Men are better at Chess then Woman Debunked

[Raze]

3 hours ago, integral said:

I not citing studies, I know how learning works, IQ has nothing to do with the problem. Woman drop out rates are higher then mens so that indicates a motivation problem, where is that coming from? Woman are literally not showing up as children to play and learn, why? 

If we got more woman to play the game and keep playing it we will get more GM woman players.

--- Edit

I've personally played against woman who where clearly highly emotionally unstable and childish overall still manage to play fantastic chess and get a higher rating then me. This stuff is not simple to understand. 

The point is , that doesn’t debunk men being better at chess. Hard work plays a role, but baseline intelligence is a factor. Lack of participation alone doesn’t explain it.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Raze

[integral]

54 minutes ago, Raze said:

but baseline intelligence is a factor

How do you know what baseline intelligence is good for chess?

If you listen to Magnus and Kasparov speak there not that intelegent. If you listen to bobby fisher speak that will really blow your mind of how "unintelegent" someone can be and still be good at chess.

The measurement of intelligence is not that simple and from knowing how chess works i know woman can do it. 

Edited August 18, 2023 by integral

[mr_engineer]

15 hours ago, integral said:

Id like to start out by saying I can destroy Andrew Tate at chess and i didnt have a father who was a grandmaster to hold my hand and pass down his epigenetics to me. lol Actually I can pick a random human and train them in 1 year to be better then Tate (who has a rating of 1600). Hes that bad. 1600 is joke rating that the majority of woman can obtain. So Tates gender bias here as a man is ridiculous.

What's your rating? Mine is 1800-1900 chess.com. (I crossed 2000 once lol) 

[Raze]

4 hours ago, integral said:

How do you know what baseline intelligence is good for chess?

If you listen to Magnus and Kasparov speak there not that intelegent. If you listen to bobby fisher speak that will really blow your mind of how "unintelegent" someone can be and still be good at chess.

The measurement of intelligence is not that simple and from knowing how chess works i know woman can do it. 

There are many different factors to intelligence. You can be very gifted in one area but heavily lacking in others. Men are more likely to be in the higher distribution in areas that relate to chess performance. Therefore, overall there will be more advanced male chess players. 

[integral]

48 minutes ago, Raze said:

There are many different factors to intelligence. You can be very gifted in one area but heavily lacking in others. Men are more likely to be in the higher distribution in areas that relate to chess performance. Therefore, overall there will be more advanced male chess players. 

That did not explain the exact intelligences that make someone good at chess, it only reiterated your world view. 

Judit polgar was part of a family of 3 sisters whos father thought them chess at a young age, Judit reached a top rating of 2735 that is 100 points away from Magnus Carlsons top rating of 2882. She achieved that rating is a male dominated player pool. 

Seeing how 1-3% of chess players are woman we can clearly see that if more woman played chess we would have some amazing top performing chess players emerging. 

This clearly shows that what people think is "male intelligence" is there inability to understand what intelligence is and a stereotype gender bais projected onto it. 

"Irrational" emotionally immature woman can still be good at chess. This should shatter any concept people think intelligence is and how it applies to chess. 

Edited August 18, 2023 by integral

[integral]

34 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

What's your rating? Mine is 1800-1900 chess.com. (I crossed 2000 once lol) 

Thats pretty good! Is that in the 3 to 5 minute pool? I got to around 2200-2400

[Leo Gura]

Fewer women will be interested in chess than men. Just like fewer men will be interested in ballet than women.

It's mostly a function of personality alignment.

Chess doesn't align well with the feminine temperment, just like hunting does not.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Scholar]

16 hours ago, integral said:

The issue is woman have a seperate chess league with a separate rating system that is significatly easier then the mens division. The main purpose is to get more woman interested in playing chess. 

What will likely happen is a trans-person will become the top female chess player and its a bad look. Again it comes down to statistics, there are way to many men.

This is unlikely if women and men actually are on par cognitively speaking. The pool of transgender individuals who play chess is far smaller than the pool of female chess players, therefore if both are on par, it should be very unlikely for transgenders to outcompete females.

[Princess Arabia]

Don't know if this is related to topic but I just want to say, my mom didn't go to school, or I think she dropped out real early, all 4 of her kids did and all of us did real well. 2 above average and 2 not above average but still pretty good. All graduated high school. She made sure of that. Point is, we all used to play Scrabble growing up. My mom and all her bright educated school kids. My mom used to beat the shit out of all of us in Scrabble. She knew the technique and how to maneuver the game without a high school education. If you know Scrabble you know you need to have a basic knowledge of spelling and 2/3 letter words. 

So, I don't think it's intelligence but how well you know the game, the strategies involved and how much you've practiced. I know Scrabble is different from chess, but it's not that far apart in terms of what is needed to play. I know nothing about chess only checkers, so I can't comment on the chess game. 

I see Integral's point, tho, if more women played more women would be at the top as the ratio is not balanced.

[Scholar]

14 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Don't know if this is related to topic but I just want to say, my mom didn't go to school, or I think she dropped out real early, all 4 of her kids did and all of us did real well. 2 above average and 2 not above average but still pretty good. All graduated high school. She made sure of that. Point is, we all used to play Scrabble growing up. My mom and all her bright educated school kids. My mom used to beat the shit out of all of us in Scrabble. She knew the technique and how to maneuver the game without a high school education. If you know Scrabble you know you need to have a basic knowledge of spelling and 2/3 letter words. 

So, I don't think it's intelligence but how well you know the game, the strategies involved and how much you've practiced. I know Scrabble is different from chess, but it's not that far apart in terms of what is needed to play. I know nothing about chess only checkers, so I can't comment on the chess game. 

I see Integral's point, tho, if more women played more women would be at the top as the ratio is not balanced.

Well, let's assume for a second that this was true and due to biological factors:

 

And let's say this translates to games like chess. If this was the case, would that bother you? If so, why would that bother you? And then, why does any of this even matter that much? If it was true that men are more likely to be in the lowest percentile of intelligence, but also in the highest percentile of intelligence, do you think that would be bad?

[Danioover9000]

@integral  I have a stellar rating of...1350-1400, although in time of recording it's dipping towards 1300.

[Danioover9000]

@Raze

3 hours ago, Raze said:

There are many different factors to intelligence. You can be very gifted in one area but heavily lacking in others. Men are more likely to be in the higher distribution in areas that relate to chess performance. Therefore, overall there will be more advanced male chess players. 

   Obviously there's like millions of types of intelligences out there, we have about 9 main types of intelligence namely: Existential, philosophical, nature, intrapersonal, interpersonal, kinesthetic, auditory, visual, mathematical, and linguistic. 

[Danioover9000]

Just now, Danioover9000 said:

@Raze

   Obviously there's like millions of types of intelligences out there, we have about 9 main types of intelligence namely: Existential, philosophical, nature, intrapersonal, interpersonal, kinesthetic, auditory, visual, mathematical, and linguistic. 

   On top of that, there's also specialized and general intelligences.

[Danioover9000]

@integral

18 hours ago, integral said:

The issue is woman have a seperate chess league with a separate rating system that is significatly easier then the mens division. The main purpose is to get more woman interested in playing chess. 

What will likely happen is a trans-person will become the top female chess player and its a bad look. Again it comes down to statistics, there are way to many men.

Ok in this case it still makes sense, because its a man having a "womans title". But because of how rare it is they should just let it be.

   I just don't understand why the FIDE just now ban trans from playing chess. What's the argument? That because trans are taking drugs that somehow enhances cognitive performance, therefore cheating, therefore we must ban trans from chess? Please help me find a convincing argument for why FIDE did this? It's just bizarre...

[Danioover9000]

@Scholar

2 hours ago, Scholar said:

This is unlikely if women and men actually are on par cognitively speaking. The pool of transgender individuals who play chess is far smaller than the pool of female chess players, therefore if both are on par, it should be very unlikely for transgenders to outcompete females.

   Would open tournaments be a good solution to this trans playing chess problem then? Especially considering the very low numbers of trans in a sport, to consider making a category where just trans compete with trans is difficult because of the very low numbers, so wouldn't it be good if there's an open tournament like in chess, or any other game board events? It's not like in combat sports, it's just mental games being played.

[Danioover9000]

@Princess Arabia

1 hour ago, Princess Arabia said:

Don't know if this is related to topic but I just want to say, my mom didn't go to school, or I think she dropped out real early, all 4 of her kids did and all of us did real well. 2 above average and 2 not above average but still pretty good. All graduated high school. She made sure of that. Point is, we all used to play Scrabble growing up. My mom and all her bright educated school kids. My mom used to beat the shit out of all of us in Scrabble. She knew the technique and how to maneuver the game without a high school education. If you know Scrabble you know you need to have a basic knowledge of spelling and 2/3 letter words. 

So, I don't think it's intelligence but how well you know the game, the strategies involved and how much you've practiced. I know Scrabble is different from chess, but it's not that far apart in terms of what is needed to play. I know nothing about chess only checkers, so I can't comment on the chess game. 

I see Integral's point, tho, if more women played more women would be at the top as the ratio is not balanced.

   The ratio isn't even balanced as in context chess is known to be more a male type of game, AKA the emphasis on logical thinking and sequences in a chess game, recording and logically understanding blunders or inaccuracies. Pretty male centric view, so common sense being that the average will be men more than women competing. I'd also like to see more women play as @integral suggests, would love to see more intuitive play styles in chess as I play mainly from feeling the chess moves and the images in my mind. Like literally if I'm in a bad move my rating goes down, and when I'm feeling happy and creative, my rating goes up. I'd like to see more that play style.

[Danioover9000]

@Scholar

1 hour ago, Scholar said:

Well, let's assume for a second that this was true and due to biological factors:

 

And let's say this translates to games like chess. If this was the case, would that bother you? If so, why would that bother you? And then, why does any of this even matter that much? If it was true that men are more likely to be in the lowest percentile of intelligence, but also in the highest percentile of intelligence, do you think that would be bad?

   Mainly it would be bad because if you're a woman, in a biological female body, you're stuck in that body LITERALLY. This ain't Alternate Carbon yet, where you can switch your consciousness disk onto another body.

[Scholar]

9 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Scholar

   Would open tournaments be a good solution to this trans playing chess problem then? Especially considering the very low numbers of trans in a sport, to consider making a category where just trans compete with trans is difficult because of the very low numbers, so wouldn't it be good if there's an open tournament like in chess, or any other game board events? It's not like in combat sports, it's just mental games being played.

From what I know the "male" tournaments are basically open, so anyone can participate. It's just that women have a specific seperate protected category.

3 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Scholar

   Mainly it would be bad because if you're a woman, in a biological female body, you're stuck in that body LITERALLY. This ain't Alternate Carbon yet, where you can switch your consciousness disk onto another body.

But the same is true for the men. If you look at the graph, men will also dominate in the most disadvantaged group, namely people with very low IQ.

Sure, the world is unfair in that sense, but I would say being a human in general already is such a privilege in most cases that the difference between male and female are basically negligible.

You have to remember, you are basically just arbitrarily looking at this in terms of male vs female, but you can subdivide groups of individuals into infinite categories, from which then you can evaluate which one has it worse than the other.

[kylan11]

As you know Jordan Peterson says tons of bullshit when he speaks about political topics, but as a psychologist he explained this in a way I found very helpful.

It goes like this: Men are interested in things, women are interested in people.

More accurately, I'm talking about feminine and masculine traits. Now obviously there are women with masculine traits and viceversa, so this is a simplistic generalization. We need both in a functional society.

This is why nurses/social workers/teachers are mostly women while the engineering field is mostly men. Trying to artificially eliminate those differences and make every profession or human endeavor a perfect 50/50 ignores this truth and is actually a loss to democracy and freedom.

It's not surprising that chess, being a "thing", attracts mostly men. There is definitely a socially constructed component to some professions/activities being historically dominated by one gender, but keep in mind that we have (theoretically!) achieved gender equality in the civilized world fairly recently so the overall culture will need time to adjust. And this takes many generations.

Edited August 18, 2023 by kylan11

[integral]

51 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@integral

   I just don't understand why the FIDE just now ban trans from playing chess. What's the argument? That because trans are taking drugs that somehow enhances cognitive performance, therefore cheating, therefore we must ban trans from chess? Please help me find a convincing argument for why FIDE did this? It's just bizarre...

Ah no there is a misunderstanding, they banned Tras-men from getting a Woman Chess Title. They can still get a regular Master or IM or GM title. The idea being a if you identify as a man then your not a woman basicly so why would you get a Womans Chess title? Trans-people can play chess, there not banned. 

Edited August 18, 2023 by integral