Low visuo-spatial IQ but very high numeric and verbal IQ

I have very low visuo spatial IQ but quite high numeric and verbal IQ. I am good at concepts and abstract thinking but am poor at performance tasks. Does chess involve more visuo spatial skills or is it concept and abstraction driven.

I ran a search for something like this and got only the following link.

https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/7c5291/if_jews_have_low_visual_spatial_iq_why_are_there/

What do you think? Please share your views and also comment on your own visuo spatial abilities and Verbal IQ.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/does-good-chess-require-visual-spatial-skills

https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/bitstream/2438/805/1/Visuo-spatial_abilities.pdf

There's a ton more available. Did you search Google for visuo-spatial IQ chess?

No I tested on an Android app. I have high numerical IQ but below average visuo spatial skills. I have great difficulty in rotating cubes and dodecahedrons and whatnot yet I can follow mathematical theroems quite fluently. And it's true that Jews have a lower visuo spatial ability but extremely unhuman verbal and reasoning skills. Think chomsky and Stiglitz.

Extremely unhuman? 

You know who else thought that...?

Even if true, just develop your visual-spatial ability to its utmost, to its ceiling, whatever that may be.  It will feel good to strive for your max.

Fischer?

No, but in all seriousness, the point is that perhaps chess utilizes the abstract centers of the brain and not the visual spatial ones at all. That is what the reddit post says.

It's true. Chess thinking may be more left brained than we would at first think.

One of the studies I've seen said there's a relationship between visio-spatial ability and chess skill in children but not in adults.

I personally don't think that anyone can become a chess master if they just determined to be one and studied for hours. There has to be something akin to aptitude. I was trying to define what that aptitude consists of so that a player may direct their efforts in the most fruitful manner. In my considered opinion this consists of the abstract symbol manipulation ability, working memory(as measured by digit span and n-back tests) etc.

I have on occasion taken the drug modafinil to play better chess and on one occasion I beat a 2300 rated opponent on Playchess when I was on 200mg. Soon after, I developed a tolerance and slid back to my 1600 level. But modafinil is known to increase digit span. I also now take a supplement stack called Optimind and it makes me a much more fearsome chess player.

It's pretty obvious, at least to me, that visuo-spacial IQ doesn't matter.

In fact it's a common misconception among non-players that chess skill is due to calculation.

All real players should know this is silly.

But since @pdve's topics are always borderline troll garbage I'm not surprised.

Ashkenazi Jews have an unusual ability profile as well as higher than average IQ. They have high verbal and mathematical scores, while their visuospatial abilities are typically somewhat lower, by about one half a standard deviation, than the European average (Levinson, 1977; Levinson and Block, 1977). Han Eysenck (Eysenck, 1995) noted “The correlation between verbal and performance tests is about 0.77 in the general population, but only 0.31 among Jewish children. Differences of 10-20 points have been found in samples of Jewish children; there is no other group that shows anything like this size difference.” The Ashkenazi pattern of success is what one would expect from this ability distribution-great success in mathematics and literature, more typical results in representational painting, sculpture, and architecture

Visuo spatial ability does not matter AND calculation does not matter. I would rather say that visuo spatial ability is over rated and that calculation is what really matters.

The main thrust of my argument is that what ultimately matters is symbol manipulation capacity, i.e. working memory. 

Most puzzles I solve these days take less effort than puzzles I struggled with as a beginner.

I'm not doing more calculation, and I'm not using more working memory. I'm better at chess because it's easier for me to detect the most important elements in the position.

I agree working memory is important, and a decline in it is probably part of why older players get worse, but, for example, an 80 year old Korchnoi after half a bottle of Vodka would beat me 10 out of 10 games even though my raw memory and raw calculation would be superior. The little he remembers and the little he calculates will be more important, so I'll lose.

Yes, that too.

 Another day, another troll trying to be subtle. 

ghost_of_pushwood, of all the times that I have tried to create topics for humour this is the one time I was actually serious and you totally missed that. This could have turned out to be a fine intellectual discussion.

yes

Quite. I was about to post the definitive answer to this but now I'm not going to in case ghost_of_pushwood pokes fun at me.

Don't know why you would worry about what kind of iq matters or not. You have to work with what you have.