Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Women and computerchess

Author: Don Dailey

Date: 20:54:59 04/25/98

Go up one level in this thread


Hi Fernando,

I have no personal agenda when it comes to this issue and would not
"flame" anyone for their point of view.   I feel like there are
a lot of unknowns here so I would be hard pressed to refute anyone elses
opinion unless it was completely unreasonable.  My own opinion is not
well formed on this issue either, so I realize I could be quite wrong in
my opinion that the sexes are fairly balanced in chess skill.  Since
so few women are interested in competing at chess, it makes it quite
difficult to get any real sense of it.  It's only my "best guess" that
we are probably pretty close, but I give women the edge for now.   I
base this mainly on the fact that out of such a tiny fraction of female
tournament players, there probably shouldn't be one in the top 10 but
there is!   But of course I know there are reasonable arguments  on why
this is so, therefore I don't have a strong opinion on this.

I remember a few years ago Stefan Edberg (the tennis player) made some
offhand comment about no female being able to even come close to beating
him.  He was not bragging, he was just responding honestly to a question
on the subject.  I remember he was really blasted for his remark.  I
viewed
that as being really unfair to Stefan because he was speaking completely
frankly and truthfully.   Being analytical as most of us on this
newsgroup
are, we like to speculate on this kind of thing.  It should be expected
that the opinions will cover a wide range of beliefs.   Since most
people
agree men and women are different it should be no surprise that we want
to analyze the ways we are different.

But maybe this is for another newsgroup ... ?

- Don


On April 25, 1998 at 15:40:46, Fernando Villegas wrote:

>On April 25, 1998 at 13:25:57, Don Dailey wrote:
>
>>On April 25, 1998 at 11:17:47, mick adams wrote:
>>
>>>It seems to me fairly academic, that if, Judit Polgar were to play Bobby
>>>Fischer in Reykjavic,right now,the outcome,would,indubitally(or without
>>>doubt)favour the male of the species,and why is this?Surely not because
>>>Judit is a female!No perhaps it is because,in Reykjavic the environement
>>>conspires against the human race,no right-minded turnip,would surely
>>>know the difference.Judit is fantastic! i love her,but you know so is
>>>Bobby,and he's all grown up,and i don't think he was designed upon to
>>>the same extent as sister POLGAR.If,Judit becomes peregnant,her cute
>>>play agin masters of the ilk of Korchnoi,will be seen in true
>>>light.micky.
>>
>>I beg to differ, but it seems highly unlikely that the current Bobby
>>Fischer could win a match against Judit Polgar.  I haven't been
>>following
>>this thread so I hope my comment is not out of context somehow.
>>
>>But since I'm here, I might as well throw my 2 cents in and hope these
>>comments are not out of context.    I believe it is likely (after
>>sorting
>>out millions of environmental factors) that men and women are not
>>exactly
>>the same intellectually.  Based on Judit's performance the evidence is
>>on the side of female superiority at chess.  I'm basing this on the fact
>>that percentage-wise, VERY FEW women persue chess compared to men.  This
>>of course is not a strong case because there are many arguments that
>>could
>>be offered as to why this is so.   But I've always prefered hard
>>evidence
>>over lot's of speculation which I've learned over the years is quite
>>unreliable.
>>
>>My gut intuition (which I rarely trust) is that neither sex has a basic
>>inherited advantage (on the average) over the other.  I strongly suspect
>>both sexes bring (again this is a broad generalization that only applies
>>to the average, not individual case) their own strengths and weaknesses
>>to the game.
>>
>>But surely if there turned out to be a sex advantage in chess for one
>>side
>>over the other it must be so small as to be practically immeasurable.
>>
>>But isn't it best just to judge each person on his own merit?  After
>>all,
>>who of us in this newsgroup has any chance whatsoever against Judit
>>Polgar?
>>
>>- Don
>
>
>
>Hi Don:
>This thread begun with a question about why women almost does not appear
>in this field of computer chess and then I posted saying that maybe was
>necesary to take into account the statiscal fact that women tends to
>appear in increasingly LESS percentage of the samples as much as you go
>to the extremes of the IQ curve. My supposition was -and is- that there
>are some activities that tends to require a high degree of gusto for
>intellectual perfomance AND that this last gusto is associated with high
>IQ. So, as much as less women have high IQ than men -although in both
>sexes the percentage is small respect to all population-, then it
>follows naturally that a minor portion of women will appears interested
>in chess and programming. But, of course, if for any reason a woman is
>anyway interested and is there, chess os science, no matter what, of
>course you cannot do any conclusion about her ability and capacity with
>respect to any other chess player or scientist, male or female. I think
>that this line of thought is logical and baeed in facts of statistics
>and common experiebnce of any of us.
>Now:
>a) That does not mean that no women can have hight IQ, performs in
>sciences, etc.
>b) Does no means, either, that IQ is the only criteria to measure mental
>perfomance.
>c) Less that I was beginning a sexist movement.
>Nevertheless, i was shot from all sides. As Bruce said, this is sensible
>issue that better not to touch anyway and he is right in that.
>Nevrtheless, recognizing my lack of tact, I would insist that no matter
>what can be said to create a feeling of equality, facts are facts; women
>does not appears in force in this and other fields where high
>intellectual effort and perfomance is needed. Of course, maybe that does
>not matter at all. As many has done here, you can write a filosophy
>about all this and make an speech about human rights, broterhood, etc. I
>wellingly subscribe all thta filosophy, but...



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.