Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:21:30 12/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 22, 2001 at 13:35:13, James T. Walker wrote: >On December 22, 2001 at 10:05:21, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 22, 2001 at 05:55:17, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >> >>>On December 22, 2001 at 00:07:53, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>>IQ is like nps, you want to have a higher one, but that number alone >>>>does not mean a thing. >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>Miguel >>> >>>You are right Miguel, infact Kaspy is a good example of that : he excels in >>>chess , but his measured I.Q. is still far from genius level. >>>He is well above the average, but no exceptional values, nevertheless combined >>>with his outstanding memory capabilities (especially visual kind), his passion >>>(Ed's factor) and constant training (Time factor) he reached the top of chess. >>> >>> >>>w.b.r. >>>Otello >> >>It actually works like this: Being a good chess player does not mean you >>have a high IQ. But having a high IQ _does_ mean you can become a good >>chess player. IQ is about the ability to visualize, recognize patterns, >>and so forth, all of which will help a chess player. > >I rember reading (at least 25 years ago) that in a study it was found there was >no correlation between IQ and chess ability. >Jim I think such a "study" would be very hard to do. You would need two groups of people, where the _only_ difference between them is IQ. IE both groups love chess, are willing to spend the necessary time studying the game, etc. I doubt _that_ was done in the study you mention... which reduced the chessplayer part of the equation to "noise"...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.