Kasparov's IQ and chess skill

GRE is the Graduate Record Examination. I scored 800/800 in quantitative and 700/800 in verbal. Also, I am from a socialist country that produces nothing.

you  are very good.

even though i dont believe he is 170, is possible to be really smart and not be able to spell amateur.

you have to ask they guy from greece, there is a famous story of a greek guy who made a fortune in america.

He couldnt get a better job in the church he was working at because he couldnt read or write. HE went to america and become really rich.

a reporter once asked him: you achieved all that, what would you have become if you could read and write?

the greek guy said: i would be working in a church.

I've never been able to understand why the reactionaries among us can't understand that without socialism, nationalism is impossible.

I believe the number was 135, not 130 on Kasparov's IQ performance but what was more interesting was the confirmed fact that Kasparov had an exceptional memory. Many great players were said to possess such exceptional memories and there are numerous anecdotes of Tal, Fischer, Kasparov, ect, where they displayed great memory by being able to replay their blitz games from years ago or recall an offhand conversation from years ago word for word. This incredible memory ability would greatly help players recall game theory, past games and positions, even their opponents games they may have analyzed. I suspect memory has much more impact on chess successs than IQ would.

The so called intelligence test Kasparov made was just a few of questions on geographical and other subjects if I recall correctly, and nothing that can be taken particularly seriously.

A damp sponge can score an 800 on the math GRE.  I scored one as an English major having taken no more than the introductory calc sequence as an undergrad.  It's a terribly designed test, used only to vet people for base intellectual adequacy, which when combined with undergrad record can give grad school admissions folk some idea of who might be qualified to pay them for an advanced degree.

The tests were conducted by a team of international psychologists hired by the German magazine Der Spiegel in 1987-88. They ran a battery of tests on him which tested his memory, spatial ability, and abstract reasoning with the result being a 135 IQ and possessing an exceptional memory. Definitely something to take seriously.

no its nothing to take seriously, if you only score 135 and are the best of the best at the time. Then ofc there must be something flawed with the test....

not to mention the fake diary of a famous dictator they published

The German magazine test is often mentioned but I have never seen anyone referring to the actual test or article about it. The leading Nazis in Nuremberg went through IQ tests, scoring 138 (Göring and Schacht), 141 (Seyss-Inquart), 143 Schacht, etc. Maybe they at least did the test in their own language, which Kasparov didn't, but if it's true that the test below is based on the test Kasparov took it can't have been worth much:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/your-iq-compared-toquot-world-chess-championquot-garry-kasparov

A 135 IQ on a rigorously designed and applied test is exceptional.  Not one person in a hundred will score that well.  To put that in perspective, only about twenty people have posted in this thread.

The flawed tests are the ones that are telling every schmuck on the Internet that he possesses a 170 IQ.  The math says that there are fewer than 500 such people in America.

yes  but its just hilarious to think that a designed test is really accurate in measuring something like the human intelligence. The thought alone is really hilarious in my personal opinion.

not to mention that psychologists are not exactly on the top of the hierarchy of univerally accepted most intelligent humans on earth.

All IQ indicates is your ability to learn. It has nothing to do with your actual knowledge. In short having a high IQ just means that you can read a book or listen to a lecture and understand it very easily.

well i dont think that any iq indicator can measure that properly.

Good point in fact I argue that IQ tests are invalid because a persons IQ is culturally relative.

For example, in my hometown of Kentwood, MI USA, I would be considered a pretty smart guy. I am well read and I can solve some complex puzzles. 

However, if I was in an environment like impoverished Africa, and I had to survive on my hunting and gathering proficientcy I would certaintly be the village fool.

be happy im the impverished village fool.

anyway stop mocking a valid point.

I mean look there are 2 guys, im not talking about me im just not so smart.

But seriously imagine there are 2 people living in america. 1 has a really high Iq and one has not such a high iq. Both people goal in life is money, but the one with a low IQ really makes hundreds of millions of dollars, while the other makes in his like well like 2 million.

Ofc we have to assume its just luck, because the iq tests are really meaningfull.

Also if you take a poll about who people consider the smartest human on earth. Do you know any psychologist that people would name into the top 100??

I dont know any.

I think they probably woulndt vote one into the 10000 smartest people.

I thought IQ was a measure of someone’s general intelligence, sometimes abbreviated G, which purports to be a measure of someone’s "computation" power similar to a computer’s RAM. People with a higher general intelligence "G" are less likely to be accident-prone then people with lower intelligence. They are also more likely to put off breeding due to schooling and upper middle class sensibilities, hence the observation in the Bell Curve that the Western World is actively breeding a race of inferior people.

Anyway, I am not convinced that a person's general intelligence is the most important factor in calculating chess tactics. Chess is too visual and involves the manipulation of patterns. Attempts to test G are all related to problem solving, but are rarely visual in nature.

@ZeroSymbolic7188

However, if I was in an environment like impoverished Africa, and I had to survive on my hunting and gathering proficientcy I would certaintly be the village food.

I fixed a typographical error for you.

i think that is mistaken, im pretty sure that impoverishment is one of the key for breeding and not finishing school, i think i saw pretty good statistics that prove the point. If you finish school also has different factors. And yes accidents tell me that you must be joking...

stop trolling lol

Actually I was only joking with the village food remark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve

The rest I read about in The Bell Curve. Intelligence is hereditary, a social structure that rewards intelligence concentrates intelligence in the upper classes, thus we are left with a breed of inferior creatures below the upper classes. If the upper classes put off breeding until they are in their 30ties due to treating women as the equal of men, we are left with the dredges out breeding the intelligent people. This is further exacerbated by the less intelligent people having more unwanted and unplanned pregnancies.

And to reiterate I remain unconvinced that general intelligence is the most important factor in determining a person’s ability to calculate in chess. A person’s ability to calculate probably has more to do with visual memory then general intelligence.   

Just for the record, I have to say the following because I'm really tired of people mentioning Einstein's IQ: Einstein never took an IQ test. Never. All you hear in the TV is just an invention based on his achievement, just a rude aproximation. 

(Be aware, then, the next time you heard or read that someone it's "more intelligent" than Einstein, because he got an IQ of 165. Be aware of so dumb is that statement.)