im gettin like a 3.5 and im like a... 1372.
i did alot better on my standardized tests though, like a 32 on my act.
GPA doesnt mean shit
Chess Rating vs. G.P.A.
Sort:
grensley wrote: mburch1974 wrote: Ok, just for my understanding... Kingfisher, you got 4.4s and 4.3's in HS because of the necessity to get into a good school yet, you reference a GPA from a community college; excuse me for prying, but if you got those kinds of super grades in HS 4.4?! Shouldn't you be going to some ivy-league school like Harvard, Dartmouth or Stanford and not some community college? Of course in reply, doing your first 2 years at a community college is cheaper if you have to pay for it, but I just figured with THOSE GRADES you would be given scholarships galore by those aforementioned great institutions with the left over stipend being wisely spent on beer and faternity women! j/k...LOL
croatia.
Exactly. Did you not read what I wrote on different educational systems?
i get straight A's and i'm about 1475
My rating is >1800 but my grades depend just on my level of lazyness... (although they are pretty good usually - we don't have GPA). And I'm really lazy, I came 1 h too late for the math graduate exam hihi.
3.88 gpa and 1860 rating
Time is finished for the collecting of data! I would like to thank all of you for aiding me with your information and your verbal support. Now I need to get to work on the remaining sections of my project, so I bid you farewell.
Kingstone1 wrote: Yes, well my study is going to see if that can be proven, on a small scale of course.
Hey, Kingstone1, I went to bat for you, now don't go using words like "proven." the word you're looking for, I think, is anecdotal. How's it going so far, by the way?
I am a graduate student, a teacher, a chess coach, and a parent. I would love to say that GPA and chess ratings have a connection. As with anything, it is all about the amount of time and focus one puts into an activity. my chess team has some of the brightest students-and some of the laziest: Genius by birth, slacker by choice is the mantra for some of them. And, while their ratings are respectable, the numbers mean nothing if they aren't willing to work. I learned how to play chess through the love and guidance of my uncle, a man who had little formal education. My game was fine tuned through intense play by ex cons and street hustlers. What I am saying is what I tell my students and my children: you are more than the numbers, i.e. gpa's and ratings. The will to win means nothing without the will to prepare.
I am a 4.0 student and a chess beginner. Many who I consider to not be quite as intelligent have kicked my behind plenty of times. I think it may have something more to do with experience. Think of it this way as well, a grand master or a person who is consumed with chess studies and technique may become too specialized, leaving other types of knowledge behind. Will they get "the same grades" as a person who focuses on classic academic pursuits? Probably not.
BUT, I have noticed that many of my chess acquaintances are rather intelligent people...let us know how your hypothesis results.