Is there a relationship between our lichess rating and our intelligence ?

Yes

If you care about your Lichess rating, you are not intelligent.

@Bellendo said in #21:
> Yes
>
> If you care about your Lichess rating, you are not intelligent.

You're back bellendo , where you been good to hear from you xxx

My intelligence percentile is 99%. Any questions?

This is purely anecdotal, in being based upon one person's testimony, mine. I once had my IQ measured: 154; this usually means talented but not a genius. My LiChess rating: 1602 at absolute top, lots of time spent in mid 1300s to mid 1400s. This means I can beat a beginner but am otherwise quite undistinguished as a player.

I have always been skeptical about the spatial-chess connection. Chess players have, of course, become very accustomed to the use of the term, space, in connection with chess positions, but I wonder if that usage has much in common with the usage of the term by IQ test designers. As I remember it, at one time, it was common to ask questions about such things as the shape that one would get after folding:

*****
*......*
*****************
*......*......*......*......*
*****************
*......*
*****

I suppose that such skill might help in a battle against Khan Noonien Singh, but it doesn’t seem to me to have much to do with the space issue important to chess players.
I think that chess and some other activities would reward those who are willing to explore and able to keep track of what is discovered while exploring. After 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 Bc4 Bc5 5 Ng5 Ne5 6 Bxf7+ Nxf7 7 Nxf7 Kxf7, 8 Qh5+ is a good idea, but, after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 d4 exd4 4 Bc4 Bc5 5 Ng5 Ne5 6 Bxf7+ Nxf7, 7 Qh5 is not such a good idea.
In chess and other activities, it is also valuable to be flexible about modifying one’s ideas. At one time, Lasker thought that Black was obliged to play 5...Nxe4 after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 O-O, but he later became convinced that 5...Be7 was a reasonable alternative.
I suspect that IQ tests are only poor measures of some of these valuable qualities.

@coledavis said in #24:
> No chanse buddy

Yes and no.

Intelligence its just a measure of knowledge. So the more knowledge you have, the more intelligent you are.

And since many times knowledge can be combined, it creates more knowledge when you understand the result of the combination.

For example. If you learn the concept of a discovery check.
Then you learn the concept of a pin.
Then in a certain position, you realize you can pin the opposite king with one of your pieces instead of his own. It leads to a discovery attack when you remove the pinning piece, usually with a capture. So you get like a windmill with a rook and a bishop.

So, the more knowledge you have in chess, obviously it is going to transform into more rating.

However, since intelligence depends on knowledge, if you are a GM, but have no knowledge of physics, you are gonna suck at physics. In other words, being good at chess means you are good at chess. Nothing else, nothing more.

"... The level at which one plays is governed by a number of vague and poorly understood factors. The first is what one might term 'natural talent'. ... It is my belief that ... considerable improvement is possible [(for most players)] with appropriate education, training and practice. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)

Magnus Carlsen has put it on record that his father is much, much smarter than he is.

Yet Magnus is able to play at a competitive level blindfolded, something most individuals cannot even fathom.

His endurance is unwavering.

One would thing Magnus could be a fantastic researcher in the fields of science, math, physics, philosophy... if he wanted to.

But he didn't. He wanted to play chess, and says his dad is smarter than he is.

I think competitive chess players tend to score high on traditional visual and memory IQ tests, but I don't know if applied intelligence will match. After all, they decided to dedicate their lives to something as worthless as chess.

Certainly we woul expect that those people with a higher IQ tend to play better chess, other things being equal. But my research says that chess doesn't make you more intelligent, it doesn't increase IQ with any statistical significance, what it does do is help you with lower level skills such as powers of concentration, which will of course help you perform better at scholastic math and the like.

edit: I have also read that learning chess gives you more confidence in using the intelligence that you have, at least for adolscents.

No, not learning chess I should have said success at chess increases confidence, which seems obvious.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4126200/

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6744885/