Einstein's physics rating was way higher than Kasparov's.
YOUR IQ compared to" World Chess Champion" Garry Kasparov ..
Sort:
Elroch wrote:
btickler wrote:
Elroch wrote:
btickler wrote:
PawnAcrobat wrote:
Parts of IQ have no effect on chess such as general knowledge or the entire verbal section of IQ.
You're thinking of the SAT, perhaps. There is no "verbal section" of IQ, nor any "sections" at all, thus one of the major problems with IQ as a measuring scale.
What he must mean is that IQ tests typically have a lot of word-based problems in them as well as numerical ones, geometric pattern based ones and so on. They are a weighted sum of a set of more specialised intelligence tests.
You're being too generous.
I'm not because verbal means "relating to or in the form of words" according to the dictionary. This definitely encompasses large parts of typical IQ tests.
By that latter definition, almost any test would be "verbal".
That doesn't jive with "What he must mean is that IQ tests typically have a lot of word-based problems in them as well as numerical ones, geometric pattern based ones and so on. They are a weighted sum of a set of more specialised [sic] intelligence tests." where you clearly delineate a distinction you just erased with your attempted refutation via technicality 
.
I'll stick with you being too generous in this case.
Jan 28, 2020
0
#464
Elroch doesn't cheat, you blitz kiddies are not only rude, but make very weak arguments.
(edit -- looks like chess.com screwed up the order of these posts or there was some deleting going on)
Elroch wrote:
You, by contrast are about 1000 points weaker at blitz than the best, and I am about 1400 points weaker at blitz than the best
You can count the number of players above +3070 on your hand, while one finger would suffice for +3205. https://www.chess.com/leaderboard/live
My currently highest Blitz rating would be 2336 on lichess, while I am rated 2227 under FIDE.
Your 1700 rating would in fact be 1500 points below the best, to be precise.
I would be confident I am much better than you at turn-based chess, because it is the version that suits me best. I'm just nearer the best in the world.
Ridiculous. It baffles me how you even dare use phrases like "nearer the best in the world" when you not only have a 1700 rating on your record, but were only recently check mated multiple consecutive times by a 1700 rated opponent.
Does this look like someone near the best in the world to you?
Out of interest, how fast can you run 5k? I bet I could beat you.
Why would you bet that? I haven't given you any indication of my athletic abilities, yet you again seem so utterly sure of yourself without any particular reason.
But it is exactly this ignorant, overconfident and almost delusional self-image which also allows you to make such outrageously ridiculous claims as being near the best in the world at any form of chess.
Jan 28, 2020
0
#466
KibiDangoman wrote:
How do you know for sure?
Do you massage him while he is playing?
He cant cheat in Blitz and his rating there is weak af is that coincidence?
Dont be jealous because you are only bullet player the lowest of all chess.
I shouldn't have you grouped you with Colby, his trolling efforts are much better.
Jan 28, 2020
0
#468
KibiDangoman wrote:
A strong player is high rated across board
Well thank you. I guess you noticed the difference between my blitz and bullet rating is only 1 point.
KibiDangoman wrote:
a cheater is only high rated where he can cheat
So lets talk about why your bullet is over 200 points below your blitz. I guess bullet is too fast to cheat?
lol
In any case, old people don't play speed games well. Chess.com is com is full of two types of people:
1) Little kids / teens
2) Retired old folks
Group 2 isn't so good at speed chess anymore. Try to show some respect.
Jan 28, 2020
0
#469
Yeah, I can be a pretty rude a**ho**, that's for sure.
Sometimes I'm nice though 
(Oh you deleted your post, well whatever)
Jan 28, 2020
0
#470
If I gained a few rating points every time you said "bruh", I would be a GM
...and that's saying something
@Kibidangoman
Calm down a bit, please.
llamonade can be infuriating at times, but let's keep this civil.
I do however somewhat agree with your assessment of Elroch, with regards to his claims about being near the best in the world with his online daily rating.😏
Jan 28, 2020
0
#472
Did he actually claim that? I find it hard to believe. He used to have a note on his profile that said his rating was that high because a lot of people timed out or were caught cheating against him.
Jan 28, 2020
0
#473
KibiDangoman wrote:
1_a31-0 wrote:
If I gained a few rating points every time you said "bruh", I would be a GM
...and that's saying something
At 1800 you gonna have to keep reading for couple more years bruh.
There's some more rating! ✌️
Jan 28, 2020
0
#474
KibiDangoman wrote:
I just look at your Blitz games.
You didnt play since Jan and you lost many games at 2106 but your rating never drop
Once again you've failed at checking the facts. I've lost a grand total of 1 unrated blitz game after reaching 2106.
KibiDangoman wrote:
I think you just baaaaarely hit 2100 and now you dont wanna play anymore because you scared you are too weak and lose everything. The same thing with your bullet rating. You are a weak player who is scared bruh.
In my past accounts I would stop at 2000. But that was getting too easy so for this one I decided to stop at 2100.
It's true that 2100 should be near the best I can do on this site, but I'm not scared of "losing everything" because it's basically impossible for me to drop below 2000.
KibiDangoman wrote:
But you cannot cheat in bullet anyways so your sentence does not make sense.
Except that's exactly why my sentence makes sense. I'm saying your bullet is lower because you can't cheat at it.
(By the way it's been possible to cheat at bullet for at least 15 years, just speaking from having seen it)
KibiDangoman wrote:
So only old people and kids play here thats it?
That's not what I said.
This plus your logic errors are why "talking" to kids is no fun. You have to make long posts (like this one) explaining everything they got wrong.
KibiDangoman wrote:
This Elroch guy said he is almost best in the world but he has a 1700 Blitz rating LMAO.
For example, @pfren is an IM. His blitz is 1700.
Jan 28, 2020
0
#475
Sure, lets play sometime.
In fact I've wanted to find someone who will copy the format of the chess.com speed chess stuff. I think they play a few hours of 5|2 then maybe 1.5 hours of 3|2 then 30-60 minutes of 1|1 ?
I'm probably getting that wrong, but that's approximately what they do.
No one seems to want to play that though (increment time controls aren't my favorite either but I think it would be fun to copy that format).
Jan 28, 2020
0
#476
How can I decline what I didn't see? If you're going to be a pest about it I wont want to play you.
I can't play right now, how about this weekend? We'll have to set up a time that works for both of us.
By the way it can be you, or anyone reading this (I don't care if you're rated a lot lower or higher than me)
Jan 28, 2020
0
#477
Yeah, I saw the 2nd one you sent.
Oh, you just sent another.
I'll play you, but it will have to be this weekend at a time that works for both of us.
I've calculated my IQ as 140 before.
The test was astonishingly easy, and I got all 10 correct. This surely isn't a real IQ test, is it?
Real IQ tests are (typically) administered by psychologists, cost money, are taken in person, and take a few hours to complete.
All the 10 question junk online is clickbait and it's practically impossible to score below 100. In real life 50% of people will score below 100.