Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

95% of people get this wrong, Are Chess Players Different?


  • 21 months ago · Quote · #161

    waffllemaster

    Seraphimity wrote:

    Devils advocate, of is the devil in the details?  The OP's statement that most people get this wrong at the same time attempted to put chess players as a group to the same task.  The diagram dealt with squares and one was  asked to deduce a number of squares of various size using basic spatial reasoning.  I wonder why I thought chess players would just go quitely and answer the bleeping question? LOL

    Chess players take their squares very seriously ok!?  Sure the average person can get away with a sloppy square here or there, but we have 64!  If you don't have uniform size and proper alignment the diagonals and files go all crazy.  Any person who truly loves chess also loves a properly formed and placed square.

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #162

    Seraphimity

    waffllemaster wrote:
    Seraphimity wrote:

    Devils advocate, or is the devil in the details?  The OP's statement that most people get this wrong at the same time attempted to put chess players as a group to the same task.  The diagram dealt with squares and one was  asked to deduce a number of squares of various size using basic spatial reasoning.  I wonder why I ever thought chess players would just simply answer the question; the one about squares? LOL Tongue Out

    Chess players take their squares very seriously ok!?  Sure the average person can get away with a sloppy square here or there, but we have 64!  If you don't have uniform size and proper alignment the diagonals and files go all crazy.  Any person who truly loves chess also loves a properly formed and placed square.

    as a whole the I thought chess players scored very well here very little coloring outside of the lines. A+ I was suprised no one proferred the amount of possible squares that would be possible on a chess board, assuming of course the board was made up of matchsticks..

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #163

    waffllemaster

    Seraphimity wrote:
    waffllemaster wrote:
    Seraphimity wrote:

    Devils advocate, or is the devil in the details?  The OP's statement that most people get this wrong at the same time attempted to put chess players as a group to the same task.  The diagram dealt with squares and one was  asked to deduce a number of squares of various size using basic spatial reasoning.  I wonder why I ever thought chess players would just simply answer the question; the one about squares? LOL 

    Chess players take their squares very seriously ok!?  Sure the average person can get away with a sloppy square here or there, but we have 64!  If you don't have uniform size and proper alignment the diagonals and files go all crazy.  Any person who truly loves chess also loves a properly formed and placed square.

    as a whole the I thought chess players scored very well here very little coloring outside of the lines. A+ I was suprised no one proferred the amount of possible squares that would be possible on a chess board, assuming of course the board was made up of matchsticks..

    There was a topic like this already.  They answered how many squares, rectangles on a chess board and then some of them came up with formulas or programs they'd written to find the answer and then they also posted generalized formulas for boards of nxn size and how they came up with them... lol

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #164

    waffllemaster

    Here it is (I'm sure it wasn't the first)

    http://www.chess.com/forum/view/more-puzzles/can-you-solve-it

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #165

    Seraphimity

    I'm sorry I was too lazy to read your last post could you repeat that?

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #166

    waffllemaster

    The nice thing about reading it is you can repeat it for yourself Tongue Out

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #167

    sacking3

    the question is so dull and non chess you should all forget it. Better to consider an even better non chess Q,  if a man says he is a liar , do you believe him?

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #168

    Sunofthemorninglight

    or even if he says he never lies ?

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #169

    sluck72

    I got this one wrong xD Got 15 but didn't see the 3x3 square oO

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #170

    Conflagration_Planet

    sluck72 wrote:

    I got this one wrong xD Got 15 but didn't see the 3x3 square oO

    That's the one I missed at first.

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #171

    mr_Bohlin

    sacking3 wrote:

    the question is so dull and non chess you should all forget it. Better to consider an even better non chess Q,  if a man says he is a liar , do you believe him?

    Yes, I do. Because if the man is indeed not a liar, he would not lie. which he would need to do in order to state that he was, in fact, a liar; even though he werent. So even if was not before, he is now.

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #172

    grandbrother

    I can see plainly 12 squared in the figure!

    12

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #173

    zazen5

    You need more definitions rather than implying.  You will be wrong if you say anything other than 9, because a square has four sides.  If you are implying that the other partitions are squares, that is nonsense according to the definition of a square.  This reminds me of the hoops I had to jump through academically to get a good job.  Multiple guess questions are irritating.

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #174

    grandbrother

    zazen5 wrote:

    You need more definitions rather than implying.  You will be wrong if you say anything other than 9, because a square has four sides.  If you are implying that the other partitions are squares, that is nonsense according to the definition of a square.  This reminds me of the hoops I had to jump through academically to get a good job.  Multiple guess questions are irritating.

    Then I think this forum got longer and longer...........

    Isn't it time to get the answer from the one who started out asking

     

    '

  • 21 months ago · Quote · #175

    Elubas

    I think yes would probably be correct in either case depending on how you define liar. If he's telling the truth that he is a liar, well, obviously believing that he was a liar turned out to be correct (obviously if you're a liar it doesn't necessarily mean you can't still tell the truth sometimes... if you use the assumption that a liar must be someone who tells only lies, perhaps he can't be a pure liar because a person who has always lied but now saying that he lies must be making a true statement [at the time he is saying it.]).

    Even if he said he was a liar when he in fact has never lied in his life, by him making the statement that he is a liar, he is perhaps now turned into one since that statement at the time was a lie (I guess it depends on how many lies it takes for someone to count as a liar Smile).

  • 20 months ago · Quote · #176

    grandbrother

    so that is it, just 16 boxes, after 10 pages down the road, has any one gave you that figure before, or correctly answered with that same answer. thanks for answer!


Back to Top

Post your reply: