Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Relationship between Chess rating and I.Q?

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #321


    The first step in knowing is realizing you are aware and questioning it and what it is and then being convicted by the totality of that reality.... then you jump more into what you were getting at, but it is a little different than what you proposed....

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #322


    zxzyz wrote:

    But that is not the same as saying that there is a no correllation between IQ and being an adult tournament chess player.

    =thats the way it is spinned.


    There is a disturbing trend to push the idea that there is no such thing as inherited intelligence and that anyone can be a genius.. Thus anyone can be a GM.IM if they study enough...

    THis is what is being pushed in the media -- everyone is equal --- thus according to this belief there is no relationship between intelligence and chess rating - in fact intelligence is due to environment alone -nothing else -- so no such thing as talent - anyone can develop that.

    Perhaps not on this thread but on a similar thread someone made the argument that anyone can be a genius.

    If this was true -- you just need one verifiable case of an 85 IQ person who is now an im/gm. (or even increased IQ to 100 or above by learning).

    Of course if the person was drunk or did test badly because of other factors it wont count.

    the consensus is that there is a small correlation. not no correlation. which essentially means you can't accurately or precisely predict someone's iq from their chess playing ability alone. you can only make a very rough estimate. it cannot be used as a verifiable iq test. the sat would give you a much better idea, but even that is not as accurate as a stanford-binet. 

    not everyone will be able to become an IM or GM. but everyone with average intelligence (seems to be widely acknowledged as being 100) will be able to achieve around expert or master---if nothing else is getting in their way.

    I don't know much about how the media spins things, but I do know there is a normal distribution in regards to intelligence. you can google it. the average is 100, SD 15. someone with an iq of 135 would be within the 99th percentile. people with iq's of 150 or above are regarded as possessing "genius level intelligence"---less than 1 percent of the population. 

    in regards to talent, is it just me or does it seem like whenever you ask someone to define exactly what this is what people offer up sounds a lot like what they say when asked to define god? I myself am suspicious of such vagueness, things which cannot be measured.  personally, I regard what people call talent as a combination of several discrete factors working in concert. the most important of which would probably be capacity (iq) and a genuine deeply rooted interest/emotional investment for whatever it is. you combine both those things with a wealthy family  able to secure top notch trainers and you get magnus carlsen. 

    you can readily imagine someone with a relatively high iq, 130-140 or so, who is nevertheless not IM GM material because they lack the temperament and/or don't have much of an interest/emotional investment.  

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #323


    madhacker wrote:

    "IQ x 100 + 1000 =~ top possible rating"

    = 100 x 100 + 1000

    = 10000 + 1000

    = 11000

    Person of average intelligence can reach ELO 11000 with enough work!

    x 10

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #324


    exactly my point. thanks nemo. you proved urself wrong or right?

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #325


    Why bother talking about tournament players? If the trend can be seen anywhere that intelligence correlates with better chess skills it can be seen at the Grandmasters. It seems very common sense to me that higher intelligence is a big asset. A person with a very high IQ can usually solve math problems more easily and therefore i conclude it must be the same with chess. Or course dumber people can beat smarter people in chess and even have better skills if they put enough effort. If however 2 people of different intelligence study the same material for the same time with the same passion and all te more intelligent person will surely be stronger chess wise.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #326


    im stupid

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #327


    @ beerainsdon

    In the proverbial sense you are right....you can't become counted as wise until you are humble enough to realize how much you don't know and/or how much there could be to know.... I think you worded your statement a bit ambiguously though... I was being facetious and punning the literal interpretation....

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #328


    thanks? im only kidding. this thread keeps popping up on my page. guess i need to "uncheck" it. hows ur day nemo?

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #329


    over with, but good otherwise.....you ?

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #330


    got the busy part overwith. now just relaxin and tryin to decide on where to move. in between places now. obviously a long story. oh... isee ur name now. i just glanced at it. thought it said Nemo. sorry. I live in Austin. its ok...

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #331


    That is why I use the icon.... people kept typing nemo to either shorten my name for ease of typing, perhaps to mess with me....

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #332


    my original name was BeeRainDone.

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #333


    I couldn't think of a good one and all of the run of the mill names were taken....

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #334


    i wasnt looking at the list of "banned" for cheating folks. geez. i must have seen at least 2000 names. They apparently have a very effective way of catching cheaters. Its everyday. Good job Chess,com. What was this thread about again? oh yeah, im a genius.... thanx. I know. I know. Oh stop. I know. Yeah. Oh stop. Im not that smart. Oh. youre smart too. Ok stop... 

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #335


    I'm sorry... I was watching tv, did you say something?

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #336


    haha. what? so, when u are playing online games try playing upside down, from the other persons point of view. its kinda weird. then watch the game after when ur pieces are on the bottom. its kind of a cool way to see the game literally from a different perspective...

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #337


    I used to read the newspaper upside down for the hell of it....

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #338


    good job. now we are talkin intelligence. haha.....

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #339


    Cojabo wrote:

    Why bother talking about tournament players? If the trend can be seen anywhere that intelligence correlates with better chess skills it can be seen at the Grandmasters. 

    The IQ of GM's have been studied with respect to their chess skill. The first paper on this appeared in 1927. In that paper, Djakow and his associates tested grandmasters, including several world champions and some of the elite players of the day, they found no difference between the highly talented group and a control group of adult non-chess players. 

    The relationship between chess and visual-spatial intelligence has been tested and there is no correllation.

    Chess players, including grandmasters, have been parts of studies using the Guilford-Zimmerman Spatial Visualization Subtest, the Berlin Structural Model of Intelligence, The Shape Memory MV-1 Test, the Intelligenz-Stuktur-Test 2000 R, the Raven Progressive Matrices, Digit Span Task, the Corsi block-tapping test, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (among child GMs), and none of them found a correllation between mental capacity and chess ability. 

    There is 90 years of research on this. 

    There is no correllation between IQ and chess ability in the chess playing population. 

    Indeed, identifying why there is no relationship between general IQ and chess ability has become a really interesting area of investigation for that reason, and has contributed significantly to the current body of theory around what components make for expertise (chunking theory, template theory, apperception-restructuring theory, long term working memory, and so forth) and how those elements are created in individuals with normal IQs.

    The big differentiators for chess ability is the amount of deliberate practice alone. But that is still only moderately associated with chess skill even when a number of other factors, such as practice with others, competative games played, and the number of chess books owned were entered into a regression analysis. 

    What's really fascinating is that Ward, Hodges, Williams and Starkes did a review in literature across domains, and using the same criteria, the same level of correllation holds for other sports and activities as well. 

    One possible explanation for why intelligence isn't related to chess ability may have to do with selective drop-out. That is, the population of active tournament chess players' intelligence distribution has already been accounted for in the sample because only those people whose intellictual abilities put them in the range of players likely to be successful tournament players remain tournament players, all others having given up the game, thus giving researchers access to only a restricted range. 

    But that explanation seems to be lacking as Bilalic, Gruber and others have found that the correllation between chess skill and intelligence in children is slightly negative!! The smarter kids tend not to practice as hard or as long, and thus their skills quickly drop behind the less intelligent peers! 

  • 23 months ago · Quote · #340


    Great post @Kingpatzer.

    You prove (yet again) that chess players are clearly Smarter Than the Average Bear.

    Despite your herculean efforts, that bias is likely to remain a constant in these endless threads on chess and intelligence, however construed.

    Thanks for all your good work.  Is anyone listening?  Q.E.D.  Smile 

Back to Top

Post your reply: