<<Rating = 10 × IQ + 1000 , implying IQ = (Rating - 1000) / 10 . obviously a controversial formula.>>
... and it's obviously wrong. I could explain why we know it's wrong too.
Because IQ and chess IQ are different things
Yep.
IQ is general puzzle solving ability but chess is a specific form of puzzle leaning heaviliy on memory and the enjoyment of a fight. It's a rather specialised puzzle.
Levitt's formula supposedly predicts maximum possible FIDE rating from IQ. Most players don't dedicate their lives to the study and practice of the game, so they never reach their maximum possible rating. Therefore calculating backward from chess rating to IQ is ridiculous.
I don't think Levitt's theory holds water or that there is any close correspondence between IQ and chess rating. The formula says that Garry Kasparov, with a tested IQ of 135 could reach a maximum FIDE rating of 2450, which is a long way from his actual peak of 2851.
Levitt's formula supposedly predicts maximum possible FIDE rating from IQ. Most players don't dedicate their lives to the study and practice of the game, so they never reach their maximum possible rating. Therefore calculating backward from chess rating to IQ is ridiculous.
I don't think Levitt's theory holds water or that there is any close correspondence between IQ and chess rating. The formula says that Garry Kasparov, with a tested IQ of 135 could reach a maximum FIDE rating of 2450, which is a long way from his actual peak of 2851.
IQ testing is very fragile. Do it on a bad day and you can test well over 50 points lower than you could get on another day.
Levitt's formula supposedly predicts maximum possible FIDE rating from IQ. Most players don't dedicate their lives to the study and practice of the game, so they never reach their maximum possible rating. Therefore calculating backward from chess rating to IQ is ridiculous.
I don't think Levitt's theory holds water or that there is any close correspondence between IQ and chess rating. The formula says that Garry Kasparov, with a tested IQ of 135 could reach a maximum FIDE rating of 2450, which is a long way from his actual peak of 2851.
2350* however entirely correct. a regular player's current rating reflects their current level of experience rather than their cognitive ceiling. it is impossible to reverse-engineer their IQ from their rating. levitt's formula is fundamentally incomplete. standard IQ tests do not measure traits necessary for chess strength. GM Jonathan Rowson argued to account for EQ. your thinking and your feeling are inextricably linked. you cannot separate your cognitive IQ from your emotional state. emotional resilence, concentration, maintaining objectivity, handling psychological pressure, objectively evaluating positions without ego or fear, all are necessary. it requires far more than pure cognitive intelligence.
Personally I don't think Rowson is correct at all. Firstly, what is EQ? Surely that's a measure of emotional maturity, if anything. Also, it's perfectly possible that some people's rational intelligence is more linked to their emotional intelligence than others.
IQ was initially developed to estimate the aptitudes of conscripted soldiers. Then it was applied to children to estimate their intellectual potential. It would be nonsense, whatever "EQ" means, to assume that it directly correlates with IQ.. He looks wrong and is certainly wrong that these things link together identically for all peoples and cultures.
EQ is completely spurious and should be ignored amd left to psychotherapists.
Personally I don't think Rowson is correct at all. Firstly, what is EQ? Surely that's a measure of emotional maturity, if anything. Also, it's perfectly possible that some people's rational intelligence is more linked to their emotional intelligence than others.
IQ was initially developed to estimate the aptitudes of conscripted soldiers. Then it was applied to children to estimate their intellectual potential. It would be nonsense, whatever "EQ" means, to assume that it directly correlates with IQ.. He looks wrong and is certainly wrong that these things link together identically for all peoples and cultures.
EQ is completely spurious and should be ignored amd left to psychotherapists.
Your timeline is backwards. IQ tests were developed for children/students, military applications came later.
<<Rating = 10 × IQ + 1000 , implying IQ = (Rating - 1000) / 10 . obviously a controversial formula.>>
... and it's obviously wrong. I could explain why we know it's wrong too.