Why getting GM title is not possible at the age 30+? Is it a fact?

Yeah but it idea skills which overlap with a lot of that which is useful for IQ tests, pattern recognition, calculation, problem solving, visualization etc

I would suggest you try first to become a National or a Candidate Master. That's not an impossible goal, but certainly a difficult one. Once you are at that level, then you can really think about if you want/can go the extra mile. 

I thought though you can't improve your score on IQ tests by, say, 50 points if you study.  All the questions or problems are supposed to be novel to the test taker (I'm guessing).  When you sit across of Kasparov (or any professional GM) you're entering a puzzle they've spent most of their life working on.

A high IQ may mean you'll get to 1200 faster, but I'm not sure if it matters more than that.

To answer the initial question..

No, it is certainly not impossible to gain the GM title after the age of 30.

Yge Visser became a Grandmaster in 2006 at the age of 43.

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yge_Visser

But he didn't start chess at age 30  : /

Instead of setting a goal for a change of rating, one might set a goal to win atleast 5 online games per season.

Indeed - I managed to get a score of 172 in an IQ test as a teenager by spending some time practising doing IQ tests - so I know it works. I wouldn't consider myself a genius at anything (except understatement, perhaps).

But that's way to easy if you plan on becoming an FM sometime (I think I already won 5 games this season).  Maybe 10+ games should be sufficient (1 tournament has 20 games).

And that 135 is proven by one test. He's alleged to have 190. Fischer is alleged to 180 and Judit Polgar to have 170.
Basicly, people of genius IQ will sometimes play chess for their whole life as their proffesion.

I think he meant to get 1800 instead of 2500.

You're missing the point entirely. All of the tests have different rating systems. A 132 in the Wechsler Scales test is equal to a 148 in the Cattell III B test. Some tests say 180, some 140. Read the post from the mensa website above.

I'm not sure why you think it is unlikely he was a 135, depending on the test that could make him a genius. So basically you seem to be arguing that being a genius is not enough, you need him to be MORE of a genius.

If you google it and have a read of a few articles, you'll find that it was reported to be 180-190 until he was put through multiple tests in the 80's to determine his true IQ and it was discovered to be 135. Now, does that mean they used a different test than the original one that suggested 180? maybe, that's the point. Without knowing which test it is just a number.

People who think they have scored over 135, if it was an official test then you can easily find out which one you sat, perhaps you are a genius. If, however, it was a 70 question test on a website, it isn't worth the paper it's not written on.

Becoming a GM is possible after age 30 but the amount of time required to learn the game that well and getting the required 2500+ FIDE rating along with the several norms needed to earn the GM title (plus all the norms needed to get the titles below it first) would be so great that I doubt many, if any, could actually achieve it. Most people over the age of thirty have jobs, families, kids, and other obligations that would probably limit the amount of free time available for them to do such. As mentioned already, many of the older players who achieved GM status after thirty already were strong players in their younger years. Starting the game essentially from the beginning at thirty and becoming a GM then would be a considerable feat in my eyes.

I think chess is romantasized a bit on the TV these too, which leads many to a false perception of it being strictly related to intellegence.  The knowledge base needed and the amount of chess one would have to play to reach GM status after age 30 would be alot.  I think a younger person's brain, fresh and unfilled with the toils of life is much more likely to hit a groove that would accelorate this process.  I think IQ and what not only gaurentee one's ability to sit and do the task at hand, whether the right choices are made is up the persons Skill at chess.  

You missed my point. That test is not to be trusted, neither is what I wrote. There's gotta be, as you stated, a real test and even then it will only cover a few areas.

They are all 'real' tests. Just different rating systems. It is not a question of them being unreliable. They are all reliable.

Yes.  These are the kind of speculations you get when people who have never played chess, and who are unintelligent, speculate about how chess and intelligence are related.

There's ALOT of unreliable IQ tests, like this one http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/your-iq-compared-toquot-world-chess-championquot-garry-kasparov
And ofc the millions on the internet.
Just a couple of weeks ago a guy in my town claimed he had 136 IQ on facebook. I asked how he knew and said he did a test on the internet, hilarious. 

¨¨They are all 'real' tests. Just different rating systems. It is not a question of them being unreliable. They are all reliable.¨  --Genhiskhant.

So I take it you're a strong advocator of the pro-IQ test movement? 

Well if its on the internet it must be true! That commercial gives me a chuckle every time... :)

I would suggest the ones I posted, which are accepted by mensa to fulfill entry requirements, are accurate.

I also commented on the unreliability of internet IQ tests, I couldn't agree more, they are useless.