Chess vs IQ

Which words are you specifically referring to?

Thanks for your input on the matter. It's interesting to see a psychologist's take on it.

I have a tested IQ of 54. It was very disappointing to hear, as my parents had great expectations for me, and those all went down the drain. But I am happy with my day job as a janitor now, and that I can pretend that I am good at chess on the way there.

     Few of us  realize that the common conception of intelligence differs from the meaning of the "I" in IQ. Most think the word "intelligence" means all-around mental capability, but cognitive scientists have a more rigorous and limited definition of the word. They will joke that "Intelligence is what IQ tests measure", meaning that SOME mental abilities can be quantified and tested. No reputable psychologist or cognition researcher will tell you that an IQ test reveals the subject's total intellectual ability. Most quotidian activities require a wider range of mental activity than just that quality that IQ tests reveal, and many times that specific mental quality will be of little help in deciding what to do in any particular situation.

     The other fallacy many of us fall into is thinking that chess is a purely intellectual exercise. Brilliant minds may often be diverted by other ideas that the task at hand suggest to them, leaving the original problem unsolved. Some people can focus narrowly (and too often obsessively) on one specific idea. Some people "fold under pressure". Many factors go into a chess player's make up, and so thinking that IQ is the only, or even

the most important factor in chess-playing potential is mistaken.

     Finally, a wealth of real-world evidence shows that some high-IQ people make mediocre chess players, and some with below-average IQs can become strong players.

    

you're late bro, people amongst the first developpers of IQ test thought about that...

The corralation is that there is no corralation

138 IQ, still bad at chess with daily practice

no way, my elo is 1930

According to that formula, my IQ must be 275. Sounds pretty clever.

Is it fair to say you can’t have a good ELO without a high IQ, but you can have a high IQ without a good ELO?

Point is, chess isn’t solely IQ, IQ would simply represent the ceiling of your chess ability, given that you practice as much as possible. Thank you.

ELO=IQ x 10 I would have an IQ of 90. My IQ is 138.

Even though it's not necessarily true, I think that it is a fair to say you can't have good elo with a low iq but not vice versa. 

Anyone else?

 

114 was my tested IQ.  This was with an actual standardized iq test.  Was told the average is 100.  I'm happy with that.  I have fun with chess.  I feel sorry for geniuses, because they have to put up with such ignorance.   btw my rating is 780 Rapid.  

humm

Thank you!

Chess needs a good memory and good pattern recognition. It doesn’t need much of creativity or other factors involved in calculating IQ. Even for memory, it doesn’t need a memory to store high dimensional complex objects, but very simple fixed symbols. Kasparov for instance had IQ of 135 when he won the world title. It is pretty good, but no way close to a genius. On that test he was genius in memorizing texts or playing with numbers and solving logical puzzles, on the other hand he was below average on many other aspects. I expect a similar outcome from most of top players.

If you have a high IQ, you should have a good chance of becoming a good chess player (not a top player, there you need special skills), but if you are a good chess player, it doesn’t say anything about your IQ.

Wait, Garry Kasparov has an IQ of 190, and was ranked as one of the top ten highest IQers in the world at one point. He never had an IQ of 135.

scoopwhoop.com/inothernews/smart-people-wow/#:~:text=Garry%20Kasparov%20(IQ%3A%20190)

Check this article out.