Einstein was only rated 1426 making him a patzer but he was pretty smart in real life.
Then you have Carlsen who is rated 2845 but can’t string a sentence together.
Because he’s literally Norwegian!!!! English is his second or third language
It's not hard to learn English. Even babies can do it!
Einstein was only rated 1426 making him a patzer but he was pretty smart in real life.
Then you have Carlsen who is rated 2845 but can’t string a sentence together.
Because he’s literally Norwegian!!!! English is his second or third language
It's not hard to learn English. Even babies can do it!
True enough @blueemu. Sadly, some babies never learn English, even with 13 years of USA public education. Some districts don’t require even a basic level of understanding of English to “graduate” from high school. I suppose that’s part of the reason we now have LMAO, ROTFL, IRL, BTW, WTF (where’s the food?), and BTW. IMHO. 
What just happened to this thread
Or good taste in clothing attire, in most cases, at most tournaments.
But who's counting? Ha!
Studying chess religiously is a waste of time if you think it makes you "smart". If you wanna be smart, go to school for a job.
...that being said, what if it's just your main hobby?
Let me ask you something. Let's say your current favorite hobby is playing Minecraft. Let's say you have 5 hours of free time a day, and every day you spend those 5 hours studying and playing Minecraft. Keep in mind this isn't your life, just your favorite way to spend your free time. Now, this might make you a better reader when reading guides and challenges online, but other than that... not much. Maybe you can say it's good for creativity, but after you've been building for about 3 years, you begin to run out of ideas of what you want to do.
Now, let's say you instead spent those 5 hours studying and playing chess. Right off the bat we have the advantage that every time you play chess it forces you to think a lot harder than most games, not to mention the patience. Good chess players will also likely spend a good 2 of those 5 hours studying strategies and moves, along with patterns to look out for. Again, this isn't your entire life, but it's your favorite hobby. And the main advantage of this hobby, is how it works your brain. It really forces you to think, training your brain.
Basically, no, chess does not make you any smarter. And playing it every day of your life AS your life... is kinda dumb. However, should it instead be your favorite hobby, or a pastime you enjoy, then you now have a hobby that trains your brain while you play it, making strategizing and planning an easier concept for you (note: this does not mean you will be some general when it comes to planning. All it means is you will likely have an easier time with thinking harder than if you spent all your free time playing Apex or something).
Depends on definitions to an extent. Is it relatable to IQ? Sure, in certain ways. The real measure of the relationship between IQ and chess skill would be how fast/well you learned to play reasonably without making any effort. Chess is largely pattern recognition and projected calculation based off that. IQ tests at the higher range are 99% pattern recognition. Einstein was quite good at chess without trying at all. He thought it a waste of time. Magnus has the IQ to be a rocket scientist, but plays chess... Same with Fischer. There are aspects of this question that go beyond rote abilities and capacity. Sharon Stone is a Mensa member, and fortunately for her, was very good looking. She became a millionaire just flashing her formidable bits on screen. That's smart! Apparently she enjoys the occasional game of chess, but I doubt she'd be short of things to do as a pass-time. So, aptitude in inverse relationship to time spent is the true rubric.
Chess develops attention, memory, multiple simultaneous analysis, imagination, simulation capacity. It is a good mental exercise and can help people in other activities that demand these capacities. Like other games, chess can become an addiction.
No & yes.
Yes to both.
There are nine different types of intelligence:
Naturalistic, Musical, Logical–mathematical, Existential, Interpersonal, Linguistic, Bodily–kinaesthetic, Intra–personal, Spatial intelligence
I read a scientific article a few years ago that studies found that the game 'Tetris' is the one that benefits one's intelligence.
That means there must be ten and one consists of knowing how many different types of intelligence there are. No wait, that's another one so there are eleven ..... 
Personally I would never believe someone's idea of "how many different types".
That means there must be ten and one consists of knowing how many different types of intelligence there are. No wait, that's another one so there are eleven .....
Personally I would never believe someone's idea of "how many different types".
Optimissed: THIS IS NOT "SOMEONE'S IDEA" THAT THERE ARE NINE DIFFERENT TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE. THIS COMES FROM ALL SCIENTIFIC SOURCES AND ALL ENCYCLOPEDIAS AND ALL EDUCATIONAL SOURCES!!! I DID NOT MAKE IT UP! I JUST COPIED IT AND PASTED IT HERE FROM A SCIENTIFIC SITE! LOOK IT UP YOURSELF! TYPE "HOW MANY TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE ARE THERE" IN YOUR BROWSER SEARCH AND CHECK OUT ALL THAT COME UP! TELL THAT TO ALL THE EDUCATIONAL PROFESSORS IN THE WORLD! WOW!!!
Chess can perhaps enhance one's intelligence, but I doubt chess can make one smart in and of itself...
There are dumb people good at chess and smart people who suck at it. It's all about practice in this game, which is what makes it so fun
Well said, Nino!
Theres certainly correlation between chess ability and intelligence. The better you understand complex concepts the better you can learn chess.
That means there must be ten and one consists of knowing how many different types of intelligence there are. No wait, that's another one so there are eleven .....
Personally I would never believe someone's idea of "how many different types".
Optimissed: THIS IS NOT "SOMEONE'S IDEA" THAT THERE ARE NINE DIFFERENT TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE. THIS COMES FROM ALL SCIENTIFIC SOURCES AND ALL ENCYCLOPEDIAS AND ALL EDUCATIONAL SOURCES!!! I DID NOT MAKE IT UP! I JUST COPIED IT AND PASTED IT HERE FROM A SCIENTIFIC SITE! LOOK IT UP YOURSELF! TYPE "HOW MANY TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE ARE THERE" IN YOUR BROWSER SEARCH AND CHECK OUT ALL THAT COME UP! TELL THAT TO ALL THE EDUCATIONAL PROFESSORS IN THE WORLD! WOW!!!
Rubbish.
Gardner initially (in 1983) insisted that there are SEVEN types of Intelligence. In 1999, he added an eighth type to the list. Later, he added a ninth type, and it was in this form that his "Theory of Multiple Intelligences" became a pop-science phenomenon.
But pop-science isn't science. It is popularization, always oversimplified into pap so that it can be easily digested by people with no scientific background in that specific field.
You omit the small detail that Gardner later added two more types (for a total of eleven) and still later, a twelfth. If his theory has changed four times already (from 7 => 8, from 8 => 9, from 9 => 11, from 11 => 12), then what exactly is your reasoning in pointing to a popular simplification that is already 20 years out-of-date and insisting that it represents absolute truth?
Optimissed: THIS IS NOT "SOMEONE'S IDEA" THAT THERE ARE NINE DIFFERENT TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE. THIS COMES FROM ALL SCIENTIFIC SOURCES AND ALL ENCYCLOPEDIAS AND ALL EDUCATIONAL SOURCES!!! I DID NOT MAKE IT UP! I JUST COPIED IT AND PASTED IT HERE FROM A SCIENTIFIC SITE! LOOK IT UP YOURSELF! TYPE "HOW MANY TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE ARE THERE" IN YOUR BROWSER SEARCH AND CHECK OUT ALL THAT COME UP! TELL THAT TO ALL THE EDUCATIONAL PROFESSORS IN THE WORLD! WOW!!!
Rubbish.
Gardner initially (in 1983) insisted that there are SEVEN types of Intelligence. In 1999, he added an eighth type to the list. Later, he added a ninth type, and it was in this form that his "Theory of Multiple Intelligences" became a pop-science phenomenon.
But pop-science isn't science. It is popularization, always oversimplified into pap so that it can be easily digested by people with no scientific background in that specific field.
You omit the small detail that Gardner later added two more types (for a total of eleven) and still later, a twelfth. If his theory has changed four times already (from 7 => 8, from 8 => 9, from 9 => 11, from 11 => 12), then what exactly is your reasoning in pointing to a popular simplification that is already 20 years out-of-date and insisting that it represents absolute truth?
blueemu: DID YOU NOT READ WHAT I TYPED? "I SAID THAT I JUST COPIED IT AND PASTED IT HERE FROM A SCIENTIFIC SITE!" MEANING, I DID NOT "OMIT" ANYTHING! I ALSO LOOKED IT UP ON TWO DIFFERENT ENCYCLOPEDIAS THAT SAID THE SAME THING! SO THEN, EDUCATIONAL AND SCIENTIFIC SOURCES ARE ALL "RUBBISH"! YOU WOULD KNOW BETTER THAN ALL THESE SCIENTIFIC STUDIES BY PEOPLE EDUCATED ON THE SUBJECT!
I think Chess can make you a more patient person. With patience comes wisdom. This on one side of the sword. The other side where you lose against a lesser opponent while up 6pts can make you a mad man. Its not all positive. Lol.