I think its clear that men are far more visual, and they can manipulate the pieces with less effort than female... its just like arm strength.
?
It's well established that men are better than women at spatial visualization.
That ability probably has very little, if any, chess value.
It's well established that men are better than women at spatial visualization.
That ability probably has very little, if any, chess value.
I completely disagree. Visual-Spacial intelligence is incredibly important for chess. Visualization/Spacial Memory is a critical component of chess "calculation."
Sure, women and men are different. Each individual is different from one another also I think reasonable people don't look at the statistics and assume that males have a special gift for playing chess or driving or logic, etc., over women. Women can excel beyond any man with our minds. It comes down to the individual, not the sex, in my view:)
Yeah, a woman could be the best chess player in the world. But if it were true that men are more inclined to the skills required by chess, this would translate to the group (the sex of men in this case) being overall more dominant in chess, even if a proportionate amount of women are trained the same way from birth.
Oh! Visual-spacial! I had no idea what that quoted part meant! I was like, "manipulate the pieces"? "arm strength"? 'What the heck?'
Sure, women and men are different. Each individual is different from one another also I think reasonable people don't look at the statistics and assume that males have a special gift for playing chess or driving or logic, etc., over women. Women can excel beyond any man with our minds. It comes down to the individual, not the sex, in my view:)
Yeah, a woman could be the best chess player in the world. But if it were true that men are more inclined to the skills required by chess, this would translate to the group (the sex of men in this case) being overall more dominant in chess, even if a proportionate amount of women are trained the same way from birth.
Sure, but that's not true. You know how easy it is for me to figure out that males have nothing special about them to make them better than females at this game? I win them. So it must come down to the individual. Experience is the best teacher:)
Our present males evolved from hunters. Our present females evolved from women who stayed at home and took care of the children and took care of the home area.
The hunters were strong and had to solve problems of hunting.
Problem solving helps in chess.
Thus a slight tendency for males to be better than women in chess????
Our present males evolved from hunters. Our present females evolved from women who stayed at home and took care of the children and took care of the home area.
The hunters were strong and had to solve problems of hunting.
Problem solving helps in chess.
Thus a slight tendency for males to be better than women in chess????
Are you being sarcastic?
The fact that there are more does not mean the rating system is inflated. It could easily mean that the number of top players has increased.
Two simple questions: what is the rate of inflation, and what is causing it?
http://en.chessbase.com/post/rating-inflation-its-causes-and-poible-cures
The last graph, which is the most important one, is unfortunately not very nicely done.
I'm not planning to explain it myself, It doesn't have a direct link to actual issue that is being discussed.
Yes. I followed the discussion very closely in 2009. Statisticians later showed that playing strength had not changed and there was no rating inflation due to problems with the system. In fact, there was actually evidence that ratings had deflated slightly over the previous 30 years.
And here, you seem to be claiming that there has been rating inflation of 50 points in the last ten years!
Our present males evolved from hunters. Our present females evolved from women who stayed at home and took care of the children and took care of the home area.
The hunters were strong and had to solve problems of hunting.
Problem solving helps in chess.
Thus a slight tendency for males to be better than women in chess????
Yes, and our ancestors hunted dinosaurs too, eh?
Are there any studies on trans-gender chess players..?
Our present males evolved from hunters. Our present females evolved from women who stayed at home and took care of the children and took care of the home area.
The hunters were strong and had to solve problems of hunting.
Problem solving helps in chess.
Thus a slight tendency for males to be better than women in chess????
Yes, and our ancestors hunted dinosaurs too, eh?
The first chess pieces ever discovered makes me wonder...
Brontosaurus e4
...your move
I don't think the Brontosuarus existed? You may have to open with a pteradactyl.
Are there any studies on trans-gender chess players..?
Isn't this an interesting topic? Perhaps i should make a new thread about it... :D hmmm...
This is way old news. Read what Nigel Short writes about women brain and chess.
I think it is quite obvious women are NOT better at chess.
1. Women's wiring are different as to how they utilize pieces to achieve an objective.
Think about it, when women are in the kitchen cooking they put the salt and pepper shakers back to their original spots in the kitchen. This goes against the chess principle to only move a piece once. Men would never do this. Therefore, they have a better sense for development in chess.
2. Women's wiring make them good at reading, as Short stated, so they follow recipes precisely.
Men change the move order and introduce novelties when playing and therefore are not as predictable.
3. Women's wiring allows them to ask for directions when driving.
Men refuse to ask for directions and therefore have to find a way to a destination on their own. Women might make a sequence of better moves until they get lost.
4. Women's wiring prevents them from taking advantage of a position for sake of "shopping".
Once a woman starts playing a game of chess, it is like they are at a shopping mall. They just buy buy buy all the pieces and become too materialistic. Men keep the pieces on the board longer, and they can then win more often.
5. Women's wiring keep them gossiping and sharing secrets.
If you see women talk in press conferences after a game they share ideas more and talk about possible moves. With men, it's only 1 or 2 moves discussed and the loser will simply say they played badly.
Sure, but that's not true. You know how easy it is for me to figure out that males have nothing special about them to make them better than females at this game? I win them. So it must come down to the individual. Experience is the best teacher:)
I think you missed my point.
I'm sure there is a female out there who is a better soccer player than me. Does that mean males have no natural advantage over females as soccer players? This is basically the argument you're making.
Yes. I followed the discussion very closely in 2009. Statisticians later showed that playing strength had not changed and there was no rating inflation due to problems with the system. In fact, there was actually evidence that ratings had deflated slightly over the previous 30 years.
And here, you seem to be claiming that there has been rating inflation of 50 points in the last ten years!
As far as the analysis in this thread is concerned, the question of ratings inflation doesn't change much. It only brings to question whether Wei Yi is actually better than Magnus Carlsen, and whether Hou Yifan is actually better than Humpy Koneru. If there is ongoing ratings inflation, the pairs are evenly matched; if not, then Yi and Yifan are the superior players.
All the other conclusions still apply, inasmuch as they are not otherwise refuted. The most interesting of which, in my opinion, is the asymptotic nature of the male curves vs. the fluctuating nature of the female curves, which could imply that top male ratings are limited by a lack of higher-rated opposition and top female ratings by a comparative lack of skill.
What I see in the graphs is that almost everybody (not Nakamura or Yi) shows a bit of levelling off starting around age 13 or 14, but this diminished rate of improvement is not as dramatic in the boys.
My guess is that the leveling off has more to do with hitting 2500+ than hitting 14.