If Albert Einstein played chess he could have been one of the greatest Chess Player🏤🏡⛲

DefenderPug2 wanted to bury the hatchet. I also tried in the past. I asked you if we could just stop it and be friends and you told me that basically you dislike people and you have no intention of being pleasant to people. So I gave up. Then I tried a second time and the peace held for two weeks. Then you got bored and started again. And now you're being really unpleasant to Mr DefenderPug simply for wanting to bury the hatchet. Why? How insecure have you got to be, to do what you do?

What if the Nazis won? He made other advancements too.

Lol.  What is happening *here* that you are trying to distract from is that you made a mistake and went off on a post from January, and now you are trying to bury that embarrassment by pretending I started something.

Your narrative about me telling you this or that is all in your head, as has been pointed out many times.  Produce a PM or something.  There's never a hatchet to bury.  There's just posts where you say something objectionable (to many people), and I take you to task, and then it's over.  I can't help if you do it on the regular.

As for the jumper-on...being swayed by some bookstore talk and a nearby flag is a little too easy .  You will find more direct insults coming from Optimissed in any exchanges with, well...practically anyone you care to compare with.

The DefenderPug2 red herring...I'll see your DefenderPug2 and raise you a Soniasthetics.  Keep your nose out of it.  DefenderPug2 can handle his own stuff without you.  Isn't that part of what got you blocked from that thread in the first place?  *That* is why you are bringing it up here.

The rest of the conversation above on this page?  That belongs in PMs.

Grow up btickler. You are a bully and a bore!

You don't seem to be aware of the difference between insult and direct criticism. The time for hedging with you has passed, because you continue to attack people at random. Just as you claim to be protecting all the people from trolls and spammers, it seems reasonable that you should accept that people should be protected from online bullies. Otherwise, one might smell hypocrisy.

Only someone with something very wrong with them could behave as you do and also, it isn't any of your business whether others make small talk in a thread. That's down to the originator of the thread entirely. When others are getting to know each other, p.m.s may be less appropriate.

So you admit that you're attacking another chess player. Actually, it's a constant thing. I also can handle myself but the time is past when people should have to stand up to your trolling and sneaky tricks by themselves and so it's quite appropriate to point out the fact that you constantly attack others. It needs to stop. Be aware of your hypocrisy and do what you claim should be done by others. Don't make posts attacking others in other people's threads. Learn the difference between trolling and reasonable criticism, because your behaviour continues to be unreasonable and unpleasant to many people, including to myself.

Possibly decent but great? That takes a special kind of fighting spirit. And although Einstein was friends with Lasker, he did make it clear that he didn't really respect chess players. Perhaps it was a kind of one-upmanship. Maybe they played a few games and Einstein took care to put him in his place, after he lost?

So many self-proclaimed geniuses in this thread! I forgot that chess attracted such ridiculous personalities.

First of all, no one knows Einstein's IQ because HE NEVER TOOK AN IQ TEST. Any speculation about his IQ is complete nonsense.

Obviously it isn't nonsense, since there have been a lot of studies done re. things attained by people with various I.Q.s. It was estimated as 160 some time in the early 1970s, I think. No-one has seriously challenged that and the figure of 160 has attained a pseudo-factual status. Some think it's an underestimate and I think it's possibly an over-estimate. I suspect there's a watershed around 155 where people can become somehow slightly superhuman and Einstein clearly wasn't that, with his intense opposition to quantum physics, his promotion of the Big Bang Theory and his moral degeneracy.

Secondly, Einstein never had an official rating, and even the Einstein vs Oppenheimer game has never been confirmed to be authentic (in fact all evidence suggests it's fake)!

Quite possibly. There's so much fake stuff about him and from what I heard, he wasn't a good chess player at all. But again, that may be fabricated.

Would Einstein have been a great chess player if he devoted his life to it? We don't know! Is intelligence associated with good chess? Probably somewhat, but it's absolutely not the end of the story. Regardless, Einstein was known to be a deep thinker who struggled sometimes to find quick solutions. There is even a famous anecdote (which ironically I'm forgetting the details of) where Einstein was offered to take an entrance exam for an engineering university and failed (this was after he already did the bulk of his incredible work). OTB chess is largely about finding practical solutions in a limited time, not finding innovations that could take years to uncover. If anything, he probably would've been a great theorist/composer had he devoted his life to chess, but not an incredible player.

Good comment.

But hey, what do I know? I must step aside and bow down to the 50% of you who apparently have IQs above 150.

I think it's only me and you're fine. Unfortunately, I've been distracted by talking to an imbecile.

Maybe you can write in a color that doesn’t make me lose my eyesight patzer?

No... it is complete nonsense. The most you could say is that there is a correlation between achievement and IQ, and that since Einstein achieved a lot he probably has a high IQ. I wouldn't be surprised if his IQ was indeed high, but unless he took the test (which he didn't) there is nothing of substance to discuss here.

As for your comments about 155+ IQs being associated with super-human abilities,>>>

I think we should metaphorically  delete your comment because you're misunderstanding what I meant. As a general rule, if you continue by talking about "drooling" then there's probably something going on in your head that doesn't relate to reality. I'm only talking about my experiences online, talking to various high IQ people, or people claiming they are. You can often tell whether it may be real but not always. Probably up to about 155, people often seem to be capable of being overly egotistic and they haven't put their intelligence to good enough use in understanding their own reactions and those of others. Probably 160+ or certainly 170+ gives a cushion where you aren't going to meet so many people in your league. There's no "threat" or I should say, perceived threat from others who are perhaps trying to trip you up or whatever. What I'm trying to say is that it was my own experience that I tended to live a rather weird, almost dreamlike life and actually, to combat that I became very physically active .... played a lot of football, rock climbing, fighting and so on. When I eventually met my present partner, nearly 36 years ago, things changed .... she'd taken a Mensa IQ test and came out at 158 and she's a psychologist, so there was a bit of normalisation because she isn't stupid and we understand each other. And managed to produce a quantum physicist. So anyway, on with the rubbish you wrote:

I would only agree if you consider drooling on yourself and doing nothing productive "super-human abilities". In general, people with IQs above a certain level effectively become cripples who can barely perform daily tasks, let alone contribute something major to society (this isn't always true but is certainly a rule of thumb). Being able to see logical connections and recognize patterns is a very small part of the full spectrum of human cognition. It's like having a car with 1000HP but no ability to steer; it may be impressive in some way, but it will never win a real race. Oh moral degeneracy huh? I suppose you should take that up with Tesla, who was romantically involved with a bird. Or perhaps Ford, who helped create the assembly line, allowing him to depress the wages of his workers. Or hell, almost any genius, who exactly BECAUSE they're a genius is fundamentally complex and flawed. To suggest that moral degeneracy in any way negatively impacts IQ is ridiculous.

Are you suggesting that? I wasn't suggesting it. Who suggested it? Not saying it isn't so, though.

The rest of your comments about Einstein are absolute nonsense. He didn't oppose quantum physics, he was one of the founders of it (read his paper on Brownian motion which revolutionized the field). Einstein did not "promote" the big bang theory; he was actually quite opposed to it and believed in a static universe. In fact he went so far as to "simplify" some of the GR field equations by assuming the cosmological constant was 0, thus implying no expansion/contraction of the universe. It was only years later after much evidence of an expanding universe that he begrudgingly admitted his mistake.

I'm sorry, you should read up on it and not make yourself look ignorant. Einstein opposed the BBT at first and he changed track because he thought it would help him in his fight against quantum physics. And without Einstein, we wouldn't have it now, more than likely. He opposed quantum physics for years. It wasn't thought that Brownian Motion had anything to do with it. Simply, theoretically predictable collisions between microscopic particles.

I see your high IQ doesn't seem to protect you from speaking of things you don't understand, nor does it indicate good irony detection.

What's your excuse then, because obviously you don't have a high IQ.

I didn't write in that awful color, that's just how Optimissed responds apparently.