How Fast Can Someone Break 2000?

On breaking 2000 , I am 51 years old and my fide is over 1700 , however last year in bad weisse achived a tournament average of over 2000 , this is a tournament with over 40 masters in it , the advice I would give was the advice given my IM Andrew Martin to a friend of mine called Paul McKweon , who is over 2000 , when asked how he could improve his grade , he was told just stop losing matches , here on chess.com its a bit of fun to play 10 minute chess , in a tournament when you have paid money to be there , and paid for a hotel and get a good nights sleep before every game , you are more focused and more hungry and when in that state of mind you make less mistakes and play better chess .

Ya Quady I completely agree with you, and the reason I am trying to get good is I'm tired of losing.  Losing in blitz is one thing but otb it is just painful

You are always going to lose; no matter how good you get, because the better you get the better opponents you will play.  World #1 Magnus Carlsen lost twice in the 2013 Candidates Tournament (he still won the tournament by tiebreaks though) and lost once in the recent Tal Memorial, coming in second, because he is playing the world's best players.

It's better to lose to better players than to lower rated. You can say good excuse to yourself. Losing to inferior much lower rated players makes one feel ashamed, stupid. 

Everything is relative. Recently a very good friend of mine said "I have never really studied chess until I was 2700+". Don't take their revelations literally. When such people say they haven't been studying openings, they compare themselves to guys like Kasparov/Kramnik/Anand and conclude that they know nothing about this stage as compared to the world's best.

In order to improve your game, you must study the endgame before everything else. For whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves, the middle game and end game must be studied in relation to the end game.  -  Jose Capablanca

@Natalia I wish most "liars" are just being humble. Most are the opposite, arrogant. Either they are conveying the message they are naturally gifted or hiding their chess background to their "rivals". Some play the GAME of chess so seriously although they are not playing professionally.

@Natalia thanks for the comment @M5F I completely agree hopefully at the Pacific Open I won't have too many haha 

To improve it helps to get absolutely smashed by much higher rated opponents. I have made this part of my chess into an art form. What is best is to have those dame players go over the game with you and find out where you went wrong. Then once this is done analyze it yourself without the help of an engine to make sure you understand your mistakes. Getting proficient at this game means accumulating many, many losses....

Another word of advice - Be a harsh critic of your own wins.  Just because you won doesn't mean you played a brilliant game of chess.  There are probably a number of errors you made yourself.  Most wins by players under 2500 come from games that look like this:

+/= to +/- to =/+ to +- to = to -/+ to +/- to = to -+ to 0-1

Instead, a more typical black win by a master would be:

+/= to = to =/+ to -/+ to -+ to 0-1

I have played well over 2100 tournament games.  I seriously can count my number of true brilliancies on one hand, even though I have over 900 wins and almost 500 draws.

Good Point. That GM could be thinking "yeah, I read a book about the French Defense, and played over 4 or 5 recent games, but I didn´t really studied as much as I should".

@Noreaster I 100% agree with you I only play stronger opponenets if I can, luckily I have a club with really good players and of course chess.com always comes through with difficult competition .. and @ThrillerFan good point

How fast can someone break 2000?

That depends on what you're trying to break. I could probably break 2000 eggs in a minute or two, depending on how I do it. However, if we're talking about something like boulders or steel beams, that a who different story.

This is the kind of self-honesty that will help push you past 2000. 

2 years

1.When did you start playing?

2.How much talent do you have?

3.How willing are you to reach it? 

I have gotten lazy in my chess training and with other obligations so my goal is to make class B when I finally get going on tournament chess (already got a USCF membership so that's a step in the right direction). 

Dzikus, how does one know what's an appropriate repetroire for one's style of play?  Would me giving up the King's Gambit awhile ago be a step in the right direction?  I'd describe my "style" (Schiller says that below master level people don't have a style but a group of weaknesses we call a style) as balanced like Botvinnik, but with Carlson's approach to the opening (even before knowing about him). 

I always thought I played to secure advantages while being on the lookout for tactics but I noticed that I'm not too different from people who play for cheap tactical tricks, but instead of tactical tricks I usually apply the same methodical strategies: d4/d5 break, create a weak backward pawn, and generally play to transition into a better endgame.  I'm aware of what strategies are associated with which imbalances, but like anyone still have a lot to learn. 

I've been playing on the reg for a bit under 2 years and my playing strength is very easily at least 2000.

Unfortunately there are almost no OTB FIDE tournaments where I live, so itll be another maybe 6 months before I can get my rating there,

Mostly likely rating points.