8502 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!
^ Does Andy have a new avatar?!?
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.
Lol! Well said! I have met both sorts as well :D Reminds me of Nimzowitsch's outburst: "Why must I lose to this idiot?" (Which is not to say that his opponent was actually an idiot).
I have often wondered about the correlation between chess playing ability and IQ myself. It is easy to associate a healthy ego with a large score in either of the categories; I believe we often read too much (or completely misread) into numerical quantificiations of non mathematical phenomena. A talented chess player does not necessarily have to have even above average intelligence to perform well at this game, just as a Honors degree in Physics is no guarantee of Chess aptitude.
Intelligence is an funny thing. There met people whose elevators don't quite make it to the top floor who are still capable of profound understanding of natural things that baffle even the wisest of men. There are geniuses of great reknown who forget to put their pants on when they leave the house.
In short, I quit worrying about my IQ, rating, and all that jazz, and I put more effort into enjoying the game for its worth. :)
lol...if I ever do change, it will be to that.
I will state only truth
Oh good, that will make things a lot easier on us then.
- The simple fact that you can study for an IQ test devalues it as a measurement of natural intelligence
- Bobby Fischer did not have an IQ of 180
- Garry Kasparov does not have an IQ of 190
- Chess skill is not an indication of intelligence, it is an indication of chess skill. It is fun to think being good at chess makes you smart, and have others think so as well, but there's no truth to this.
- Hard work and going down the right path with a trainer/coach will get you much further than any sort of natural intelligence will. Alekhine taught us this in his match vs Capablanca, and Laszlo Polgar taught us this by raising 3 daughters to be world class chess players.
Have a great day
Agreed. You have a good one also mate....: )
You can not study for a good iq test.
If Kasparov had such an iq his elo would have been over 3000.
You cannot find a good IQ test.
Well, you can study for an IQ test, but it only helps the score a little... you're not going to score an extra 15 points or anything.
So that's supposed to make the notion sound?!...lol
No, the whole idea is silliness :p Not only IQ to chess relation but a test purportedly measuring intelligence itself
Yes, presumably the measurers would have to be the biggest geniuses of all!
It is true that chess skill and intelligence are 2 different things.
Chess skill is chess skill.It has to do with a lot of random facts.The most important are:
1)Where did you born.
2)How much money your parents have.
Kasparov wouldn't be Kasparov if he was born in Somalia from very poor parents.Kasparov is Kasparov because he started play chess at 3 , having the best trainers , a ton of books and no need to work even one hour in his whole life.
True , others had the same chance and Kasparov is only one but can anyone say that it is because he was the most intelligent?When he lost from Kramnik he was less intelligent than him?
Chess , like it or not , is a sport.And as a sport the result is defined by a lot of outside and "inside" factors.The most important quality of any Great chessplayer is his personality.The ability to stay calm no matter what happens in or out of the board .
How many of us lost a game because we were dissapointed from a bad move weplayed and mistakes start to come one after another?How many times we couldn't play next day because of a bad defeat on a previous round.
A tournament and a chess game is a hard psychology test drive.You need to stay untouched by everything , totally calm and ready to find the best move even if your mother died.
That is why some really great players (like Efim Geller or Vassily Ivanchuk) never manage to be World Champions.Certainly not because they were less intelligent.
Any others suck at chess.. period?
Everybody sucks at chess.
Except the Chess Champion. He was too good for this site.
Now we don't know where he is.
Your two most important choices in life --
Choose poorly and you're screwed.
I am tucked comfortably on the left tail of both bell curves.
I know a woman with an IQ of two hundred and forty...but she can't change a car tyre...experts are baffled...
Einstein couldn't tie his own shoes.
Which was why he invented velcro.
WHO decides the names of chess variations
by SlimReaper99 a few minutes ago
Which gambit gives you the most innitiative?
by Phife_Dawg a few minutes ago
Why lose points for stalemates?
by kco 3 minutes ago
Is the book "My System" worth getting?
by Greenmtnboy 4 minutes ago
by Moremover 5 minutes ago
Setting Engines to never resign
by ollave 7 minutes ago
Weird bugs on this site.
by Conflagration_Planet 7 minutes ago
by dylan723 16 minutes ago
Time to get 1500 rating
by tacticop 16 minutes ago
Wanted; High rated players to compete with.
by MartzVariation 17 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com