>women are less intelligent than me-

>Judit Polgár (born 23 July 1976) is a Hungarian chess grandmaster. She is generally considered the strongest female chess player of all time.
>With these three results, she completed the requirements for the International Master title; at the time, she had been the youngest player ever to have achieved this distinction.[42] Both Bobby Fischer and Garry Kasparov were 14 when they were awarded the title; Polgár was 12.
>However, Kasparov expressed early doubts: "She has fantastic chess talent, but she is, after all, a woman. It all comes down to the imperfections of the feminine psyche. No woman can sustain a prolonged battle."[54] Later in life, however, after he had lost a rapid game against Polgar himself in 2002, Kasparov revised his opinion: "The Polgars showed that there are no inherent limitations to their aptitude—an idea that many male players refused to accept until they had unceremoniously been crushed by a twelve-year-old with a ponytail."

Hmmmm, how can men compete?

Other urls found in this thread:

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289606001115?via=ihub
m.youtube.com/watch?v=wUs9qObj9xU
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_complexity
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Bump

Women drive themselves into debt taking art history and gender studies majors then complain about the wage gap and why their aren’t enough women in STEM. Agree to disagree.

>Peak career Elo 2735

She and her sister studied chess from when they were very young. Their father wanted to see if yo could cultivate genius. He was a psychologist. He allowed the girls to pick something, and they picked chess. Then, they studied it obsessively.

I don’t think this means you can make any child into a genius. They were already naturally very intelligent, and picked chess themselves because there was something about it that interested them. They learned all these skills as their brain was developing. As a result, they can play and win multiple chess games at once blinded or over the phone without ever seeing the board. Their brains truly are special. They’re good models for how gifted children should be taught.

But they are outliers. Men will always dominate in chess.

>Citing an outlier and claiming it is representative

I was disciplined at work for stating that I believed that the mean of IQs of both males and females were identical, however there was a difference in distribution.

>chesslets think they are intelligent and not just rote memorizer

Still mediocre.

...

Shit, she is super hot too. Better burn my chess board. #mensrights

>outliers exist
>therefore the distribution doesn't exist

Judit polgar was mediocre compared to any of the chess greats, just like the best female player of any generation is mediocre compared to the best man of that generation. I dare say this may be the most retarded thread on pol right now

Lol what field do you work in?

>I dont like what I am seeing
>therefore it must be an outlier

Pictured is my favorite female chess player. I can’t remember her name. She’s gorgeous.

>Polgár was born on 23 July 1976 in Budapest, to a Hungarian Jewish family
>Jewish
stormfags on suicide watch

>women are less intelligent than me
Yeah.

>chess determines intelligence

>Polgar: Playing Carlsen feels like you're drowning
lol

It literally is an outlier though.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289606001115?via=ihub

>Among the top 2% AFQT scores, there were almost twice as many males as females. These differences could provide a partial basis for sex differences in intellectual eminence.

No-one here denies that there are intelligent women. We simply assert, backed up by data, that there are more highly intelligent men than women. There are also more low-intelligence men than women.
There are more women of average intelligence than there are men of average intelligence.

>Cites a single exceptional example
>This is certainly not an outlier.

Because chess is more popular to men? Just like how cheerleading and ballet is more popular towards women

Goes to show that men are better than woman across the board.
I mean, we get the majority of the geniuses, but even among the dumbfucks, a stupid man is more useful than a stupid woman, because a stupid man can do heavy manual labor.

He didn't mention chess, retard.

Men have a higher variation in intelligence, so you get more geniuses but more retards.

So...

You found a sum total of one woman who is good at one thing.
That thing is a game.
And this woman will die alone and not pass on her genes, because she is ugly as fuck and no man cares if a woman plays chess well.

And... you think you proved something...?

You fucking what...?

Pic related.

women are inferior to men not because of their inteligence
its their psychology . now watch how that girl will ride BBC 6 years later

I don't think even a nigger would fuck it.

Judit was the best female player in chess history (and it's not even close; there is no second place worth mentioning in the same breath), and she's still just an interesting footnote on the history of the game. She was not, and will never be, a world champion, and although she was capable of beating world champions ON OCCASION she had no winning record against any world champion class player (in her prime she was legit top 10 overall, so she was definitely fucking good).

I don't believe she ever took a game off of Anand, for example, who was world champion while she was active (as well as Kramnik, who she did beat on occasion, or maybe just once; i can't find the stats).

We all know Jews are intelligent. And they're fantastic at chess; something like 40% of all world champions were at least half Jewish.

They also probably can't do anything else

>Bobby Fischer and Garry Kasparov were 14 when they were awarded the title; Polgár was 12.
>However, Kasparov expressed early doubts: "She has fantastic chess talent, but she is, after all, a woman. It all comes down to the imperfections of the feminine psyche. No woman can sustain a prolonged battle."[54] Later in life, however, after he had lost a rapid game against Polgar himself in 2002, Kasparov revised his opinion: "The Polgars showed that there are no inherent limitations to their aptitude—an idea that many male players refused to accept until they had unceremoniously been crushed by a twelve-year-old with a ponytail."

Keep in mind, Judit beat Kasparov only very rarely when they played, and a rapid game is very different from a classical time control game. Polgar was never world champion, and she was never a serious contender. Kasparov was world champion for something like 15 years.

>I don’t think this means you can make any child into a genius. They were already naturally very intelligent, and picked chess themselves because there was something about it that interested them. They learned all these skills as their brain was developing. As a result, they can play and win multiple chess games at once blinded or over the phone without ever seeing the board. Their brains truly are special. They’re good models for how gifted children should be taught

All strong (international master and beyond) chess players can do this. Every single one of them.

Your position is unsupported by facts laddie.

So so everyone is clear, when they refer to a female as grandmaster, it's a separate thing from the men.

Women literally have their own titles with much lower rating requirements.

This is never made clear by (((media))), but Judit Polgar was a legitimate super grandmaster, and not a WGM (woman grandmaster, a title with a significantly lower rating requirement, only available to women).

Her brain have been rewired for chess from early age by her father. They did brain scan on her and same area that is in charge of face recognition she uses for chess formations. You can show her pieces of any moment of any game for a few seconds and then she will be able to perfectly reproduce them letter on. Show her randomly places figures and she will do poorly as any regular Joe.
There was some show that took bunch of "geniuses" and have given them different intellectual /artistic tasks. She sucked at most of them. So mostly she seems to be one trick pony

>Her brain have been rewired for chess from early age by her father. They did brain scan on her and same area that is in charge of face recognition she uses for chess formations. You can show her pieces of any moment of any game for a few seconds and then she will be able to perfectly reproduce them letter on. Show her randomly places figures and she will do poorly as any regular Joe.

This is true for all players of sufficient strength.

They brain scanned anyone else or you are guessing?

I don't know about the brain scan, but you're referencing a well-known study which determined chess players of a sufficient calibre are capable of replicating complicated positions and piece placements PROVIDED they were reached through real positions, and not placed randomly.

All good players are also able to do such things as play blindfolded, and memorize every move of hundreds or thousands of games.

>Hmmmm, how can men compete?

How many times Kasparov defeated her?

Lots. And he was world champion for over a decade, while she was never world champion. Winning a rapid game is also very different from winning a classical game.

Women are not funny. Jew girl tries comedy, she even implements non stop Feminism and Marxism in her routine. Thumbs down.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=wUs9qObj9xU

She is ranked far below any of the top male players.

Nah, in her prime she was a top 10 player, and nit 'far below' anyone. She's far and away the best female player of all time though.

Good analysis, avoids a lot of nonsense conclusions that many people arrive at regarding the matter.

I assume you're mainly trolling, but Magnus Carlsen could probably crush 10 people at once in a blindfold chess960 simul. (randomized starting position, so no rote theory)
Calculation and tactical ability is way more important than theory even in regular chess.

>strongest female chess player of all time

>female

end of story

No I think most women are more intelligent than you. Mind you so are most fence posts.

>Extra! Extra! Read all about it! One woman good at one thing! Men eternally BTFO!

Translation: OP sucks nigger cock. Hard.

...

women are terrible chess players compared to men. i get on chess.com regularly seek out women opponents and pad my stats with easy wins because they are so bad. also chess nudes, the best nudes if you find one who happens to be a whore also.

Yes, but does she cooks and cleans like a perfect Hungarian woman? If not, then sucking dick or playing chess won't be enough.

u dont know how to cook and clean your own shit?

>jewish

Why should i do that if i get a woman? Relationship isn't all about coming sperm.

> However, according to Susan, Judit was not the sister with the most talent, explaining: "Judit was a slow starter, but very hard-working."
Which one, Sup Forums?

This, Paul Morphy beat 2 inexperienced people at once in 1858 while watching an opera. He had a servant tell him his opponents' moves so he could make his own.

Bell curve

Chess is like mental arithmetics, isn't really intelligence is like a calculator, unless you think a calculator is intelligent. Chess is autism, is binary, is for computers. Any war/economy/building pc strategy game has far far more possibilities.

then how good are you if you dont mind me asking? chess960 is superior of course but without a doubt the people who decry chess like you are (fischer being the exception) are almost always terrible players or people who dont olay at all. get good.

>There are also more low-intelligence men than women.
That's actually wrong.

physical strength >> muh IQ

even if she's by far smarter than me i can still be able to kill her with a single blow
literally 99% of women cannot compete with me in term of physical strength

In modern society that no longer matters. Maybe it's for the best that strong and dumb don't rule. I don't think the cunning and weak should rule from the shadows either.

>Chess is like mental arithmetics, isn't really intelligence is like a calculator, unless you think a calculator is intelligent. Chess is autism, is binary, is for computers.

Not really once you get out of the small time. High level chess players aren't actually "calculating all moves", it's just become a way of talking about it. You have sets of options that are aggressive and defensive and a set of known openers and finishers.

>Any war/economy/building pc strategy game has far far more possibilities.

Usually they have less, you're literally celebrating the vagueness of the strategy element. You see this play out over and over again in computer games; people have fun and talk about how rich the options are and a year later some autists will have scanned the game files and done the math to know what 2-3 builds, build orders, units, countries beat all the rest. Your strategy game is just a series of numbers too, and they generally "stop being fun" when the serious players discover exactly what those numbers are.

Which means what you think is better is just the fog of war hiding the machinery. In chess it's just not obscured.

This it only shows you can programm a half way intellegent human being (already above average) to be a chess grandmaster. It's not that extrem to become a chess grandmaster, if you spend enough time. Shitty bait thread, saged.

>In modern society that no longer matters.

Women don't do hard labour, they don't do dangerous jobs, they want more room for vacations or family time. It's not changing either.

"Modern society" tries to step around this by introducing laws designed to reach an imaginary "pure" 50/50 state in certain jobs (usually high paying ones with a chair and desk) and high level positions, based on the ideological axiom that the only reason for discrepancy must be patriarchy.

Dissent to this idea is starting to be a ticket to get fired, your research funding pulled or even jail time.

This is such a stupid post. It's a mental game that requires strong abstract thought, spatial recognition, memory, etc. Intelligence doesn't matter much for CLUB PLAYERS, but at the absolute top level, it's very much a factor. Same with any sport. Intelligence is relevant in literally EVERYTHING, if you want to excell.

960 kills all of the beauty of the game, and unless you're a fucking 2700 super GM then opening theory is not negatively impacting your gameplay experience. I got to 1960 USCF in Chess without ever knowing all that much about openings. I just studied tactics hard and really focused on my moves and planning.

Chess has less options because it has less units, less moves, less squares to move and so on. You can also turn off nation specific advantages in most games. Chess is to military strategy what a calculator/memory disk is to mathematics.

What retards don't understand is that genetic mutations can produce almost anything. The question is, how are women SUPPOSED to be. Even if 30% of women have a high iq, is this how things are supposed to be? The answer is no, women are not supposed to be more or equally intelligent to men.

>Not really once you get out of the small time. High level chess players aren't actually "calculating all moves", it's just become a way of talking about it. You have sets of options that are aggressive and defensive and a set of known openers and finishers.
This is only somewhat true. High level players are capable of deep, and long, calculation, and they do talk about calculation. Some players are famously calculation heavy (Kasparov, Tal), while others favoured positional consideration (Spassky, Fischer I think), but all great players could calculate very well.

This is so idiotic... even checkers is a deep enough game to be beyond the human mind (no human can ever play checkers 100% perfectly).

>It's a mental game that requires strong abstract thought, spatial recognition, memory, etc
Mental arithmetics.

That's a pretty nice fabricated story but it remains entirely within the realm of your fantasy. Literally not a single thing you stated is factually correct.

You just don't know what you're talking about. I'm sorry.

I suppose the positional thinking won out, at least with the chess people I've talked to. Maybe it's influenced by the fact that computers use calculating and can do so to win against high level play.

>Chess has less options because it has less units, less moves, less squares to move and so on.

You're talking about "computer strategy games" in the abstract which makes this a very nonspecific debate to have. If RTS like StarCraft wasn't continually tinkered with precisely because imbalances are found, there would be only a couple of ways it was played at high level. Only a couple of build orders that worked. Several units never used at all.

In most 4X games there are sets of builds that work better than all others and the rest is just RNG based luck.

> Chess is to military strategy what a calculator/memory disk is to mathematics.

You really picked the wrong game to make this analogy with, and you're inadvertently supporting endless horseshit in computer games that don't even attempt to start out balanced. Chess is completely balanced but for who makes the opening move, and even that's not always a benefit.

Is Catan a calculation game or strategy in your mind?

You are so fucking retarded that you can't even stop for a second and read your own fucking idiocy.
Not gonna spoon feed you but I'll give you a hint you fucking brainlet.
The keyword in your sentence is lacking an "s" at the end.

>even checkers is a deep enough game to be beyond the human mind
You are fucking subhuman retard. I didn't say anything about chess not being a game with many many possibilities. I just said that there are other games that offer far more possibilities.

>>With these three results, she completed the requirements for the International Master title; at the time, she had been the youngest player ever to have achieved this distinction.[42] Both Bobby Fischer and Garry Kasparov were 14 when they were awarded the title; Polgár was 12.

The best Polgar sister, as I understand, was ranked 32 in the world. So even the best female is 32nd.

Of course, they had some victories, but that does not mean anything. the offical ranking does. Also, they beat Fischer and Kasparov when those two men were older.

>I just said that there are other games that offer far more possibilities.

If a game offers 200 options and only 3 are viable winning options, how many options really mattered?

You keep talking about unit variety as if it means anything without knowing how the game actually breaks down. If you made a version of chess where every pawn had a new hat, but it never mattered, is it a more complex game?

I've been studying how human mind computes I can say you that not arithmetics or playing chess are strong signs of human intelligence. Scientific Creativity>IQ tests>Chess>Mental arithmetics.
Your reality is formed in your brain through the signals society sends to you. Chess is portrayed always as theoretical physics level cognitive struggle. And it's not that's why machines are better than humans.

>a rapid game
men BTFO irrevocably

Kasparov was way better
losing once/winning once does not imply Superiority
win record vs lose record does

you retarded, mate? where are the other female chess prodigies making a name for themselves in men's (actually, open) tournaments? there are none. or do you claim an unique case isn't an outlier?

/thread

That's lefty logic for you.
They base their worldviews on exceptions and not the rule.

>Imagine being this retarded

Chess is a not a good predictor of intelligence anyway. Even if she isn't cheating, which she probably is, that doesn't in any way indicate that she is a smart person.

>I suppose the positional thinking won out, at least with the chess people I've talked to.
Maybe they're not that good? As a near-expert player I make use of pretty solid calculation; it's why I'm better than most club players.

Did you quote the wrong person or something? I have no idea what you're talking about.

You understand it wrong. She was ranked within the top 10 for some of her career.

Men are better at ballet as well, and they would probably be better at cheerleading if that wasn't immensely gay. Men are also better chefs, fashion designers, tailors, and pretty much everything else.

>As a near-expert player

What Elo rating?

how long will magnus remain at the top? he seems to be in a league of his own desu

1960. 'Expert' is an official classification you get when you achieve 2000 elo rating. I wouldn't consider myself anywhere near an expert beyond that specific classification. I'm not a great player.

He'll be at the top for some time, but he could lose any WCC match. He nearly lost to Karjakin last time.

Sage and report troll threads.

>people still falling for shitty bait
nu/pol/ is pathetic. sage

>Game complexity: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_complexity
State space complexity at least is far higher for any pc game. Tree complexity is also higher for well balanced games

show the list of top ranked chess players in the world. how many are men and how many are women? are you really this stupid?