Do atheists/agnostics tend to be "better" at chess than theists?

I dont know if I am right in posing this question. Just had this thought at the top of mind.This is not intended to provoke any kind of outbursts or arguments between theists or atheists whatsoever.

My question is are atheists/agnostics, being more rational and logical (unproven yet widely accepted hypothesis) slightly "better" than theists at playing chess?

Wud like to get some views/comments/opinions and examples if any.

P.S. Correct me if I am wrong and apologies if this offends anyone.

Cheers and Thanks,

Arun

yes, i mean no.  wait...  yes! (or no)

"This is not intended to provoke any kind of outbursts or arguments between theists or atheists whatsoever."

Then what is the intent of such a spurious question?  Are you after data, statistics?  Do you actually think such data has been collected?

Let me start:  The heathen is vastly superior because their judgement is unclouded by faith.

You know who tended to "better" at chess?

Hitler.

No.

Being an atheist myself, I think not!

Altough, I find the question quite offending!

This is clearly in the realm of "religious" discussion, which is not allowed here. This is a question for the Open Discussion group on the site, not for the public forums, thanks.

Thiests make for terrible chess players: they put far to much faith in their Bishops

Seroiusally though: If you did find a statistically significant co-relation between chess and religious belief this could not -- in any way -- reliably prove that belief is a causal factor.

Moreover, you may also run into an sort of logical fallacy:

i.e;

1) The results of our survey suggested that athiests, on average, have higher ratings.

2) therefore, Athiests make for better chess players.

So far, there is nothing wrong with the argument, however If I were to add the following two premises...

3) The average IQ of Athiest chess players is 140.

4) The Average IQ of Theist Chess players is 102.

....We can no longer relaibly conclude that athiests make for better players, rather, what might make a difference in the ratings is the difference in IQ (IQ being an uncontrolled confounding varible in this hypothetical study)  

** In case you didn't get it: I'm trying to suggest that "athiests" might make for better chess players not in virtue of being athiests but because of some other confounding variable with seems to strongly corelate with athiestic chess players.