Is intelligence directly related towards skill in chess?

I did and it didn't work. From that I conclude that this universe isn't concious based.

Using it as a definite argument is however religion.

If we live in a consious based universe, you should be able to defeat Carlsen if you want to. Try it!

Your entire argument is based on an assumption that shouldn't be assumed. If you want to prove something certainly, you should argue in an arbitrary universe.

That it didn't work? Or that I made the conclusion?

A lot more men play chess than women. So, statistically, the best players should also be mostly men.

It's OK, I'm not angry, I'm just an a554hole, and as to looking through old forum posts, it's true I did spend about two minutes finding out who I was dealing with. But which came first, the chicken or the egg? Are there fewer women playing top-flight chess because there aren't the female role-models, or are there fewer role-models because women don't have the ability to play top-flight chess? If women amount to 5% of chessplayers generally, but only 2% of GMs, and are even more under-represented in the top 500 (never mind those with a credible shot at a world title), where's the evidence for equal talent?

Then statistically it is only a matter of then before a woman becomes the dominant GM.  My opinion is that the Top GM's of the world are anomolistic and therefore a woman should of surfaced capable of beating every male currently in the top bracket.  One has not.  Personally I don't think there will ever be a Woman in the top slot of chess.  I think the requirements both competatively speaking and sheer depth of understanding of the game of chess are beyond even the most talented of female chess players.  It is simpy counterintuitive to a woman's base nature to dominate this sport.  that just my opinion~

I already concluded that reality did not alter itself to suit my desires.

So, that you don't like that we have restrictions in the actual universe makes you think that we live in another universe? I'm not following your thought pattern.

You claim that our universe got laws but at the same time is concious based without restrictions.

Rather, it proves that if the universe is concious based, it's not based on my conciousness.

Again, why bring up concious theory? You're not defending the flaws of your argument.

No.There are children who have dyslexia and they still doing well.

Hyperactive children and austistic children can as well.

Even slow learners as well.

No. My concious is thinking that no one is controling the universe. This is however very much off topic. The point of the test was after all to test your claim that anyone can be as good as they want at anything. I proved that it's a false claim and that's all.

I agree. It's called theory because it's not suited to be used as an absolute argument.

The OP's initial statement totally answers itself.  Of course intellegence is going to help you with chess in this reality or the other.  But shear ability to memorize opening lines is not going to gaurntee tactical accumen or the ability to read your advesary.  Ego has alot to do with Chess.  Preparation.  Intellegence and IQ are going to give you a clear edge.  So is intuition.  I don't see intuition as being part of IQ.  I believe some can wield reality and some are just a part of others reality.  It is a competely subjective analysis.  You need brains and to some degree an ability to play to your opponent.  

whats your IQ level?