I know there is a difference between intellect, IQ and chess. It you can solve an IQ test question, you can solve a chess puzzle and be good at both.
chess and IQ
Sort:
Apr 7, 2020
0
#83
EQ - Emotional Quota
Think about all the greats, yes they have quirks but when it comes down to it they have very little emotion.
Watch Videos of Fischer he may smile for a moment but then he will revert back to a straight/stern face
And Carlson, does wet fish come to mind ...
Apr 7, 2020
0
#84
Apr 7, 2020
0
#85
Amitkathe25 wrote:
hi, I am struggling between 1450-1600 from last 3 years . no matter hard I try I unable to defeat any 1700+ player , this brings me a theory that it is possible that my IQ is capable only to achieve around 1600 and I can't defeat any 1700+ players since their IQ Must be better than me .. I see it's all LUCK..lucky those 1700+ players who naturally got bigger sharper brain ...it's not Talent but Luck ...thank you
After I had been playing chess for a few years, I became very motivated to improve. I read books and solved puzzles. I went to tournaments and analyzed my games, but I seemed to be stuck at 1500-1600. Sometimes online I saw people say how easy it was to get to 1700-1800 and that made me upset.
After working hard, I also got to 1700-1800. So I say it's not about IQ.
But of course every idiot on the planet says "you can get to my rating as long as you work hard" and they say it no matter if they're rated 1700 or 2700. So of course they are bias fools.
I suppose the moral of the story is, even if you stop improving for a long time, if you work hard, you can surprise yourself. You can go further than you thought was possible. That doesn't mean you can get to 2700 (or even 1700) as many fools suggest, but you should be able to surprise yourself, and break through to a new level.
Good luck!
Apr 7, 2020
0
#86
Wicked_Mickey wrote:
EQ - Emotional Quota
Think about all the greats, yes they have quirks but when it comes down to it they have very little emotion.
Kasparov was a ball of emotion.
Fischer was too.
It's dumb to fetishize a Vulcan-like approach.
In any case, here's a well known quote that I happen to believe is true:
Alexander Alekhine: “During a Chess competition a Chessmaster should be a combination of a beast of prey and a monk.”
Sometimes you should suppress your animalistic side, other times you have to use your instincts and be a savage.
Being good at chess means you are good at chess, and little else.