10957 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
From what I have observed, high IQ correlates well with tactical thinking in chess, but not necessarily with strategic thinking. So if you have high IQ and are not doing so well in chess, work more on the strategic aspects of the game.
I'm not so sure it's so cut and dry like this. the strategic aspects of the game are just less likely to be studied as frequently and as much as tactics are by most people so it may just appear correlated. most people don't ever really progress beyond just getting a good feel for tactical patterns, which is why most people aren't master level players. correlation is not causation.
omertatao: You may be right. Just an unverified hunch on my part. I'd be interested to hear what the OP (NawtybyNature) thinks though. Quite struck by his observation: "it's just hard to separate the success i've had in other endeavors and the shortcomings i've had in chess."
The OP has played only 7 games in 2-1/2 years on Chess.com? What's up with that?
is that the best thing you can do in math ? what's up with that ?
The OP apparently has a made-to-order tutor at home. His son. A little sweat, and a touch of O.C.D. should do the trick. So get with the program.
The OP's son could tutor you too. Your Live Chess needs work.
some great respones here! ok, i'll come clean to the fact i've never finished a chess book i'd start. my son does study reguarly. i play exclusively somewhere else. bottom line is that i'm lazy when it comes to chess and just like to play bullet and blitz. truth is, i tell myself that laziness is the main reason i'm so bad. that if i really tried, i could get much better. but i'm starting to feel now that i'm so old that my chess progress would be very limited no matter how much i studied. i mean why try and "remove all doubt" kind of thing :)
There's no direct correlation - as a commenter on the 1st page said, there are probably more intelligent than unintelligent players. But while I've know some very brilliant people who were strong players, I've also known a few strong players who, having had a conversation with them, I was surprised they even played.
My experience has demonstrated that a high I.Q. equates to not being very bright
Too true - the type of people who score highly on IQ tests tend to be the type of people who actually care about IQ tests.
2 years ago I was actually presented with an envelope from former Prime Minister of Australia congratulating me on my involement and placing in Australia's largest ever IQ test. Out of 356,012 people aged between 16-65, I came 19th. Only the top 20 were sent this message -------------->
"On behalf of all Australians, we commend you and your ability"
That was it............lol
And yes, I totally suck at chess, infact, I find it quite difficult to find an opponent that can lose against me...lol
So according to Podeian standards you would be just above the "Creationist" range. Can somebody verify if I got the conversion correct?
I would have to agree with your harsh but true example. : )
This site has taught me that there is no correlation between intelligence and chess.
By the evidence of this site, there would seem to be a correlation between high IQ and inane posts, though.
Maybe your IQ is not as high as you think.
Its call tunnel vision where i come from. Not seeing what was, what is happening now. and what is to come. i notice that a move that was made 3 turns ago is affecting me now. and forces me into doing something that will help them in the turns ahead. ( playing against high ranking players). trying to unravel the linar path is a skill leant over time, but once done you can redirect there momentum into your favour. thats why i suck. still learning how.
this person hasn't been educated in terms of chess. don't ask me why because you won't get an answer, but I have spent some time reading all about chess, listening to what professionals say about this and that for a while now. I have come the to conclusion that there are a hell of a lot of misconceptions about chess. how exactly it is related to IQ is one of these. the first thing people need to understand is that internet blitz chess is not the chess played in real life in real tournaments. everyone have that down? seems obvious, but some people refuse to accept this as truth, equating the two as equals. in fact unless you have achieved master level, blitz is nothing more than a video game. there's a little more going on in a blitz game between masters, but even there "video game-esque" type factors come into play most of the time, but to a significantly lesser degree. the second thing, most everyone can achieve GM level with persistent dedicated training, but not everyone will able to acheive super-gm status of 2700 FIDE and above. the people that do are endowed with incredible visualization and spatial analytical abilites, I believe this is one type of intelligence of many. this being true, it is readily apparent that someone can have a high overall iq but only ever be a decent player and not a super gm.
another example. if chess were as closely linked to iq as some people think it to be, then it would follow that some student from an ivy league school who knows how the pieces move, knows what castling is and knows the importance of the center, but nothing else and hasn't spent any time doing tactics, playing or learning about strategic themes would be able to easily defeat someone who scored lower than them on iq and standardized tests but who has studied and played chess for a considerable amount of time and attained master or expert level. I don't think this would be the case, I think the master/expert, with the lower overall iq, would demolish the novice ivy leaguer just about every time, something like 9 of 10 even. unless the ivy league student just happened to be one of the relatively few people on earth who possess the extraordinary visualization and spatial analytical abilities that super-gms have but just never really got into chess for some reason or another.
Defeating a FM and Chess.com bug?
by mychessapps a few minutes ago
Fritz 12 transfer new computer
by baddogno 3 minutes ago
Advice on choosing a book
by alec849 5 minutes ago
Question about rating change
by MrEdCollins 6 minutes ago
12/11/2013 - Topalov-Kramnik, Dortmund 1996
by kalpokdragon 7 minutes ago
Cannot log in to chess.com email .. Need Help !
by Kikyo_Sushi 7 minutes ago
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by OMF2097 10 minutes ago
How do I go about studying the middlegame
by alec849 13 minutes ago
Looking for live relayers of chess events
by Wilbert_78 14 minutes ago
My First Chess Composition
by MrEdCollins 16 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!