15041 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!
IQ can change. The brain is not static; it has neuroplasticity. Yes, IQ can be improved. Just playing a game of chess here or there isn't going to do much for you though.
"Whats with Tigerprowl writing persuasive essays in every post?"
Come to the dark side newplayer, is that persuasive enough?
In a recently released study about nature vs nurture, it is pointed out that nature( innate abilities ) accounts for 58% of the disparity of the subjects involved while nurture ( upbringing ) accounts for 29%. The study thus provides some concrete ideas about to what extent native intelligence and diligence complement each other. The report deserves more careful reading .
As to the relationship between playing chess and improving IQ, I think playing chess only improves one's visual - spatial intelligence. I very much doubt if it also leads to better Maths skill in general.
Cite your sources.
Isaac Asimov was probably one of the smartest people alive at his time and yet he sucked at chess...
Isaac Asimov was probably one of the smartest people alive at his time and yet he sucked it chess...
That is the saddest thing I've heard all day. Poor, poor Asimov.
Yeah, Isaac Asimov talks about it (Chess) in one of his books I believe the title is "I Asimov". It's a real good book but then of course all his books are good...
I agree, it needs more careful reading. It seems, nobody understands these studies at all. Read the mismeasure of man, by Stephen Jay Gould. An old book, but still, sadly (since it should have cleared this nonsense up decades ago), relevant. And anything by Lewontin. Then re-read the study, whatever it was.
oh, and what accounts for the remaining 23%?
"Reykjavik Open, Round 5 | Commentary by FM Ingvar Johannesson & Fiona Steil-Antoni"
Post your best miniatures here
by Monster-Bullet 3 minutes ago
3/7/2014 - Mate in 4
by wotr564 4 minutes ago
Making the Chess.com Forums Better
by ilikeflags 4 minutes ago
Displaying our own problems as a tactics quiz ?
by nen1 6 minutes ago
An interesting chess variant on chessbase.com
by royalbishop 6 minutes ago
Chess.com pippin off credit cards
by RonaldJosephCote 6 minutes ago
Does Magnus Carlsen have an account on this website?
by Jrmld 12 minutes ago
players who c ant get rating above 3 digits
by baddogno 13 minutes ago
This was the sneakiest knight I've ever seen
by ViMH 17 minutes ago
Creating traps vs positional play
by johnyoudell 18 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 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!