Accountants are very bad at chess. You need deductive logical abilities to play chess. There is nothing logical in accounting.
Chess Ability Influenced by Profession?
Sort:
People characteristics affect the professions they choose and also if ( and how) they play chess. It's not like the profession is influencing the chess.
I'd guess that in professions where mathematical ability/ analytical thinking is more valued you're gonna find the best chess players.
Gilgamesh wrote:
Since assembly-line workers have so little room for promotion in real life, they tend to be obsessed with pawn promotion in chess. Pit two of them against each other and you'll soon have four or five queens on the board. Though sometimes they promote to a bishop because of their poor self-esteem. The worst cases promote to another pawn.
Managers are pretty much bad at everything. Except my boss, Matthew, who's a swell guy and I'm sure would be great at chess. Hi Matthew!
Heh, entertaining take on the topic.
gomaster wrote:
Accountants are very bad at chess. You need deductive logical abilities to play chess. There is nothing logical in accounting.
No, accounting isn't really math, but I certainly think they can be good at chess 
Though I am an accountant, so I would obviously say that.
Professional chess players...
As a technical writer, I think my approach to chess is mostly an academic one.
One of the toughest tournaments I ever played in was a blitz memorial tournament where taxi cab drivers got free entry. If anybody knows how to play fearless blitz chess, its Russian taxi cab drivers.
While an assembly worker does not need to think out of the box...they must be able to focus and concentrate for long periods of time while doing the same old thing. What are some of the best qualities in a chess player, Focus and Concentration. mix that with Intelligence and you have an awesome chess player. I would pit the average blue collar worker against the average white collar worker IQ for IQ. The white collar worker may have more knowledge due to more education, but does that translate to being smarter? Hmmmm....
I have been on both sides of the bubble and dont believe there is any correlation between occupation and chess ability. It boils down to interest, capability and desire to learn. I have the interest and I believe the capability but have not taken the time to educate myself on the game beyond learning as I play. Thats probably why I am a middle of the road player. But I manage a 20 million dollar a month portion of a billion dollar company. And my wife has beaten me 4 out of the last 5 games we have played and I taught her to play. she has no job but stay at home home mom. Which is the hardest of all occupations. :-) can I get a back rub tonight?
No i dont think it makes any serious difference what u do for a living its more your aproach to chess that makes the difference i feel......
Dec 11, 2007
0
#10
Unfortunately, I was better at chess when I was unemployed. Now that I have a profession that requires analytical skill and thorough thought processes, my chess ability seems to be lacking, slacking or something. I believe chess has the opposite affect on job selection. Chess isn't driven by the profession of the players. I believe chess is a great springboard for teaching players of any age to plan strategic steps in order to accomplish a goal. The earlier this ability is acquired, the easier it would be to attain and prepare for long-term goals. These long term goals are not subject to but do include things like college planning, career goals, and job choice. The inherent ability to strategize lies within each and every chess player; however, the choice to use these abilities is what defines how we have become whom we have become.
Ok lets see.
Lawyers - aren't good chess players because they are always trying to cheat (win) the system... Move knights in funny (borderline legal) ways etc...
Doctors or rather gyneas only have interest in the queens....
Construction people over value the rooks (castles)
Accountants can't stop counting the pieces and "balancing" the board thus losing the plot and loose most of the times
Priest obviously aren't (or rather shouldn't be) good chess players due to the violence thing (thou shall not kill)....
Canadian mounties over value knights (horses) but certainly know how to handle them....
Dentists should be good players because they know how to spring a nasty surprise...
Kindergarden teachers can launch a vicious attack when they get the pawns to work together....
Engineers, especially mechanical engineers always draw games because Newtons (third, I think) rule of, for every action there is a equal and opposite reaction....
Goods business people are consistently better players because they compensate for inflation (queening) and know when a good deal presents itself.
How well you play chess is mostly about how you were trained very early in life. By the time you are old enough to have a career, it's too late.
Susan Polgar's chess education started when she was 4 years old. She never went to school, because that would have taken too much time from chess education.
Xerg wrote: gomaster wrote:
Accountants are very bad at chess. You need deductive logical abilities to play chess. There is nothing logical in accounting.
No, accounting isn't really math, but I certainly think they can be good at chess Though I am an accountant, so I would obviously say that.
mmmh I am an accountant too, was commenting with my tongue in the cheek.
Obviously you can get better at the game, but at 33, I bet it's too late to even become a "Master." (Anyone have any other thoughts on this?)
All the current top players received extensive training when they were children, although none so much as the Polgar sisters and Gata Kamsky (whose father made him play chess 14 hours a day).
It may be like learning a foreign language. Once you are past a certain age, you can never do it well. Take Henry Kissinger for example. Brilliant guy, but could never learn to speak English without that funny accent.
HalfSigma wrote:
Obviously you can get better at the game, but at 33, I bet it's too late to even become a "Master." (Anyone have any other thoughts on this?)
I think I've got to disagree with this. Even though I don't know if anyone has made the master title in thier 30's I'm sure someone would have. Is anyone up for some research on this topic. Does the USCF or FIDE keep records of when people are awarded master titles?
As for profession affecting a persons ability to play chess, I think it would be impossible to prove one way or the other. How would you differentiate between innate chess ability and professional influence?
Red
billwall wrote: Oscar Shapiro became a master for the first time at age 74.
According to his bio on this site:
http://www.chess.com/chessopedia/view/shapiro-oscar
he won a chess championship when he was 30, so it's not like he took up the game at 70. But if he played better at age 74 than he did at age 30, that's still pretty interesting.
Nice one Bill, kinda proves my point
Red
Dec 11, 2007
0
#19
I work on a production line and find chess helps me to think ahead on components i have to make, regarding what tooling i have to do the jobs that i have planned, whether i have enough or the right materials to do the job and whether i have the logistics in place to move the job and store the job before it's moved on to be assembled. I make safes by the way. I won't speak for all bosses, but i personally find that they don't have a clue about the product that they sell. I think there better off in their offices out of the way. What their chess abilities like i wouldn't know, not very good i would imagine.
Do you think certain professions can influence chess performance?
Different jobs require different mind sets and ways of thinking about things. For example, a manager of a for profit business must be able to manage time, people, money, etc. and be able to foresee the result of certain actions. Additionally, they're thoughts and decisions effect their chances for promotion. These mental activities and realities of his/her job could help a manager/chess player develop the part of his brain that helps predict opponents and long term results of certain moves. There would also be a built in motivation for achievment if he was used to a competitive environment. An assembly line worker requires minimal amounts of 'outside-the-box' thinking to perform his/her duties and there is little room for promotion. This could result in an overrall lack of great chess ability or at least lack of the desire to improve as they are not exercising appropriate mental skills nor are they exposed to a competitive environment at their work.
Basically, is a manager better at chess than an assembly line worker, or are these facts mutually exclusive?
Which profession is best at chess?