There is an interesting article at ChessBase:

ChessBase.com - Chess News - Handedness, practice and talent in chess

I'd be interested to know what some of the experts (JacksonShowalter etc) think about the time estimate.

There are some "findings" on the age players started playing seriously and the strength they achieved as well.

Interesting article but I’m hardly the one to give an opinion! My interest in chess has waxed and waned over the years so I have no way of knowing how much time I spent on it. A lot as a young teenager but I never studied much after that and had several gaps (including a couple 8-10 years) when I didn’t play at all. Also I’ve been told several times I don’t know squat anyway.

They should do a study on what is the most efficient study method.

Haven't they been doing that for at least 50 years? This research article, while interesting, doesn't prove anything to me. It doesn't offer me a new perspective either, I've always held it as a truth that (almost) any player can reach master strength with the right ammount of effort. This article seems to add no more than the estimation of 11,000 hours, on average.

I can't relate to the number of hours either. 11,000 hours is like 460 days.. In how many years? The entire chess carreer, but how long is that on average?

*Shrugs*

I'm of two minds on this article. My first reaction was that it didn't say much of anything and wasn't of much use. It did cause me to do a little thinking though so perhaps its more useful than I thought.

I have read that Capablanca said it took 500 losses to become a master. Assuming that you are winning 2 out of 3 games on average (I'm assuming you are improving) that would be 1500 games. At 5 hours a game that would be 7500 hours of just playing.

Reuben Fine was pretty vague writing about his own progress in Lessons From My Games: A Passion for Chess. If I understand his comments correctly he started taking chess seriously at about age 15 and he wrote "For the next few years all my spare time was spent at chess. Since my college studies were fairly easy for me, I was at the chess clubs every weekend, and often many evenings during the week." Assuming he improved over a 4 year period at 30+ hours a week that would be over 6000 hours.

So what? Well it seems to me that improvement in chess is dependent upon a whole lot more time at the game than most people assume at first glance. Capablanca and Fine were both Super GMs in their day so their comments tend to make me think the 11 000 hour estimate is probably accurate for mere mortals. I have never really stopped to think about chess improvement in terms of pure hours but I never would have guessed the number would have been that high.

The again I read this article Secrets of greatness: Practice and hard work bring success - October 30, 2006 a couple of years ago. Turns out 10 or 11 000 hours may be a very reasonable number.

Food for thought, I think, for those of us who are trying to improve our game and are frustrated by our rate of progress. It is a long long way to the top...

It'd be interesting if they could break the time into different aspects of the game ie openings study,endgame study etc.

An Online Drum Video instructor I take lessons from emphasizes Goal oriented practice over Time Oriented practice. The concept being that setting aside time to practice isn't as important as the quality of the practice. Each person learns things at their own pace, some faster than others. Another teacher of mine said the hours don't matter if you get closer to figuring out what you're learning.

That all being said, putting a time limit does help motivate to achieve those goals. The Drum Instructor also says you can set daily, weekly, or even monthly goals to help with whatever you're trying to accomplish.

I suppose the article is an interesting look at how long it can take for folks to accomplish something, I get the feeling a lot of folks might get the wrong idea about what it is.

I've read several articles about becoming an expert (in any field) and the bottom line was it takes about 10 years of dedicated, purposeful practice. Not just mindless practice, but finding out your weaknesses, pinning them down and overcoming them ... and then repeating that process over and over again. I posted the articles on my blog ... the links are on the side.

Very good points, Sweeper! Indeed, there are certain points one must keep in mind when considering study hours. For instance, if someone is allowed to study for 30 hours per month at something, but only when they feel ill or tired, the results will surely not be as good as someone who is allowed the same 30 hours, but in peak or close to peak condition.

Quality over quantity - there is truth here!

Every field of study requires time.
Professional violinists and piano players practice 16 hours a day.
Alekhine we know was always with a portable chess set practicing.
When it comes to time, it is not time studying but rather quality time studying quality subjects or in our case chess subjects.
Fischer indicated he was not a great player. Just happened one day he became a great player. Probably from quality study of "64", "Chess in the CCCP" and other publications. Going over each game.
When it comes to time, there must be quality study.
Whether the subject is music, medicine, law, or chess.