Is chess mostly about intelligence?

I always thought I was smart but chess has really anhilated me. I rarely ever win games. I took an aptitude test and I scored in the 80th percentile, which means my IQ is around a 113, which is above average. I'm always pretty good at math. I dont see why I'm bad at chess. I used to play seldomly but now I play often. I started to play often in september and I'm still not good. Its been 3 months of repetitive play and I'm still not good. Can  you give me advice and tell me your experiences with chess?

Well, chesslearner, intelligence is not everything to chess.  Someone could be intelligent, but they may not think logically.  Some people just think differently than others, and that may speed up or slow down their rate of learning.  Chess isn't just about memorizing lines and using your superior intelligence to baffle everyone, as psychology also plays an effect, and logic is the big one that can determine how well you play chess.  Some ways to improve are to solve logic puzzles, get a coach, or play people much higher rated than you very often.  Also, in chess, three months isn't very long.  You're probably underestimating yourself, and if you keep trying, you will get better relatively quickly.  My rating on here started off slow last year, but then started to take off.  Yours probably will, too .  My main advice is just that logic is the key.

It's just a game. Basing your "intelligence" on tests and games, may just be kind of silly. Intelligence is obviously just an immeasurable opinion.

Since chess is a game wholly in the realm of the mind, it must require intelligence. However, it's not all-encompassing and probably reflects only a small subset of congitive abilities. Moreover, like for all things, practice and study is of much higher importance until world-class levels. I'm confident I'd beat even a "genius" if he hardly studied or played chess.

Anyway, don't let chess affect your self-esteem. Play for the fun and challenge.

BTW: Intelligence itself is still not really defined except in a circular way. For example, IQ tests define intelligence as how well you do on an IQ test. It's certainly more complicated than that.

I have always felt the best players had mastered forms of aggression, which is not related directly to intelligence. 

I have a pretty high IQ, and still suck at chess.  I am also very aggressive.

Have I made any point at all?

Right on exigentsky! I think I remember reading in an earlier related thread that Garry (is the double r right?) Kasparov's IQ was something or other (can't remember) - which was lower then mine! Have another couple of exclamation marks crisy, you deserve them - !! So he can stare all he likes, I'll whop him. Yeah, right.

Some people say that accurate memory is very important too.

Hope not.

What sort of intelligence do you mean?

My friend's kid is on the autistic spectrum - he's highly intelligent in the standard sense in that he is well read, good at maths, excellent memory etc. but he has nearly zero emotional intelligence. His social skills are dreadful, so he would never be able to take part in a psychological battle. I'm trying to teach him chess, but it is a bit of a struggle. He can learn the moves, calculate and make basic plans, but he lacks something fundamental to the proper understanding of the game that I can't quite put my finger on - or perhaps I just can't connect with him on the right level to pass on information efficiently.

My son is not as intelligent in the same ways, but has a much more 'rounded' intelligence - he has much better motor skills, good social skills and is generally quite bright, but not in the same league. He's much better at chess.

Yes, intelligence does have some corrolation to ability at chess, but there are various forms of intelligence. Other areas such as memory, gamesmanship, experience and creativity all have some input.

I have no idea what my IQ is and will never voluntarily have it measured because the number derived from a series of IQ tests has very little relevance to any activity I will ever partake in due to its abstract, contrived nature.

Pattern recognition is pretty important.  That is part of why tactics are so important, because when you recognize a tactical pattern on the board you can act accordingly. 

Ofcourse chess has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence !  Its all about physical dexterity, endurance, strength and flexibility !  Its also very important how long one can hold their breath under 30 feet of water with a crowd of people watching !  Oh , and as the great champion Karpov has discovered, not washing one's hair for long periods also helps.  Another plus is to have powerful legs so that you might win any kicking contest under the table during the game, as occured in a game between Korchnoi and Petrosian....

My point exactly, masters of forms of aggression.

...which includes passive aggression

You don't have to be a genius to epic pwn at chess. Kasparov's iq was around 135 (although his memory was off the charts). But of course it helps.

I agree with the earlier comment that chess is about studying and perhaps repeating patterns for those of us who are just tolerable players. I would assume there is quite a diffrence between live and correspondence chess as far as one's skill requisite. I have not yet played live chess but in correspondent chess I have a wealth of resources at my disposal over a three day period.......live chess I'm sure is where rubber meets the road and your rating is a more accurate protrayal of you tactics and mental resources. I am counting on being humbled more quickly than I would choose to imagine when I venture into that theatre.

Well first chess is just a board game.  So you may want to consider how competitive you want to be, how much time you will put into the game, and what you're trying to do with it.

If people are beating you, it's for the most part because they're serious chess players.  Like any game, if you want to play good, play smart, and relentless.  In chess that would mean constant study, constant practice, and using your time effectively with efficient ideas.

Sometimes in games you can reach plateaus, where you don't seem to be getting better.  Usually getting past one requires a bit of effort on your part.

My advice would be to read books written that increase your knowledge of the game, play strong players sometimes, and keep it fun : >

i like keeping things simple and i think repetition and discipline will provide success in chess chess puzzles have helped me alot tactically.. even though my rating isnt very high so i may not be the best example..as for intelligence Im not intelligent enough to define its meaning so i cant comment too much but yea like the guy above me said have fun

I've known people with serious brain damage that were decent chess player's.  You don't have to be that intelligent to play chess.  Memorization is important to a degree.  However, I think that visualization is the most important skill to have. Being able to picture what the board will look like after several moves is a clear advantage.

I read some posts and saw some wrong statements.

(got a mail today about the server which I had forgotten by some reasons...)

By the way, I played at ICC and Fics for 15 years, this server is in fact still a bit problematic when I compare, to be forced to use a browser and also Java or active-x is always bad, picking up more virus and other problems, slowing down and so on. Its MUCH better to use the Telnet-protocoll and no browser at all when playing. Much safer and faster.

I lost a game after some very easy wins cause Firefox browser locked, when I got back to the server the game was "lost".

Ugly.

And about intelligence, its completely stupid to say it has nothing to do with logics. Its very close connected, ofcourse!

Kasparov has medium-intelligence, not more (redic. to read "IQ 190") and he has an "idiot-memory" (yes thats how its classed by psycologs) of that kind that he can learn the Bible with reading it once. Or a phone-catalog. Those memory-abilities is very important when "thinking" over positions and considering theory of the game. But ofcouse Kasparov has more abilities than that memory of machine-type, hes very creative and ambitious (or at least was)

Clean fools can get 2000 or more in chess, we have many such in Stockholm and I think the "sport" is known for this problem.

Chess is much about memory and concentration but its close connected to logics, but a very special type of logics. Psycologic problems about the opponent and other things disturbe the concentration and also the memory.

A good player mustnt be good at anything else at all, chess is a worthless "science". The theorybases are destroying a good game and tranfering it to just a worthless science for those who follow the theories.

(Therefore I prefere unusual openings like Grob opening)

sorry for bad english, I am not from USA but Sweden.. also I say both hello and goodbye.

This server and interface must be modified if an experienced player with demands should have any interest for it.

To be clearer, after some modifications this server really can be an useful alternative.

And sorry for talking about different subjects in the tread.

Perhaps I am just not too clever:) Or I have to little time to browse the forums.

Good luck

Chess is more a game of experience than it is of intelligence, although intelligence helps a little. Much of it is memory and pattern recognition. Being able to think logically helps to a significant degree, but some positions require thinking "outside the box." By that I mean, a best continuation may require a move which at first seems contrary to logic.

As someone said, three months is nothing in chess development. Record your games and analyse them afterward. Make full use of the experience you are getting. Reinforce what was done well, and learn to recognize your mistakes. Look for improvements -- better moves -- in the games you played. Replay and analyze games others stronger than you have played.

Do a little basic studying of books. Nothing too advanced. Learn basic tactics -- pins, forks, discovered attacks, etc. Study the most basic endgames. Play, but only longer time controls, not blitz. You need time to adequately think through positions and look for the best moves.

And as several have said, have fun.

I would say chess is mostly about practice and study. The longer you play, the better you get. Being very intelligent does help though. You would probably learn things faster and calculate moves more quickly and easily.

IQ is not necessarily an indicator that you will be good at chess, and at 3 months of playing the game you have a long way to go before feeling confident in your games. Patience is a critical factor in order to be able to look at your moves, and my best advice to you is not to rush your moves - what may seem to be a good move very often is not, so thinking laterally, with the end in mind, rather than immediate gains, is very important. Don't be too disappointed with your losses - learn the fundamentals of the game and build on them.