14273 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!
I am an average iq guy. But i worked myself to improve my game, and new ideas of gameplay eventually came to me. My calculations have now become more effective and efficient. Honestly, i would have to do a sample statistical test of pmcc to check this out myself, but intially i am of opinion: practice, practice, practice...
Glad to see this mindless, four year old thread, can be continually brought back to life by people of any IQ.
Thank you @MrWizard, your legacy will outlive you.
There are about 50 other variations of this same thread (feels worse than KID theory) and all equally mindless.
Chess players are an eccentric lot. Myself included.
"We're Chess Players, we must be smart!"
Your posturing puts us at risk of vindicating post #11, joey, and you haven't commented on the numerous references to 'non-linear correlation' i posted from Google Scholar, so I think I'll just leave it at that.
Here it is:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1113/jphysiol.2005.100271/full I just thought some specific examples in actual scientific papers might help you along the path to admitting you made a (frankly, quite elementary) mistake. You don't seem like the kind of guy who would be able to do that kind of thing though :(Not that there's any need to get insulting, but there's a great deal of irony in being called dumb by someone who can't grasp the concept of a non-linear correlation.
This should be easy to look up, and I seem to remember there being a weak or possibly nonsignificant correlation between IQ and chess rating. But I'm too lazy to do so myself (another thing IQ doesn't take into account)."?
yes, this is the case. many studies have been conducted and this is exactly what was found. also I would just like to note that these studies were probably invariably talking about standard chess played in real life tournaments, and not internet blitz or bullet chess.
grandmasters seem to have a unique ability to "chunk" patterns, store them in their heads and call them up as needed. something along these lines. it was a german study I read which stated something like this. they speculated that grandmasters may have above normal neuronal connections tying together two very specific parts of the brain which may contribute to how easily they are able to store or "chunk" chess patterns or positions in their memories.
I think it very likely that each person has increased activity/neuronal connections tying together various different parts of brain leading to each person having different predispositions and abilities for different fields, activities etc., chess being one of these. this is the same variability that applies to people's phyisques and their according predispositions for different athletic/physical activities.
Interesting- thank you for that. Of course, given that I'm in the 1300-1400 range after playing chess my whole life, I would like to believe there is no relationship whatsoever!
Well, in Germany we distinguish between "Zusammenhang" and "Korrelation". Only in loose talk people use "korreliert" in the sense of "not independent". "Korrelation":="linearer Zusammenhang" is usually reserved for Pearson's product-moment correlation r, while "nichtlinearer Zusammenhang" is for dependencies that are better modelled through other than linear curves (like e.g. a typical learning curve).
Well it looks like I will have to admit a certain degree of error, Joey.http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html
If I can assume you are mathematically trained as well, Bubatz. Then it would appear that correlation indeed only formally applies to linear relationships. The sciences (and everyday speech) certainly do not make such a distinction. Shame we couldn't have had a more amiable discussion of what was ultimately a rather pointless sidenote to the thread.
I'd also like to know where you got this, although it hardly matters. If you let numbers tell you what you can and can't accomplish in life then you are a fool.
Well said. Numbers, or people with silly formulas
I've just been told that the better chess player you are; your IQ would be usually high also
I had something interesting happen to me. I used to be a rather good chess player but then, unfortunately,had limited brain damage.
My "spatial" used to be in the upper one tenth of one percent--I could play blindfold etc at an early age.
Now my "spatial" is really bad--in lower 15%-this due to some brain damage in a particular area of my brain.
My chess playing ability has also gone down something like 400 rating points in quicker chess and 250 rating points in slow chess.
So I am saying your chess ability is dependent on some separate factors such as spatial, memory, ability to innovate etc.
If you have these factors then your over all IQ will tend to be higher as some of these are factored in evaluatiing IQ. If you lose one of these factors--your IQ will drop--I have lost spatial and memory [memory to some degree]. My IQ has dropped.
[I know many will say "yes, it is apparent your IQ has dropped!]
Nah. Wisdom wins out over IQ anyday. We're glad your here, @Ponz111.
I have seen some intelligent people do some very dumb things, especially whilst using very little forethought, that they were otherwise very capable of. Even the dull are capable of making a few sharp moves now and then.
However, it seems logical to conclude if you did a study, it would show that the better you are at spatial reasoning, in conjunction with logic problem solving, you probably are going to be better at chess than those who don't do them well.
Do a sample test for it to check for correlation ^^
Do a sample test for it to check for correlation ^^
I really don't want to put forth the effort that it would require. Thanks for considering me a good crash test dummy....
It can and it can't, chess has so many complexity and memorization that you have to have quite a bit of understanding what goes on in chess I say it makes you smart in a way but only thinking ahead.
I don't think Fischer or Kasparov's IQ is known. There are silly internet sources willing to claim all sorts of numbers, but is there any evidence they were tested? Which test was used? That's what I thought
Yeah, IQ test is too broad, especially if it works the way it aims to. Chess skill is too specific. For plateau rating and IQ I woudln't expect too much correlation (after you factor out some of the problems you mentioned such as bright people quitting and such). Learning rate and IQ I would expect to be more of a correlation, but still less of one than the masses inherently attribute to chess due to its status as a game for intellectuals.
These tests have been done. Surprisingly, to me at least, the ability to solve logic problems well has very little correlation to Chess ability, at least beyond a certain threshold. Grandmasters aren't spectacularly good at logic problems, and people who are extremely good at logic problems are frequently not good Chess players. "Spatial reasoning" is a somewhat ill-defined term, but there does seem to be a greater connection between that, at least in some definitions, and Chess playing ability.
Was an issue of chess-life... maybe a year old now? Where titled players including GMs were given games similar to chess in their perfect information, zero-sum, nash equilibrium (not so sure about that last term, I'm sorta just throwing them out there now lol). But anyway games you could always reason though to the best logical move.
Long story short, the GMs preformed very very slightly better than a control group of non chess players. Masters as a whole preformed worse IIRC lol.
"Q & A with Coach Heisman!"
1000 ELO in Bullet, 1100 in Blitz, 2000 in Long games???
by wjcsz a few minutes ago
How accurate are these Chess.com ratings?
by vanman11 3 minutes ago
Millionare Chess Tournament in Las Vegas at October 2014
by woton 7 minutes ago
Chess and Coffee
by achja 8 minutes ago
King's Gambit a good opening?
by kaynight 8 minutes ago
4/18/2014 - Steinikov - Jaskoy, USSR 1988
by Bobcat 9 minutes ago
by adypady02 10 minutes ago
Confederacy of Dunces !!
by JackOfAllHobbies 13 minutes ago
Male & Female Chess Style! Can Statistics Show a Difference! ?
by kaynight 16 minutes ago
by chawk57charle 24 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!