Oct 1975, 18 players) - U18: 1 MC [sic] Chandler (Charlton) 4½/5*, 2 LT Canham 4 (Data given thus in BCM, Jan 1976, p15 & CHESS, Dec 1975, p99, though they also seem to think there was play on the 25th which would be inconsistent with MC playing the Southampton Open on that day) (results - 1 v MA Seton, 1 v AC Kosten, 1 v MCL Read, 1 v JJ Ady, ½ v LT Canham) (* The Kent U16 ran over six rounds so perhaps this was also out of six)

Kosten's year of birth is 1958, so evidently playing outside of school chess at the age of 17.

I have a memory, which I do not state as a fact, that Leonard Barden once mentioned in a newspaper column that Tony Kosten was still playing in the grading limited sections of Weekend Congresses in his late teens, namely in the mid 1970s.

His first FIDE Rating was 2315 in January 1980 (Source: Olimpbase). As reported by EMW, he became a Grandmaster about ten years later.

Edit: Ian Thompson's post indicates that Kosten would have been too strong for the grading limited sections from 1977 onwards.

[Leonard Barden]

David's memory is accurate. A few weeks after winning a grading limited section in the North, Tony Kosten attempted to enter another where I was checking for sandbaggers with the aid of infornation from reports to the Cutty Sark Grand Prix controller (me).

It was clear that he was too strong for the U170, but I recall that he protested mightlly when I told him that he was being transferred to the Open. I forget the exact year and congress, probably either Evening Standard or Lara circa 1975-76.

He scored around 4/6 in the open with a performance of I think around 200-210, and from then on accepted his destiny as a potential GM.

[Geoff Chandler]

This thread has gone all over the place, from Go masters to FIDE players getting banned,

Martin Weteschnik.

He is the best I can come up with, maybe the opening poster could get one of his books
and if nothing gleaned from that contact the publishers to get in touch in with Martin.

"Weteschnik says that he did not learn to play chess until he was 25. Nonetheless,
he became an FM, which may be a record achievement for an adult learner in modern times. "

http://empiricalrabbit.blogspot.com/201 ... chnik.html

A good site that one.

However, further down the article we hear about a different player and:

"....I am now suspicious of any rapid adult improvement story!"

Then further down completely unfounded accusations from a unsure poster about how Martin got good.
('People of my club told me...' and ' I have heard ( i am not definite about this )...'

Will, (remember him?) the opening poster, must be wondering what kind of weird world he has stumbled into.

[Andrew Wainwright]

Another one is Matthew Webb but stopped playing past few years I think.

He went from 94 in 2000 to 178 in 2010 and 192 in January 2014 but then 247 in 2018

Year of birth 1986. so first played graded chess at age of 13 or14 but didn't get really good until well into his mid to late twenties and early thirties. At that age the demands of employment, a career, social life or family life can easily consume the time available for playing chess, let alone studying it.

Matthew played for Bradford in the early-2000s and you could see then he had some ability; he stop playing for a couple of years then came back, I remember when he started playing again around 2012-13 he was getting one-on-one coaching off Stephen Gordon who focused his underlying ability

Believe me that this guy is as good as as any IM in England!

Having played with Matt at school since he was 11 (3yrs my junior) you could see right from the start he had a hunger and intuition for the game unlike anyone else I had ever met. The problem was, that we went to public school in Bradford, there were no other local teams at our level, and by the time Matt started playing "serious chess" (i.e. rated evening league chess and weekend congresses etc) he was already 12/13. We had no titled "professional coaches", we had no funding or guidance etc.

The closest we ever came to playing similar level juniors was once a year at Millfield, or the annual Times tournament, where I remember personally getting destroyed in my sixth-form years by several junior prodigies from more privileged institutions (Gordon, Ghasi, etc). I remember being delighted in my last year at school getting a draw on a trip to Lancaster against then IM-chasing Craig Hanley. By a miracle we managed to get past Lancaster before being thoroughly put in our place in the next round after a 3hr+ drive to Birmingham, where Ameet schooled me in about 20 moves! Even then Matt was the star of the show and carried our team.

The fact that Matt made 2553 (ECF - latest rating) is no surprise to anyone who saw him play in his late 20s. His game was a joy to watch. Just ask Alan Merry after several of the games that the two of them played during that time!

I applaud anyone who achieves the Norms, and gets the Titles. It is an exceptionally hard thing to do. That said, there are many gifted players out there (such as Matt) who don't have the Titles, and decided that other priorities in life took priority. Nonetheless they are "beasts" in their own right and many titled players shudder seeing their names on the tournament lists!

[Paul Cooksey]

That said, there are many gifted players out there (such as Matt) who don't have the Titles, and decided that other priorities in life took priority.

You are doing your friend a disservice Andrew! I think that level of untapped potential is very unusual. I think most people could gain 100 points, many 200. But the capacity for massive improvement, even with lots of hard work, is really rare.

[Andrew Wainwright]

[quote="Andrew Wainwright" post_id=256132 time=<a href="tel:1605808400">1605808400</a> user_id=717] That said, there are many gifted players out there (such as Matt) who don't have the Titles, and decided that other priorities in life took priority.

You are doing your friend a disservice Andrew! I think that level of untapped potential is very unusual. I think most people could gain 100 points, many 200. But the capacity for massive improvement, even with lots of hard work, is really rare.
[/quote]

Paul - not at all, very few people know how hard Matt worked for the success he has achieved. My point was actually that the “title” isn’t everything, and Matt’s success speaks for itself.

[JustinHorton]

I just looked him up in connection with this thread and discovered that Amos Burn learned chess when he was sixteeen.

[Roger de Coverly]

There's another blog about an ambition to become a titled player.

https://andycouchmanchess.wordpress.com/

He now seems to have retired from active OTB play, without reaching even the more modest objective of an ECF grade of over 100.

Another player set himself the target of reaching ECF 200, which he achieved through tactics training.
https://chessimprover.com/contributors/steven-carr/
I believe he considered he still had room or improvement in his positional play, although if you play Simon Williams openings perhaps it doesn't matter so much.

[Event "North Wales Open"] [Site "Llandudno"] [Date "2016.07.03"] [Round "4.4"] [White "Carr, S"] [Black "de Coverly, RD"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [ECO "E73"] [WhiteElo "0"] [BlackElo "0"] [Annotator ""] [Source ""] [Remark ""] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 O-O 6.Be3 e5 7.d5 a5 8.g4 Na6 9.f3 Ne8 10.h4 f5 11.g5 f4 12.Bf2 h6 13.gxh6 Bxh6 14.Bf1 Ng7 15.Bh3 Bxh3 16.Rxh3 Nh5 17.Qd2 Kf7 18.O-O-O Qd7 19.Kb1 b6 20.Qc2 {(=)} Nc5 21.Bxc5 bxc5 22.Nb5 Bg7 23.Rh2 Bf6 24.Nh3 Rh8 25.Nf2 Ng3 26.Ng4 Bxh4 27.Qg2 Kg7 28.Rd2 Rh7 29.a3 Rah8 30.Qg1 Kf8 31.Ka2 Bd8 32.Rxh7 Rxh7 33.Rh2 Kg8 34.Kb3 Rxh2 35.Qxh2 Qh7 36.Na7 1/2-1/2

In the final position, the idea of Nc6 looks devastating, but there's a fortunate defence with 36 .. Qxh2 37 Nxh2 Ne2 with the threat that Nd4 is check.
[SetUp "1"] [FEN "3b2k1/N1p4q/3p2p1/p1pPp3/2P1PpN1/PK3Pn1/1P5Q/8 b - - 2 36"]