Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 08:13:34 12/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
As a matter of fact, famous, very rich, very important and so and so kind of people tend to be considered, always, as "very good" at any activity they perform. It is part of his glamour. Take the case of Napoleon. If you look at any of his documented games, you will see he clearly is an agressive but at most average kind of player AND playing against people very inclined to concede victory to the Great Man. Nevertheless you always can get a book about Napoleon where it is said he was a master level player. Of course, smartness has a very asimetrical relation with chess ability. Einstein was a less than average player and that would be enough to probe the case. On the opposite side, a more than average chess player cannot be a dude. In fact I.Q data has been collected about many GM players and if I recall well, most of them or even all are above 140 IQ people, that is, in the 2 or 3% most high part of the curve. To say it as in an execize in basic logic: every good chess player is smart, but not every smart guy is a good chess player. Fernando, not smart neither good chess player.
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.