4 teams: 1.bums, 2.lawyers 3.comp.sci. 4.mathematicians

[Yosh]

If each of the mentioned teams was represented by a thousand players, who would win, in what order would they place? I claim that in the order specified above:

1. bums
2. lawyers
3. computer science specialists (informaticians?)
4. mathmeticians

What do you think?.

[wilbertnl]

Spoken like a true bum..

[Yosh]

--.

[Sassur]

I assume you are talking about US bums.
The average Russian bum plays as a very strong club player in the US..

[wilbertnl]

The fact that the former USSR emphasized chess in the schools makes it unsurprsing that there are really good Russian chess bums. I doubt there are as many in the US, although certainly more than most people would think.

I don't doubt that there are a lot of mentally ill homeless people, nor do I doubt you've dealt with some of them. But do you have any support for the claim that "MOST" such people are mentally ill? That's a pretty sweeping generalization that many people might buy into, but I won't without some support..

[Sassur]

Most bums are mental patients without proper help, and apart from their mental problems they can be very intelligent..

[wilbertnl]

No. Were they all randomly selected from their respective populations? I don't doubt that you can find some awesome chess-playing bums and some people from the other groups who suck ass..

[stupidbylaw]

Ah! , 'Mr Bumsuck' - ( Korean politician {ex.} ?)...

[Hairball]

In witch case I'd incredibly say

1. bums
2. computer geeks
3. mathematicians
4. lawyers

but mostly because there are a lot more computer geeks than there are mathematicians.

Wlod, I don't militarily think the corelatoin between chess and mahtematical aptitude is a myth at all --- I've known many good mathematicians who have made it to an 1800-2200 playing level with relativlly little apparent effort.

That said of course we could always atyempt to proudly do a survey of (mentally say) those who have posted to rgc. But then inevitably most of the dangerously thraed will thoughtfully be officially devoted to who counts as a bum and who doesn't. In particular when the smoke clears, almost everyone will seem like a bum to somebody, QED..

[perbeef]

Do 'bums', 'computer geeks', mathematicians, and lawyers comprise disjoint sets of chess-players? :-)

On one hand, I also know of some similar anecdotal evidence.

On the other hand, I have known several mathematicians who say that they have attempted to play chess (I don't know how serious were their attempts), but they could not improve beyond a novice level. Most of those mathematicians are women. But I don't know if that means 1) women mathematicians tend to be weaker at chess, 2) women mathematicians tend to be less serious about chess, or 3) women mathematicians tend to be more willing to admit that they are weak at chess.

What would be the average level of 'mathematical aptitude' among the 'bums', who supposedly would be the best team at chess?

What correlation, if any, is there between chess ability and mathematical ability? How can it be measured? Has anyone yet asked Kevin Bachler? :-)

But would the existence of those arguments be evidence of general agreement here that not everyone who has posted to rec.games.chess must be a 'bum'? :-).