this forum is a lie, 110 iq is already pretty genious, imagine random people going like oh i have 150 iq or even 130 iq is pretty much a lie, a few could be but bruh
Actually, a 140 IQ is considered genius amongst most psychologists because of the fact that it is in the top 99th% percentile. Also, you half to take into account that people with higher IQs are going to be the ones posting their IQs because they probably have some pride in their IQs.
ELO=IQ x 10, still nothing much with an IQ of 135+
that would mean magnus has an IQ of nearly 300, which is literally impossible.
You're using the word literally incorrectly.
I don't think you can correlate the two, but if you want some data...
My son's IQ is 137 measured and his rating is 167.
I have no doubt he is a genius and the things he puts together are insane, but if the computer wasn't correcting his illegal moves, he probably wouldn't be able to play at all.
Hello everyone,
I was curious about what the correlation between Chess and IQ was, so I decided to make this thread. If you are willing to, it would be helpful if you could post your IQ ONLY if tested by a psychologist, (No results from online tests, etc.), your rating for the time control which you play play most, (No variants), and how long you have been playing, (Amount of years + Left-over amount of months. If you are comfortable, age would be helpful, but not required.
If I get enough requests, I will post another thread sharing the data.
Thankyou!
The existence of correlation between intelligence and chess has been proven already
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/09/160913124722.htm#:~:text=The%20study%20found%20that%20intelligence,at%20lower%20levels%20of%20skill
You're using the word proven incorrectly.
this forum is a lie, 110 iq is already pretty genious, imagine random people going like oh i have 150 iq or even 130 iq is pretty much a lie, a few could be but bruh
Actually, a 140 IQ is considered genius amongst most psychologists because of the fact that it is in the top 99th% percentile. Also, you half to take into account that people with higher IQs are going to be the ones posting their IQs because they probably have some pride in their IQs.
You're using the word half incorrectly.
I don't think you can correlate the two, but if you want some data...
My son's IQ is 137 measured and his rating is 167.
I have no doubt he is a genius and the things he puts together are insane, but if the computer wasn't correcting his illegal moves, he probably wouldn't be able to play at all.
Interesting. If you don't mind me asking, what's your son's age and how long has he been playing for?
I don't think you can correlate the two, but if you want some data...
My son's IQ is 137 measured and his rating is 167.
I have no doubt he is a genius and the things he puts together are insane, but if the computer wasn't correcting his illegal moves, he probably wouldn't be able to play at all.
Interesting. If you don't mind me asking, what's your son's age and how long has he been playing for?
Not a problem, he's 7 now, but I tried for about 3 months when he was six, absolutely no interest. I figured if I forced him to play a bit, it would pique his interest, but nah. No drive to problem solve and win nor does he care if someone checkmates him.
His schoolwork is phenomenal, so I believe his IQ test as accurate. Heck, we don't even know his current reading level, because the teacher had to stop testing.
To him, roblox is better than chess.
I don't think you can correlate the two, but if you want some data...
My son's IQ is 137 measured and his rating is 167.
I have no doubt he is a genius and the things he puts together are insane, but if the computer wasn't correcting his illegal moves, he probably wouldn't be able to play at all.
Interesting. If you don't mind me asking, what's your son's age and how long has he been playing for?
Not a problem, he's 7 now, but I tried for about 3 months when he was six, absolutely no interest. I figured if I forced him to play a bit, it would pique his interest, but nah. No drive to problem solve and win nor does he care if someone checkmates him.
His schoolwork is phenomenal, so I believe his IQ test as accurate. Heck, we don't even know his current reading level, because the teacher had to stop testing.
To him, roblox is better than chess.
I see. I feel like at his young especially if he doesn't want to play chess, even with a high IQ, he wouldn't be very good or improve much.
I still don't know how the Kasparov 190 IQ was measured. Was that on Stanford-Benet? I've also seen an internet site claiming Magnus Carlsen has the identical 190 IQ. (This site also offers a 24-minute online IQ test.) Nowhere is it recorded what kind of test either took. It might be wise to mistrust some unsubstantiated "fact" seen on perhaps-untrustworthy internet pages.
Those estimates of 180-190 for Kasparov and Carlsen shouldn't be believed as there is no evidence.
A word of caution: no need to have emotional attachments to numbers like IQ or Elo rating, as such an obsession may actually hinder your intellectual development. You're plenty smart enough to learn whatever it is you want to learn, even if that thing is Chess. Please also bear in mind, both numbers can always be improved. Always. 
Have a great day everyone.
I see. I feel like at his young especially if he doesn't want to play chess, even with a high IQ, he wouldn't be very good or improve much.
Yeah,I mostly agree, but I wanted to share because many chess players claim that there is a correlation between chess and intelligence. That intellectuals are drawn to chess, because of its unique problem solving. I have one high IQ at home that isn't and I am unsure if he ever will be.
You just side-stepped everything I said. I didn't say the test was unreliable. I said it used a different IQ scale and didn't actually use questions on the traditional IQ test. Also many websites say his IQ was around 190. Did you even take the time to look into my argument, or did you immediately start typing about how my claims had no evidence to back them up?
190 is certainly not accurate, though, and those websites are in the business of "pop science" as opposed to hard, evidenciary journalism and analysis. The reality is that chess relies on working memory and pattern recognition but also on visualization, processing speed, attention to detail, general attention span, and a plethora of other factors. Assuming that the figure of 190 is accurate, Kasparov is theoretically at a level only matched by roughly 7 people on the planet. Do you honestly believe that? If you do, then there's not even a real point in trying to argue with "everything [you] just said."
First of all, you do realize that IQ tests are mainly about the attributes you said chess skills rely on. Have you ever taken an IQ test?
Second of all, why is it so far-fetched to you that Kasparov is one of the smartest people on the planet? Is that really so hard to believe?
First, I have, and I have a decent working understanding of how they work. At the same time, while you do claim that many of those elements are measured by those tests, your FSIQ is still a holistic measure and therefore may not be weighted to properly reflect the elements which are dominant in chess.
Second, it's nearly impossible to believe that Kasparov is one of the smartest people on earth, and you're truly insular if you can't see why that isn't logical. While he may be intelligent, it seems highly unlikely that one can make the claim that based on solely chess ability when chess is quite obviously not a good measure of fluid reasoning. Realistically, you could even go so far as to say that it's mostly a test of working memory, pattern recognition, and recall of memorized positions.
For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/f2q8ll/garry_kasparov_takes_a_real_iq_test_der_spiegel/
Again, I'd stray from taken anything relatively unsubstantiated; however, you can see that the OP on this thread links to a pastebin supposedly from an article in Der Spiegel which cites his iq as being 135 after a battery of real scientifically rigorous tests. Would you argue that iq, the subject of this conversation, is now not a good indicator? If you'd hold to the original constraints, I can hardly see how this is at all indicative of the caliber of intelligence asserted.
I'm completely confident I could have scored 190 in an IQ test when I was younger. As BlueEmu will testify, that is not a measure of intelligence. It's a measure of the ability to solve puzzles which are thought to have some correlation with intellectual ability. 190 just means that you're thinking clearly and well on the day. On other days, it may not be so and you score 135.
IQ = Internal Quotient
That essentially means how much information your brain takes and "holds onto" ... last time I checked it has nothing to do with one's intelligence.
Dedication and Ambition are much more important. I am a mensa member. Thats all I have to say.
-GC
You just side-stepped everything I said. I didn't say the test was unreliable. I said it used a different IQ scale and didn't actually use questions on the traditional IQ test. Also many websites say his IQ was around 190. Did you even take the time to look into my argument, or did you immediately start typing about how my claims had no evidence to back them up?
190 is certainly not accurate, though, and those websites are in the business of "pop science" as opposed to hard, evidenciary journalism and analysis. The reality is that chess relies on working memory and pattern recognition but also on visualization, processing speed, attention to detail, general attention span, and a plethora of other factors. Assuming that the figure of 190 is accurate, Kasparov is theoretically at a level only matched by roughly 7 people on the planet. Do you honestly believe that? If you do, then there's not even a real point in trying to argue with "everything [you] just said."
First of all, you do realize that IQ tests are mainly about the attributes you said chess skills rely on. Have you ever taken an IQ test?
Second of all, why is it so far-fetched to you that Kasparov is one of the smartest people on the planet? Is that really so hard to believe?
First, I have, and I have a decent working understanding of how they work. At the same time, while you do claim that many of those elements are measured by those tests, your FSIQ is still a holistic measure and therefore may not be weighted to properly reflect the elements which are dominant in chess.
Second, it's nearly impossible to believe that Kasparov is one of the smartest people on earth, and you're truly insular if you can't see why that isn't logical. While he may be intelligent, it seems highly unlikely that one can make the claim that based on solely chess ability when chess is quite obviously not a good measure of fluid reasoning. Realistically, you could even go so far as to say that it's mostly a test of working memory, pattern recognition, and recall of memorized positions.
For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/f2q8ll/garry_kasparov_takes_a_real_iq_test_der_spiegel/
Again, I'd stray from taken anything relatively unsubstantiated; however, you can see that the OP on this thread links to a pastebin supposedly from an article in Der Spiegel which cites his iq as being 135 after a battery of real scientifically rigorous tests. Would you argue that iq, the subject of this conversation, is now not a good indicator? If you'd hold to the original constraints, I can hardly see how this is at all indicative of the caliber of intelligence asserted.
You stated that the comparison between chess and IQ is a faulty one with the reasoning that chess was about memory and pattern recognition, but this makes it clear to me that you have never taken an IQ test. The vast majority of questions on IQ tests are based around pattern recognition. Also many of the questions are also based around memory. (On online IQ tests less questions are about memory, but if you are actually tested by a psychiatrist, there are many question testing memory). So really you are arguing my point when you say those things.
Where and when did Kasparov take this IQ test that revealed his 190 IQ? What test was used? On which scale is that 190 measured? How can someone with no evidence to cite other than "I saw it on some websites" claim their figure is more valid than any other?
That's fair, but the standard IQ scale is the Stanford-Benet scale, not the spiegel.