I don't understand this Germanic obsession with female cooking. All the top gourmet chefs are male, after all. It's one thing to prepare a bland meal for the whole family, but completely another to apply creativity and vision to create a culinary masterpiece.
Haha
That's no longer true.
You cannot compare men and women in a chess. It depends upon the mind of an individual. Sometimes men win and sometimes women.
Jeez... more gender wars! Haven't there been enough threads like this already.... Perhaps we should just organise a huge fight between all the men and all the women and see if that settles it :-)
And I don't like this near-universal assumption that men are no good at cooking. Not true.
I think chess is one of the few things you cant compare with genders.
Jeez... more gender wars! Haven't there been enough threads like this already.... Perhaps we should just organise a huge fight between all the men and all the women and see if that settles it :-)
And I don't like this near-universal assumption that men are no good at cooking. Not true.
I'm tired of stating in each one of these threads that it's been proven that registered male players are over 100 rating points (possibly even over 200 points) better on average than registered female players. It's a fact that seems to be forgotten each time a new thread appears. The last few of pages of this thread sum up the current concensus nicely.
Jeez... more gender wars! Haven't there been enough threads like this already.... Perhaps we should just organise a huge fight between all the men and all the women and see if that settles it :-)
And I don't like this near-universal assumption that men are no good at cooking. Not true.
I'm tired of stating in each one of these threads that it's been proven that registered male players are over 100 rating points (possibly even over 200 points) better on average than registered female players. It's a fact that seems to be forgotten each time a new thread appears. The last few of pages of this thread sum up the current concensus nicely.
Clearly there are biological differences between the genders (good job as well, otherwise we'd have some difficulty in perpetuating the survival of the human race!)
Although I am highly sceptical that the higher levels of chess skill reached so far by males has much if anything to do with genetics. I suspect that social-cultural factors play the decisive role, such as the implicit pressure put by most societies on men to push themselves forward and behave in a dominant and aggressive manner (and for women to do the opposite, accept a back-seat role and not seek to excel).
Of course women are better at chess. They are better at playing games, generally, if my experience in any way reflects reality.
http://ratings.fide.com/top.phtml
99 men 1 woman - 100 top players. GG
Social pressure is a common explanation, but it is rendered questionable by case studies such as Judit Polgar; she was basically brought up to be a chess player and avoided any social pressures to the contrary, and therefore had the potential to become better than any male player on the planet. While in her prime she was 100 points better than any female, she fell short of the top male level by about 100 rating points (as compared to Kasparov).
A more convincing explanation is attendance in women-only tournaments, where the rating pool is lower on average, yielding a smaller ratings gain with an equivalent performance. Judit Polgar refused to attend these tournaments, which might explain her superior rating. But even this is nowhere near conclusive.
Social pressure is a common explanation, but it is rendered questionable by case studies such as Judit Polgar; she was basically brought up to be a chess player and avoided any social pressures to the contrary, and therefore had the potential to become better than any male player on the planet. While in her prime she was 100 points better than any female, she fell short of the top male level by about 100 rating points (as compared to Kasparov).
A more convincing explanation is attendance in women-only tournaments, where the rating pool is lower on average, yielding a smaller ratings gain with an equivalent performance. Judit Polgar refused to attend these tournaments, which might explain her superior rating. But even this is nowhere near conclusive.
Yes, certainly Polgar rejected (or was trained to reject, or both) the stereotyped submissive female gender role, and that probably knocked a few points onto her rating. Which surely is evidence in favour of the point I was making...!
Whether she would have been any stronger had she been a man is obviously impossible to demonstrate one way or the other, without going back in time and having her born again. But I just think that common sense suggests that factors such as training and commitment to chess, upbringing and environment (as discussed above), natural flair for the game, and so on, have had a far more decisive effect on the level she has reached than whether or not she has a penis ;-)
During World War 2 Russia had plenty of women snipers, they were more patient than men?
Significantly less women play chess, and women are less competitive than men, so I do not think there is a way to make any meaningful comparison.
That said... I think it is funny: the highest rated person to post in this thread was a woman!
Good grief, enough of this "male vs female" nonsense...
I don't understand this Germanic obsession with female cooking. All the top gourmet chefs are male, after all. It's one thing to prepare a bland meal for the whole family, but completely another to apply creativity and vision to create a culinary masterpiece.
Haha