2014 World chess championship - Page 3

If you put in thousands of hours of studying into chess I believe anyone could reach at least strong expert or low master at the minimum. You will never reach GM unless you have undeniable talent/iq on top of the hard work.

There is a reason the greatest player who ever played the game happens to be one of the all time smartest people in the world.

http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/the-biggest/the-10-highest-iqs-in-histoy/6/

# 8 is female grandmaster Judit Polgar

im not sure if theres a strong correlation between intelligence and chess aptitude. garry kasparov is undeniably one of the most brilliant men of all time, but i dont think all GM players are like that. the top GMs are probably all geniuses, but when you start getting into the 2650 and below level it seems chess aptitude correlates more with how early someone was exposed to chess and how hard they studied as a youngster. my good friend was very interested in mastering chess for a while and he got lessons from a mid 2500 russian GM who was a reasonably smart guy, but his chess vision was unbelievable. he would notice certain things that took us a long time of staring at a board to see. i dont think thats necessarily intellect.

that said, kasparov, fischer, capablanca, and morphy are/were all likely off the charts in terms of intelligence. magnus is very very very smart, but he seems like more of a savant than an off the charts genius like the other 4 i listed (although still a genius)

so i was right, /thread

lol why do i argue on the internet... ok if you literally mean the intelligence quotient test there is unlikely to be more than weak correlation between that and chess achievement, but there is clearly something more than just working hard needed (some innate chess-specific ability) to reach GM as suggested by the numbers alone. 1444 GMs since 1924, and if you think the total number of people dedicating their lives to chess in the last 80 years is within the same order of magnitude as 1444 then you must be smoking crack. when X people (X>>>>1444) are trying equally hard from a young age to reach the top and only 1444 achieved it, do you think the top 1444 just ran well? there isn't much variance in chess.

to predict a guy who won some school trophies has anything other than a tiny probability of reaching GM with just dedication is just wrong. it's too bad there's no convenient way i can bet against your beliefs since it takes too long to realise a winner, otherwise i'm up for betting your bankroll at odds that are consistent with your beliefs.

doubt ur betting Daut's bankroll lol

Pretty sure you have to be smart to become GM, but most of all, as for any elite sport, it is a combination of being exposed to the sport early as well as being wealthy enough to play a game for your whole life with only slight hopes of making money out of it.

You seem to infer that millions of people dedicated their lives to playing chess which I think is a wrong assumption. Comparing the number of silver+ LoL players that you know to the number 1500+ ELO chess players that you know, it is probable you will count more LoL players. Chess is popular as in everybody plays it, but it is kinda rare to find an opponent who does not totally suck at it. I think the number of serious chess players is very low.

On November 25 2014 15:09 traxamillion wrote: doubt ur betting Daut's bankroll lol

i would be betting with romm3l against nitewin. if his peak rating has been <=1800, then its 0% he ever becomes a GM no matter how hard he studies. if he managed to get 2000+ while in his early teens...then he has a shot. but pretty sure you can be a 1500 and beat 10 year olds in your school.

you mean <1%
+ Show Spoiler +

On November 25 2014 04:51 Romm3l wrote: lol why do i argue on the internet... ok if you literally mean the intelligence quotient test there is unlikely to be more than weak correlation between that and chess achievement, but there is clearly something more than just working hard needed (some innate chess-specific ability) to reach GM as suggested by the numbers alone. 1444 GMs since 1924, and if you think the total number of people dedicating their lives to chess in the last 80 years is within the same order of magnitude as 1444 then you must be smoking crack. when X people (X>>>>1444) are trying equally hard from a young age to reach the top and only 1444 achieved it, do you think the top 1444 just ran well? there isn't much variance in chess. to predict a guy who won some school trophies has anything other than a tiny probability of reaching GM with just dedication is just wrong. it's too bad there's no convenient way i can bet against your beliefs since it takes too long to realise a winner, otherwise i'm up for betting your bankroll at odds that are consistent with your beliefs.

i just dont agree with 'trying equally hard' part, thats all

Mikhail Tal was the man. Typical baller when it comes to lifestyle, and super aggro over the board player x) If someone didn't see his games, check them out, there's plenty lol

mikhail tal should be one of everybody's fucking heroes oh my god what a monster