So this exact formula works for a 90 year old guy in China and a 20 years old Eskimo in Greenland? Somehow this is hard to believe.
Given your IQ, what's the highest Chess rating you can realistically attain?
Sort:
Apr 9, 2010
0
#103
Depressnyak wrote:
3600 FIDE ... tops :)
A fan of Grischuk?! 
Murrrrr wrote:
So this exact formula works for a 90 year old guy in China and a 20 years old Eskimo in Greenland? Somehow this is hard to believe.
Yes! Now you see why it's so great. Not only 90 year old Chinese and 20 year old Eskimos, but also new born babies, patients in a burn ward, and voodoo witchdoctors. The illiterate, the obese, the criminally insane, you name it and the formula will work.
Amazing stuff.
orangehonda wrote:
Murrrrr wrote:
So this exact formula works for a 90 year old guy in China and a 20 years old Eskimo in Greenland? Somehow this is hard to believe.
Yes! Now you see why it's so great. Not only 90 year old Chinese and 20 year old Eskimos, but also new born babies, patients in a burn ward, and voodoo witchdoctors. The illiterate, the obese, the criminally insane, you name it and the formula will work.
Amazing stuff.
One could accuse you of witchcraft when you say that 
Well you make it sound like amazing but I just can't agree with you. Without any proper proof, I only have your word. Because I don't know you, I can't trust your word only. So I still say the formula is not working
Murrrrr wrote:
orangehonda wrote:
Murrrrr wrote:
So this exact formula works for a 90 year old guy in China and a 20 years old Eskimo in Greenland? Somehow this is hard to believe.
Yes! Now you see why it's so great. Not only 90 year old Chinese and 20 year old Eskimos, but also new born babies, patients in a burn ward, and voodoo witchdoctors. The illiterate, the obese, the criminally insane, you name it and the formula will work.
Amazing stuff.
One could accuse you of witchcraft when you say that
Well you make it sound like amazing but I just can't agree with you. Without any proper proof, I only have your word. Because I don't know you, I can't trust your word only. So I still say the formula is not working
I don't blame you for not believing me
Don't tell anyone, but to be honest I don't think the formula works either 
orangehonda wrote:
I don't blame you for not believing me
Don't tell anyone, but to be honest I don't think the formula works either
So I just wasted my time pointlessly arguing over something we both agree on?
You sir, have bested me.... in the field of honor
woodshover wrote:
Whoever came up with it didn't know what they were talking about. The average person could easily get above 1200 after studying for a few months.
This statement still stands. I doesn't make sense to say that the average player, no matter how much they studied could never rise above Elo 1200.
TheGrobe wrote:
Elubas wrote:
I thought grobe was joking.
Half joking, half making a point. Some got both, some neither.
What's a grobe?
based om what ive read on iq and the backrounds of some of the best chess players in history i can soundly say that iq and playing ability are directly proportional to each other and that chess is simply a game of strategy and skill and a little luck but the truely adept player can see the game a few steps ahead but on the other hand they dont HAVE to have a high iq to do this neccesarily. one of my opponents from 3 years ago had a low iq and was the top player for 2 years at my school.
Apr 9, 2010
0
#112
DR_84-92 wrote:
based om what ive read on iq and the backrounds of some of the best chess players in history i can soundly say that iq and playing ability are directly proportional to each other and that chess is simply a game of strategy and skill and a little luck but the truely adept player can see the game a few steps ahead but on the other hand they dont HAVE to have a high iq to do this neccesarily. one of my opponents from 3 years ago had a low iq and was the top player for 2 years at my school.
You make 2 opposite arguments in the same post. I strongly believe iq and chess are totally not directly proportional to each other.
Fiveofswords wrote:
@ purplepuppy...statistically, people with high IQ are significantly LESS likely to suffer from mental illness.
People with very high IQs are more likely to develop schizophrenia and suffer from depression.
woodshover wrote:
What's a grobe?
I don't think a grobe is anything. The Grobe is a song by Ween.
Eo____ wrote:
Fiveofswords wrote:
@ purplepuppy...statistically, people with high IQ are significantly LESS likely to suffer from mental illness.
People with very high IQs are more likely to develop schizophrenia and suffer from depression.
There's evidence that the same genes that enable people to think at an extremely high mathematical level (like John Nash, Fischer, and a great number of genius mathematicians) are the same genes that cause schizophrenia.
Fiveofswords wrote:
schizophrentics with high IQ are very rare, schizophrentics with low IQ are much mroe common. Schizophrentics with hish IQ are far more likely to be functional in spite of their disability. Maybe you would simply be suprised how common schizophrenia is in general. (schizophrenia is much more common than 120+ IQ)
A 120+ IQ is almost 10 times more common than schizophrenia. A typical Stanford-Binet 120+ IQ "affects" roughly 5% of the population, whereas schizophrenia affects approximately 0.5% of the population. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1140960/?tool=pmcentrez
Eo____ wrote:
Fiveofswords wrote:
schizophrentics with high IQ are very rare, schizophrentics with low IQ are much mroe common. Schizophrentics with hish IQ are far more likely to be functional in spite of their disability. Maybe you would simply be suprised how common schizophrenia is in general. (schizophrenia is much more common than 120+ IQ)
A 120+ IQ is almost 10 times more common than schizophrenia. A typical Stanford-Binet 120+ IQ "affects" roughly 5% of the population, whereas schizophrenia affects approximately 0.5% of the population. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1140960/?tool=pmcentrez
You make the most idiotic, pointless topics in forums. lol. Who here agrees with me??
The current titleholder for pointless and mindless hails from the great city of New Orleans, IMHO.
"You make the most idiotic, pointless topics in forums. lol. Who here agrees with me??"
Who is more idiotic, the idiot who posts an idiotic thread or the idiot who replies to it?
I love it! Now I don't have to watch comedy on tv! LOL