Chess is one of easiest things in category "hard stuff"

Chess is hard when you start to learn, but it becomes easy after you learn

No and this no is why it makes that otb chess titles exist.

@Damkiller25 said ^

I won't say chess is easy, but if you compare to other hard subjects/skills is definely one of easiest ones.

1. getting inside chess is trival compare it, for competitive programming or most branches of mathematics.
2. clear and pretty obvious improvement, you can't say same for CP, math, physics, and software developmemt or even drawing.
3. no strong mental overload when playing chess, you can h...

chess is EXTREMELY easy.. to A POINT. Till like 1800, it's all about just learning methodology, skills, creativity, natural feel for the game, knowledge and so on. PAST that, it's more about just practicising and knowing who can make the least mistakes. It goes from very clear conceptual problems that you have to solve to get better, to very specific and niche things and whoever practices more is the one who wins.

Compared to something like math - chess is Conceptually very easy to understand. There's only a few concepts, and with it you can understand every part of a world championship game. The difference between you and a GM is instead that they can calculate better, faster, and more accurately make decisons.
For something like math on the other hand, you have to learn all these different kinds of topics. You can find a problem that even Terrence Tao can't solve. Math is an extremely broad field, and you can't understand most of it, unlike chess.
Chess is like one small branch of math, like basic arithmetic. There are only a few basic rules, there's a lot of concepts based off those rules, but most know all of that, some ( grandmasters) can solve a quadratic in their head , while others ( low rated chess players ) struggle, with a calculator.

@lizani said ^

1. Count the number of chess masters in your country.

2. Count the number of people who won the fields medal in mathematics, ever.

Sorry I didn’t read everything.
Just wanna say three things:

1 what’s “competitive programming”? You talk about chess in general and more on amateur level from what I can tell and then want to compare to some specific top level activity...

2 a bachelor of science in math takes three years here. After that you can chill and don’t have to worry about a job. During the study time you can access loans.
Playing chess for a living - since we make random comparisons in this topic - probably takes much more effort as to sustain yourself you need at least a part time gig on the side and do it all at once with absolutely no guarantees.

3 chess isn’t mentally exhausting? Speak for yourself. When I’m playing slow chess my head actually hurts, cuz I’m not used to calculating anymore.

"... going from good at tactics to great at tactics ... doesn't translate into much greater strength. ... You need a relatively good memory to reach average strength. But a much better memory isn't going to make you a master. ... there's a powerful law of diminishing returns in chess calculation, ... Your rating may have been steadily rising when suddenly it stops. ... One explanation for the wall is that most players got to where they are by learning how to not lose. ... Mastering chess ... requires a new set of skills and traits. ... Many of these attributes are kinds of know-how, such as understanding when to change the pawn structure or what a positionally won game looks like and how to deal with it. Some are habits, like always looking for targets. Others are refined senses, like recognizing a critical middlegame moment or feeling when time is on your side and when it isn't. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093409/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review857.pdf
"... To become a grandmaster is very difficult and can take quite a long time! Referring to my nine books: they are simply the beginning of the journey. To go beyond this, you need to look at Jacob Aagaard’s books, Mark Dvoretsky’s books and solve many exercises, analyse your games, study classic games, modern games, have an opening repertoire and so on. Basically, it is hard work, but at least a lot of good material exists. My books are intending to build a foundation for a grandmaster, but much more work is needed. It takes a lot more than just reading books to become a grandmaster I am afraid." - GM Artur Yusupov (2013)
"... Many aspiring young chess players dream of one day becoming a grandmaster and a professional. ... But ... a profession must bring in at least a certain regular income even if one is not too demanding. ... The usual prize money in Open tournaments is meagre. ... The higher the prizes, the greater the competition. ... With a possibly not very high and irregular income for several decades the amount of money one can save for old age remains really modest. ... Anyone who wants to reach his maximum must concentrate totally on chess. That involves important compromises with or giving up on his education. ... it is a question of personal life planning and when deciding it is necessary to be fully conscious of the various possibilities, limitations and risks. ... a future professional must really love chess and ... be prepared to work very hard for it. ... It is all too frequent that a wrong evaluation is made of what a talented player can achieve. ... Most players have the potential for a certain level; once they have reached it they can only make further progress with a great effort. ... anyone who is unlikely to attain a high playing strength should on no account turn professional. ... Anyone who does not meet these top criteria can only try to earn his living with public appearances, chess publishing or activity as a trainer. But there is a lack of offers and these are not particularly well paid. For jobs which involve appearing in public, moreover, certain non-chess qualities are required. ... a relevant 'stage presence' and required sociability. ... All these jobs and existences, moreover, have hanging above them the sword of Damocles of general economic conditions. ... around [age] 40 chess players ... find that their performances are noticeably tailing off. ..." - from a 12 page chapter on becoming a chess professional in the book, Luther's Chess Reformation by GM Thomas Luther (2016)

IMO when Soltis says “diminishing returns” regarding calculation, it’s poor wording. He should just address the time issue and the human brain as limiting factors.
If u calculate one move deeper, you win. There’s a reason why a new engine beats an old.
It’s resource optimization.
Just saying that he should’ve pointed out where the training time should be invested instead if calculation really falls off a cliff.
There’s allot of esoteric mumbo-jumbo like “sense” and “feeling”, also some very obvious universal truths. Maybe this is quoted in an unfortunate way or maybe that author is not for me?

Luther on the other hand completely spiked my interest.
Just that i find no books or interviews from 2016. Where did you get that quote from? @kindaspongey

@Damkiller25 said ^

I won't say chess is easy, but if you compare to other hard subjects/skills is definely one of easiest ones.

1. getting inside chess is trival compare it, for competitive programming or most branches of mathematics.
2. clear and pretty obvious improvement, you can't say same for CP, math, physics, and software developmemt or even drawing.
3. no strong mental overload when playing chess, you can h...

Well, think of how many GMs there are. Only around 2000 people in the history of the world have been awarded this title. Meanwhile, there are millions of doctors and adults with a PhD.

@Rookitiki said ^

Sorry I didn’t read everything.
Just wanna say three things:

1 what’s “competitive programming”? You talk about chess in general and more on amateur level from what I can tell and then want to compare to some specific top level activity...

Well, kinda hard find something related to chess, while not being a board game, reasons why I choose are:

1. Elo based
2. mostly problem solving and logical thinking
3. very competitive and hard to get good.

What is competitive programming?
In simple words, sport for computer science students.
Combination of discrete math + data structures + algo + coding.
https://codeforces.com/
That might give you better idea, what it is. You won't understand the problems but it will give you a tough idea.

2 a bachelor of science in math takes three years here. After that you can chill and don’t have to worry about a job. During the study time you can access ...

Nope, unless you're some olimpiad or very gifted nope.
I had a female friend, sharing math problems. And that program is brutal, and a lot of people, just simply fail, it is very hard program, this isn't a humanity, "I have fun and party, and still pass type of expirence". Part time job is possibile, but having both stuff is extremely hard and requires luck on your side.

Never said, chess isn’t mentally exhausting?
But what I will say, compared to other hard subjects it is alteast mentally exhausting, I hope you can find a diffrence...

@soupdumplingchess said ^
I made a response, with is related to your response.
You could read that, and when make whole conclussion, if you want...
Damkiller25 said ^

@Damkiller25 said ^

... getting inside chess is trival...

No, it isn't: It has long been a general consensus that chess is downright absurdly complicated. Consequently, there are very few people who play it really well—and they can't even really explain why. This also explains the fate of so many chess books: They gather dust on the shelf, unread, because they're usually incomprehensible.