IQ and Chess The Real Relationship

There have been and still are ongoing discussions on whether IQ is connected to chess or not. I shall, in this article, state my hypothesis on this
matter and provide as much proof as I can. If there are any arguments against my case, I expect them to have some form of proof as I here provide.
Here is the breakdown of my article:

I. Hypothesis
II. IQ
A. Is IQ equivalent to intelligence?
B. The breakdown of IQ according to its developers
III. Chess
A. How the brain works with chess
B. Potential chess rating
IV. Chess and IQ
A. Study of chess and IQ
B. Which factors of IQ correlate with chess and the brain?
C. IQ level and chess rating specifics
V. Likely Conclusion

I. Hypothesis
There is a definite correlation between IQ (intelligence quotient) and general chess rating / level of chess play. This correlation can be
attributed to several different factors which will be discussed shortly. The clearest correlation will be obvious in a particular chess rating range /
group of players and with a particular IQ range.

II. IQ
IQ, or intelligence quotient, is a number that measures certain aspects that are considered directly relevant to intelligence. Researchers
have spent many years attempting to prepare a test that can measure intelligence, but even the definition of true "intelligence" is debatable. Thus,
there is no real measure of intelligence. A general intelligence factor (g) may be slightly more accurate in terms of measuring intelligence, but is
still not close enough to measure overall "intelligence". Why? There are many different factors, including the physical state of a person; i.e. a blind
person will score lower on an IQ test because he / she lacks the visual aspect required in the test; a person who hasn't learned to read because they
cannot afford to, etc., may have the potential of being geniuses, but not the resources.
A. Is IQ equivalent to intelligence?
Absolutely not. As aforementioned, there is no truly accurate way to measure intelligence; IQ measures only particular aspects of a person's
intelligence; aspects such as memorization of facts, talents in fields (such as art and music) which cannot always be measured as "good" or "bad"
because of different tastes, and others are not included in an IQ test.
In addition, it is possible to increase any given IQ with practice - since the IQ test focuses on certain aspects of intelligence, any person can
do exercises that improve those aspects and leave all other aspects of intelligence untouched. Thus, someone may master the aspects in IQ tests,
but still have no factual knowledge - is that person to be considered a genius? In general, that person would be considered a savant (amazingly
talented in one aspect of life that requires powerful brain usage, but deficient in other activities due to a lack of brain power for those neglected
aspects).
Thus, one should never consider IQ to be a true, final measure of intelligence. It simply measures a relatively small given portion of
intelligence.
B. The breakdown of IQ according to its developers
One of the original and most developed models of the IQ test is the Stanford-Binet model (Stanford revised Binets original version of this test
to form this model of the test). The most modern version involves, generally, the following aspects:
1. Knowledge (reasoning and applying facts)
2. Fluid reasoning (problem-solving and patterns)
3. Quantitative reasoning (mathematics)
4. Visual-spatial processing (general patterns, seeing larger pictures)
5. Working memory (used for short-term application of knowledge)
6. Nonverbal IQ (includes patterns and other problems without words)
7. Verbal IQ (comprehension, including vocabulary)
Those are the main aspects tested in most IQ tests, to some extent. Generally, we could see that patterns, reasoning, problem-solving
(including mathematical), and comprehension of words is necessary to master an IQ test. Is this not but a simplified SAT test plus some pattern
recognition? And have we not been told that the SAT does not measure intelligence, but simply how well you will do in mathematics and English
courses in the first year of college?

Thus, the IQ test can be seen as a measure of the ability to comprehend English, mathematics, the ability to make connections when doing
problems in the aforementioned subjects, and recognize patterns and apply an associated comprehension of them to complete the patterns.
Now, we shall explore exactly what happens when you play chess and we shall soon be able to connect IQ with chess, based on those
processes.

NOTE: This part is heavily based on http://www.assess.nelson.com/pdf/sb5-asb1.pdf

III. Chess
Chess is basically a battle on the board. What do you need in order to be able to play chess? You must be able to:
1. See the board
2. Know how the pieces move
3. Correlate the movements of the pieces with each other
4. Use the correlation of pieces to perform a certain objective
5. Use a set of objectives to help you perform one ultimate objective (i.e. checkmate)
Let us explore how the brain could possibly take on these seemingly incredible tasks.
A. How the brain works with chess
The initial task the brain encounters when first seeing chess pieces is the understanding of what those pieces are and what they do. When
one first sees a chess board with pieces, there is utter confusion and the brain may signal the person to give up but the person winds up
associating these pieces with their respective positions on a board and how those pieces move.
This is done when the eye registers signals about the positions of each piece and how the pieces are associated. The newly established visual
signals are transferred to the brain, which attempts to make sense of the board and pieces via neuron connections. These connections use previous
experiences and memories, seen as similar to those found a chessboard, to help a person comprehend the positions of pieces on the board. Thus, a
person, subconsciously, is able to associate these pieces with each other. Next, to learn how the pieces move, a person must be able to connect
these symbols / pieces to a particular change in position. Thus, the brain uses further neurons, already connected with the initial neuron
connections used to understand the original positions of the pieces, to connect with memories and experiences that involved connecting symbols
with functions (i.e. waving a hand signals a greeting or a farewell). Thus, the brain is able to connect the functions of the chess pieces with the
pieces themselves. Finally, the brain connects the functions with the original positions of the pieces. Therefore, without actually paying attention
to the symbols representing positions or changes in position, the brain is able to connect initial positions with changes in position. As a person
learns how to change the positions of chess pieces, new neuron connections associate with the older neuron connections used for the original
change in position for chess pieces. A person is therefore able to associate new positions with similar changes in position.
Next, the brain must be able to associate the functions of the pieces with each other. This, of course, comes after the brain is able to
master the positional changes of the pieces from any position on the board. At this point, visuals [of the board] are not necessary. The brain has
already made enough connections to establish the visual-spatial relationships of the pieces and their associated functions; now, the brain can
attempt to connect the functions of the pieces and focus them onto different positional spots established by memory. Thus, the brain is able to
create combinations involving more than one piece in order to create an objective that focuses on particular positions on the board. This is how
chess players ultimately train themselves they begin to make more connections that allow them to logically see their combinations and responses
to their combinations. This all done in the mind, and not actually on the board (at least not in OTB / over-the-board chess). It is obvious that
playing out combinations directly on a board would make this process easier, but training directly within the mind, without the necessity of visual
stimuli that represent the pieces, gives more difficult training that helps the neurons connect and allows for improvement of the game based on the
connections of these neurons.

NOTE: The previous three paragraphs were based solely on my analysis of learning based on my
knowledge of neuron connections. The true validity of this information is disputable, but nevertheless,
my analysis should be roughly accurate.

It is clear that, at some point, every professional chess player thinks deeply about moves within their minds. But is my claim that
visualization of chess pieces is a luxury when thinking about moves and combinations true? You may want to test this out, and do so thus:
visualize a chess board with all the pieces completely set up then play several moves in your head. You should notice that your chessboard and
pieces dont seem to have a particular shape / color / size, or even dimensions that connect to how you see them on the chessboard. You seem to
simply know where the pieces go and how they move without having to actually picture a knight or a King. This is extremely normal; in fact, an
account of this experience has been described by a person who plays blind chess: http://www.notebook.kolchenko.com/intelligence/blindchess-and-working-memory. I must note that the points I make in this paragraph on based on this persons account and on my realization that I
have nearly the same experience as this person whilst playing blind chess, or even when thinking about moves.
Now, one may be able to understand how blind people are likewise able to play chess and improve at it. Once a person learns the pieces and
how they move, the brain takes over and replaces the pieces with their directly associated movements / functions and connects with each other to
achieve several goals: capturing pieces, gaining advantages, etc., to ultimately achieve checkmate.
It should now be clear that initial visual stimuli are absolutely necessary for a person to be able to play chess. Next, it should be clear that
visual stimuli are not necessary for a person to improve at chess. Finally, it is necessary to note that non-visual improvement cannot be achieved
without initial visual stimuli.
B. Potential chess rating
This factor of chess has been widely discussed over many years, and may never be truly resolved. Nevertheless, it must be noted that, since
the brain can always continue to make connections between neurons, rating can be close to infinity. It must also be noted that rating is only a
comparison to other players, and, if seen only as a comparison, then rating is just a number. But let us see rating as a number that represents
ability (which it does, to a reasonable extent).
We must now consider that a chess rating of infinity can be reached if a person devotes his or her life to chess, practices nonstop, and has
enough of an ability to connect previous chess experiences with new ones in order to improve to an infinite extent. But this is not the case
everybody can have limits to amount of connections they can make and to amount of effort they will put into chess!
Since improvement in chess involves using short-term and long-term memory, and the knowledge of patterns and their associated
connections, people may not be able to make extremely complex connections involving these patterns. In other words, after making an extremely
large amount of connections, a person may find that they are unable to see beyond a certain point limited by their short-term visual-spatial
memory. They can think ahead approximately 20 moves or so, and finally stop because any more thinking is far too difficult for them to fathom. The
brain is unable to make any more connections without an effort that a majority of humans are unable to conceive. Thus, a person may reach their
peak level of play and their maximum rating. Thus, they reach a rating that may be considered close to their potential rating.
So, how should potential chess rating be defined? Potential rating would be the maximum rating a person can reach after making as many
visual-spatial connections as he or she possibly can. After an incredible amount of connections, a person would be unable to progress without effort
that could possibly cause the brain to overwork and thus create imbalances in short-term and long-term memory.

NOTE: the analysis of potential chess rating is based on my predictions based on my knowledge of
neuron connections and the limits an average brain can achieve, based on factors directly related to
chess improvement.
Now that we understand what factors can contribute to a maximum / potential chess rating, we may be able to make a distinct connection
between chess rating and IQ.

IV. Chess and IQ

It should now be clarified that IQ involves several factors [which do not sum up to total intelligence] including: visual comprehension (of
patterns, etc.), understanding of English to a limited extent, understanding of mathematics, and the ability to connect these factors to solve
problems based on each of the three aforementioned areas. Another clarification, for chess rating: a limited ability to make further connections
regarding combinations in chess can lead to a maximum or near-potential chess rating. Now, lets comprehend a connection of chess and IQ based
on previous studies.
A. Study of chess and IQ
A 1979-1983 study, described in an article by Dr. Peter Dauvergne in July 2000 focused on how chess affects the development of children.
These children were made to study chess for a particular amount of time: 60-64 hours over a period of 32 weeks. Chess increased the childrens

creative thinking significantly; creativity is not a factor of IQ tests, but some creativity may be important in recognizing complex patterns,
sometimes seen on IQ tests.
A 1980s Venezuelan study of 4000 children, also described in Dauvergnes article, showed a general increase in IQ (the IQ test used the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale, which has a direct connection to the Stanford-Binet IQ test models). Thus, it is clear that chess has the ability to
improve childrens intelligence, including creative (part of which is the visual-spatial factor, including pattern recognition), mathematical and even
English factors. How could chess possibly improve English skills? The young students learned to make connections based on chess moves; as
previously mentioned, further neuron connections could be made, based on previous memories and experiences (in this case chess experiences) to
help students connect different aspects of what they read in English courses / texts. Thus, the ability to make connections improves the overall IQ
score.

NOTE: the previous two paragraphs were based

onhttp://www.auschess.org.au/articles/chessmind/htm
Now we have understood, through a valid source, that chess can improve IQ. But since this is true, cannot consistent chess improvement
cause IQ to indefinitely rise? Doubtfully so: first of all, we must consider that the subjects tested were children; children have a much greater
potential to connect neurons, because they are yet relatively uneducated and have much more space to connect between neurons. They lack the
experience to have made more than a few connections, and thus are able to learn (through these neuron connections) much quicker than adults!
Children can consistently improve at chess and thus improve their IQ to a certain extent. At some point, their maximum ability to connect visualspatial memories will decline. This is due to the increasing number of new problems and potential positions in chess (mentioned in Dauvergnes
article): at some point, the brain will only be able to connect previous memories to solve one problem, and then be unable to use the new
memories to connect to a new, totally different chess problem. The brain will not see many similarities between the previous position and the
current one (except in rare situations) because this position has been connected to a more basic memory in chess. Thus, a formerly created
connection is reinforced, but new connections are limited.

NOTE: the previous paragraph consisted of my analysis based on Dauvergnes article and my knowledge
of neuron connections.
Now that we have established a study of chess and understood why maximum ratings can truly be reached (even in children), lets fully
connect chess rating and IQ.
B. Which factors of IQ correlate with chess and the brain?
It should be quite clear that chess involves visual-spatial processing (as aforementioned several times in the article), some quantitative
reasoning (i.e. recognizing the value of pieces, calculating some combinations that lead to advantage in terms of material), working memory (used
to strengthen the brains ability for visual-spatial processing and comprehending current positions), fluid reasoning (recognizing and understanding
patterns, especially of individual pieces and pierces working together), nonverbal IQ (further understanding patterns), and knowledge (applying
previous experiences from long-term memory to the current situation presented in working memory / short-term memory).
Thus, chess uses six out of seven factors of the modern IQ test model. It is obvious that not all possible combinations of quantitative
reasoning, fluid reasoning, etc., used in chess are also used in IQ tests; nevertheless, chess does incorporate a significant enough amount of IQ test
factors to have a direct connection to IQ. There is no clear measurement of exactly how connected chess is with IQ, but, upon seeing IQ test
models, rough estimates can be made. If the brain does, indeed, use connections from IQ tests and from chess, there could be an incredible
connection of 0.5 (50% connection). There is no direct basis for this estimate; it is, as previously mentioned, simply a very rough estimate based on
the amount of factors that are connected between chess and IQ, and the relevance of chess and IQ factors and potential questions on IQ tests. The
connection between chess and IQ can even be partially validated based on aforementioned studies showing that chess improves IQ.
Now, we can deduce that improving our general strength in factors such as visual-spatial reasoning, quantitative reasoning, etc., could
improve our chess abilities and thus our potential chess rating significantly. But our ability to improve chess rating and even IQ diminishes as the
brain makes more and more connections and is eventually able to only strengthen previously made connections (as mentioned before). Thus, a
more specific conclusion can be made to validate the real relationship between IQ and chess.
C. IQ level and chess rating specifics
It has been argued that maximum chess rating can be estimated through the equation Elo ~ (10 x IQ) + 1000 (which is considering intense
study and practice of chess), according to the Levitt equation. An explanation of this equation can be found by Levitt himself on this
website: http://www.jlevitt.dircon.co.uk/iq.htm. There is nodirect basis to this equation, but according to the definite connection seen between
chess and IQ, this could be a valid potential study.
We must take that many people on this website have claimed that their IQ is high and chess rating low, or vice versa. But there is no proof
that these people have yet reached their maximum or potential chess ratings or maximum or potential IQs, since both can be improved. It must be

strongly noted that there may be a limit that a human can reach in chess rating and IQ if they put enough effort into achieving these feats. Only
when these feats have accomplished and noted, can an utterly accurate study be done; with this study, it may be probable that chess rating will be
proven directly related to IQ.
Finally, we must comprehend that a majority of the improvement that takes place in chess occurs at the beginners level. Going from not
comprehending even the most basic concepts of chess to making relatively simple combinations of several moves is an incredibly huge change, if
you consider the differences. From not knowing chess to being able to perform these feats, people change from chess ratings of nearly 0 to ratings
of possibly 1800+; this is far above half of the highest rating ever reached. Thus, it can be argued that a majority of IQ connections are used in the
improvements of beginners.
Now, we could look at the very basic learning of chess. Most connections for learning chess will be made when learning the positions and
functions of the pieces; a large amount of connections will also be made when making simple combinations. Thus, a large amount of factors in IQ
will be used for people rated between approximately 600 and 1400 (600 being the people learning the positions / functions of pieces and 1400s
being those learning and comprehending combinations of 2-3 moves or even slightly more).
Next, we must understand that large differences in IQ will usually result in large differences in the abilities to master the several aspects of
IQ tests (except in the cases of savants or other similar phenomena). Thus, a person with a maximum IQ of 60 will have much more trouble with
chess than a person with a maximum IQ of 140. The person with the 60 IQ is more likely to lack the ability to combine the strengths of several
aspects of the IQ test and connect them to chess. For example, lets use simple mathematical formulas to calculate potential partitions of this
persons IQ (although this should never be done in professional IQ studies): using the six factors for chess, lets partition 10 IQ points to every one of
those six factors. Next, lets partition 20 points to all seven factors (including the factor not used in chess) to the person with the IQ of 140. We can
now compare the partitions: the person with the higher IQ has at least twice as many points in factors that involve chess as the person with the
lower IQ. Thus, the person with the higher IQ immediately has a much higher potential to improve in chess because of the higher ability to perform
in the aforementioned abilities. The person with the lower IQ has a much lower potential because of the more limited abilities.
Now, we must once again take note that IQ can demonstrate a persons potentialability to master chess; in addition, we must note that the
subjects I have given have their likely maximum IQs determined. The person with an IQ of 60 may defeat the person of IQ 140 if the person with
the lower IQ has played chess consistently over many years and the person with the higher IQ has just begun learning chess. Nevertheless, given
equal effort and time, the person with the higher IQ will generally be able to overpower the person of lower IQ at chess.
Having said this, it is clear that differences of IQ in the range of approximately 60 to 140 will give a fairly large margin for fair
differentiation of chess ratings and abilities. In addition, a fair range of chess rating (600 to 1400) should be decent enough to monitor the
relationship between general IQ and general chess rating / ability and associated progression.
In other words, the largest, most accurate connections between chess [rating] and IQ will be seen with an IQ range of 60 to 140 and chess
rating range of 600 to 1400.

V. Likely Conclusion
Based on all of the information that I have presented, I can conclude that IQ and chess rating and ability have a direct relationship. The
most accurate relationship can be found when:
1) Maximum or near-maximum IQ is found or calculated
2) Maximum or near-maximum chess rating data has been collected and proven as a pattern
3) Subjects consistently practice on improving IQ and chess abilities
4) Maximum IQ ranges between 60 and 140
5) Maximum chess rating ranges between 600 and 1400
Since extremely high or extremely low IQs and chess ratings can be inaccurate (although researchers are consistently working on improving
the accuracy of tests to indicate these extremes), a more detailed and accurate correlation between chess rating / ability and IQ may not be
established readily. But since a majority of players would, at some point, fall in the ranges of IQ and chess rating aforementioned, the general
correlation between chess and IQ should be found.

Based on this general information, progress involving chess and general intelligence (or at least some factors of intelligence) can be further
determined. This could lead to developments to help children increase their abilities to deal with problems outside of chess and IQ tests. I hope
that my hypothesis and analysis has solved some long-argued problems and can lead to these developments of intelligence.

Thank you very much for reading my article. Please leave comments; if you argue against my points, please use some references. If you wish to
provide extra and new information supporting my points, also provide some evidence.

References Cited:

http://www.assess.nelson.com/pdf/sb5-asb1.pdf (In part II-B)

http://www.notebook.kolchenko.com/intelligence/blind-chess-and-working-memory (In part III-A)
http://www.auschess.org.au/articles/chessmind.htm (In part IV-A)
http://www.jlevitt.dircon.co.uk/iq.htm (In part IV-C)