Is chess mostly about intelligence?

So someone can be intelligent but it doesn’t mean they are good at chess, because chess ability is a learned skill. 
I’m not very good at chess but my pattern recognition is very high.

There you are then, I expect.

I think the most important thing is your third ability, not the fourth.

I think time is the single most important thing in chess. Chess is mostly about time. All the fighting spirit in the world wont make any difference if someone doesn't have the time to study and practice.

The ability to study and practise, PatriotGames? Well, you're a lady and ladies don't fight. They get what they want by means of the gentle art of persuasion, unless they're my wife, when she just goes ahead and does whatever it is anyway. Well, perhaps that's slightly unfair but she WAS an only child.

I guess maybe I don't look at it the way other people do. Fighting spirit just doesn't seem that important if someone doesn't have the ability (time) to study the game. But I don't have any desire to be good at chess either.

No

Well, Yes and no. It takes less time if your more intelligent tho. My opinion is mostly subjective though, as a 400 elo patzer.

Chess is mostly a specific type of pattern recognition.

Chess is not an intelligence game , is an intelectual game.

That is different. That means that people that is good at chess is not because they are smart but because they have knowledge and experience with study or many years of play. In that sense you are not going to expect a GM to be smarter than a Mathematucian, phycist, physician or a lawyer, they are only the best in their area and that is chess. Dont expect them to fix a math problem, or to me sucesfull in bussines, art or in daily life. Most of them in fact are really idiots with social interaction and not really sucesfull except chess.

If this game were about logic as example you would expect that a math related person area is gonna play better than you and that is false. They will lose every time no matter what area they belong to: that is because this game is intelectual , need practice and excercise.

The fact is that many people that is smart play chess but not chess player are smart. As example I study law and like a lot of math and I liked the logic and strategic sense of the game.

So if you feel bad because you lose and think you are not smart feel confidence that there are people like Kasparov that spend all his life just trying to ddominate a game and now machines and IA can kill him in matter of movements; It also feels good that at least you can fix the bathroom when it's clogged, and he surely needs his mom, because he doesn't know how to do anything but chess.

Math and chess are both intellectual. The reason why a chess player will outplay a mathematician while at the same time another brilliant chess player would be total garbage at math is because chess is chess and math is math. They are both learned activities (regardless of the fact that some people clearly have it easier: a high school "math wiz" is by no means a mathematician since at this age you simply won't have been exposed to more than 0.5% of all math that actually exists...), and rely on separate traits (for example there are widely renowned professional mathematicians which have been blind since childhood like Emmanuel Giroux; while you cannot find the same in chess because of the type and quantity of heavily visual information you must interiorize during your formative years).

Disagree but never mind.

I think everybody posting has a different understanding of what "intelligence" means, so while the discussion is interesting, I'm not sure that there is any ultimate correct answer to it.

Ability to understand, interpret and use one's environment.

My definition but I doubt I've seen a better one.

<<DictionaryDefinitions from Oxford Languages· Learn more

intelligence noun 1.the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.>>

That does come quite close.

A prove of intelligence and ancient one was when our ancestors discovered fire and from there they understood that fire provided heat and they began to use it If you see there was no previous learning.

Chess is not an intelligence game because you are given the rules, you can learn a lot of theory, if you play a lot you get experience and if you put somebody brilliant or smart with not experience of chess he will lose with a dumb that simple plays it.

A lot of chess players like to think that chess proficiency is a sign of superior intelligence, so doing even moderately well gives us the feeling that we've proved how smart we are. There are other talents (visualization, visual memory) that are at least as valuable to potential chess players as intelligence. I've seen enough brilliant people play chess for years and remain average strength, and enough average-range IQ players become strong players to doubt that there is a strict correlation between intelligence and chess potential.

We can regard chess as an environment similar to the one that provided the discovery of fire, but simpler. Equally, we can discover things in chess.

I hope you realise I just won the argument!

Yeah I kind of like that one.

thanks