Does chess serve as a gauge of intellectual prowess?

 I've been pondering over this question and I'm curious to hear your thoughts: Is chess truly a measure of intelligence? It's often hailed as a game that requires strategic thinking, foresight, and problem-solving skills, but does excelling at chess necessarily imply high intelligence overall? I'd love to hear your perspectives on this fascinating topic.

This question is well studied. At first, performance in Chess correlates with general intelligence but the overriding factor in Chess performance is practice. That's also the result we should expect because general intelligence is measured by testing with problems which we haven't seen before whereas Chess ability is determined by experience of problems which we have seen before.

I think to be really good at classical chess you have to have a good memory (all GMs know hundreds of openings and games by heart) and be quite disciplined, which in turn will mean that you have good chances in succeeding well in IQ tests.

But I think you can also reach 1500-2000 in bullet without being particularly clever..

i think that people with higher intelligence have more potential for chess, and can improve more quickly, but starting early is much more important. not a single person, no matter how bright, has managed to become a gm after starting chess at a late age. i've heard of a few making it to 2000 after just one year of play, which is impressive, but they'll all hit a plateau once they're up against masters.

I completely agree with your assessment. The relationship between general intelligence and chess performance has been extensively studied, and it is widely recognized that while there may be an initial correlation, practice ultimately plays a crucial role in determining chess ability. Chess is a game that requires experience and familiarity with various positions and strategies, which can only be acquired through practice and exposure to different scenarios. While general intelligence tests often involve novel problems, chess proficiency relies on the accumulated experience of solving similar problems encountered in the game.

Sounds like you've found your own unique equilibrium amidst the chaos of life's correlations. While some geniuses might fumble their way through a chessboard, and some scholarly souls may struggle with the rooks and knights, you've managed to navigate both realms like a true master of mediocrity.

You're absolutely right that being a top-notch classical chess player requires a good memory and discipline. Those grandmasters are like walking encyclopedias of openings and games, making the rest of us feel like we're still stuck on page one. And hey, who knows, their intellectual prowess might just give them an extra boost in those IQ tests! Now, when it comes to bullet chess, well, it's a different beast altogether. It's like a wild and chaotic roller coaster ride where even the cleverest of minds can find themselves losing to a cunning tactic or a sneaky mouse slip. So, my friend, while you may not need to be a genius to excel in bullet chess, it certainly helps to have lightning-fast reflexes and nerves of steel. After all, it's not about the IQ, it's all about the "I've got this!"

ratio tbh

The only thing that being good at chess proves is that: you've spent far too much time playing chess.

It's causation but it's like anything. If you wanted to be a champion weightlifter, you'd need muscles and having muscles is a causal factor in your ability to lift heavier weights. Even so, you'd want to actually do it. Clever people being bad at chess means they don't understand the technique or maybe they don't like chess. Same with weightlifting.

Anyway that's just an argument and not meant to be definitive.

No. People with average intelligence can study the game and improve. Intelligence is nice, but so is hard work.

I could suggest that that's what makes them similar rather than different. Does speaking Thai help translate something from Icelandic?

Well, if that's the case, then I must be a master at wasting time! But hey, at least I can checkmate boredom whenever it tries to challenge me.

i just play to burn the time, hoping i get some deadly disease then i wont think about chess.

Ah, so you're playing chess to ward off boredom and praying for some bizarre immunity trick involving deadly diseases? I must say, that's quite the unconventional strategy! But hey, have you considered a less extreme approach like joining a chess club or challenging your friends to a match? It might save you from resorting to such, um, creative methods.

i dont have friends im hoping the deadly disease will solve that problem too because people will feel bad for me

You can work long and hard to build up muscles, but if your skeletal system is deficient or your ligaments and tendons are brittle, you will have little success as a weightlifter. Not meant to be definitive, just wish to point out that the "most obvious" answers can be incorrect or only partly valid.