>>12205467>By playing games against them that rely on strategy.Nice post, shitcunt. Being good at chess is controlled by the number of times you played it and how much you studied it far more than anything else. Why do you think there was never a chess grandmaster that did anything profound in science or mathematics, or were only very few? It's because chess grandmasters spend more time on board games than studying: there a lot of chess grandmasters that also highly exert at backgammon. Being good at chess is all about the amount of time you invest in chess, studying and playing, and your potential return on investment for that time is then throttled by your intelligence. Furthermore, being psychic is a nice workaround on intelligence when it comes to playing games such as chess.
Pic related since this post is an obvious jibe at me: I am only better than 40% of players on this site but I've probably played less games of chess than 90% of the players. Basically, jiu jitsu also relies on strategy. It doesn't matter how smart you are, if you are a blue belt then you are going to get your ass handed to you black belt because there is no substitute for time on the mat.
>>12205487Yes, this is a decent answer. By comparing the quality of what you devote your intelligence to to the quality of what is done by other people who do the same sort of thing. This is pretty much my usual response to, "How smart is he?" I ask, "What has he done with himself?"
