I disagree about it.Rolf wrote:
In real life any good master can tell after a couple of experiences with an amateur if he has the potential of becomning a master or if he will remain a patzer. A patzer isnt a bad player, but he isnt a master either.
I do not think that a good master can tell the potential of a player based on experience and I do not think that we know the potential of chess players.
I believe that the potential(assuming that the player is ready to train some hours per day) is practically higher than what most people believe and many players fail because they do not have the right trainers to help them or fail because they do not like to spend a lot of time on chess.
Uri