11972 Giocatori online!
Uomo vs. Macchina
Partite a turni quando vuoi!
Vota la miglior mossa vincente!
Hai ciò che serve?
Affina la tua visione tattica!
Consigli e dritte sul gioco!
Impara dai migliori giocatori!
Milioni di grandi partite!
Il tuo allenatore virtuale!
Perfeziona le tue aperture!
Confrontati con il computer!
Trova l’allenatore giusto!
Riesci a risolverlo ogni giorno?
Riassembla il tutto!
Principiante? Comincia qui!
Fai amicizia e gioca in squadra!
Notizie dal mondo degli scacchi!
Cerca tra gli iscritti a Chess.com
Trova circoli ed eventi in zona!
Chi è il migliore tra i tuoi amici?
Leggi cosa dicono gli iscritti!
You could make the same analysis with americans... Why are american players not contending for the world championships anymore- male or female?
Excellent topic, very interesting , it is high time someone asked this question for the 50th time. I can’t wait not to have any answer ,again ,after 400 replies.
It's funny, I've been on chess.com for over three years, and I've never seen this thread before.Then again, I wasn't very active on the forums for most of that time. Also, I probably should have guessed.I think the best answer is: it's just numbers. If as many women played as men, we'd have nearly equal number of men and women Super GMs. There may be some other factors; It's true that men's IQ scores are more spread out than those of women--more at the bottom of the spectrum, more at the top, fewer in the middle. But there are flaws in IQ assesment; those tests were probably designed mostly by men, for one. It's probably true that men tend to be more obsessive with hobbies such as chess, though I haven't seen a lot of research to back that up.
2600 man vs 2600 woman. Mmmmm would have to see the rating ! haha.
Go one better. 2600 Core i7 Using Houdini3 ? - Flawless.
Go one better. * ELO - Jesus Christ - Perfect.
Go one better. ELO - Mr. Blue Sky - Epic.
Do fewer women play chess then men? Of course. How much is the difference? I think it fair to estimate there are 200 men for every women, that plays chess.
"I think the best answer is: it's just numbers. If as many women played as men, we'd have nearly equal number of men and women Super GMs."
You're starting the story from the middle, as though it's just divinely pre-ordained that fewer women play and there couldn't be some reason for that.The way the politically-correct castrati and feminist grievance-mongers go on, you might think it's impossible that some groups are simply better than others at certain things.
I agree (in the blue statement) ... from experience.... check my earlier post on this thread. :)
You're starting the story from the middle, as though it's just divinely pre-ordained that fewer women play and there couldn't be some reason for that.
I'm fully aware there's a reason for it. I didn't think it necessary to launch into a full thesis about it.
At the scholastic level in the US... its about 8 boys for every 1 girl that plays. The ratio is closer to even during the elementary years (4:1)... but begins to widen through middle school (my experience 8:1) and even more so in high school.
Men = Hunters / Women = Gatherers
I have yet to play a female OTB.
and you a faggot
Dogs play chess?
IRON +male = FEmale!?
Male chess players are - as a general rule - not uh... impressive socially. Look around at any OTB tournament. You're not looking at the cream of the crop of the male gender. Just the opposite is true. So in effect you'd be asking women to immerse themselves socially into a substandard vat of mediocrity (myself and you, dear reader, excluded of course). Now, maybe they'll do it anyway because they just love the game of chess SOOO much that they don't care about the teeming legions of unwanted males sorrounding them. If so, great! To say that women are "welcome" to join into the chess community would be a collosal understatement. If hordes of women started showing up at OTB tournaments and getting into chess, the old guard would be beside themselves with joy.
Unfortunately, women are very rare at tournaments (and chess clubs). As a result, from what I have seen personally, males at tournaments seize on the slightest pretext to jump into a conversation with a woman. And who can blame them? After all they rarely SEE an actual woman in their normal lives. Why not show some enthusiasm in talking with them?
If you want to help reverse this sad state of affairs, here's what you can do. Stop blathering on about genetics, testosterone, and other kooky theories. Instead, take a shower, comb your hair, and SHAVE for chrissakes. And while a tie sure isn't needed, try to wear something better than your bowling shirt to the tournament. These initial steps will do more to overcome this problem than a thousand blog posts about genetics and upbringing.
But, if I shave before a tournament I could give in to draw offers from weaker players, or worse, lose. I never shave the day of competition; it is bad luck.
The difference in numbers is only a reflection of the natural ability and desire to do something that requires strategy. Yes, if an equal number of women played chess, there would naturally be more women in the charts than there are now, but it would still be predominately men.
Men and women are just created differently, equal but different. I mean, you can have a dollar bill on one side, and a hundred pennies on the other. Both are equal in value, but they have different qualities.
You build a bridge using pillars and a deck. Which is more important, the pillars or the deck? The point is, both are necessary, but each is better at something than the other. Lots of harmony in creation...
How about this? That women for the most part are naturally more cooperative, and men are more competitive? It could be argued as to whether that is based on natural characteristics or learned social behavior, but as a transwoman, I have lived both sides of the divide, so I speak with some authority on activity-selection tendencies.
As a male, I got into the ball games, hunting, driving fast, because it was the thing to do. When I transitioned to be female, those fake tendencies went away, and I was able to allow myself to be more of a cooperative nature. After crossing the divide and living my "second life" for a long time, I feel that women are less likely to play chess because it is an activity that involves 1) shying away from eye contact, because this can give you away to your opponent, 2) minimizing what you say or share with your opponent, 3) only "being together," not togetherness in a cooperative manner, 4) creating an adversive environment, and 5) blinding you to a person's finer qualities as a person in a social setting. It feels odd, very odd to have to experience this, even when playing against the computer. I do not like the negative feelings I get in this adversive environment, the drive to defeat or destroy this person. This blocks the very characteristics NEEDED to prevent this world from going up in smoke.
I took up Chess again because I want to play Piece, or Cooperative Chess, because I want to have a game that helps to build healthy eye contact, accurate communications with your game partner (saying what you really mean), collaborative skills in reaching a goal (the give and take that comes with learning together as friends or as a couple), a warm environment (where one doesn't have to be defensive and on guard, unable to trust the other person), and teaching you to learn about your game partner's finer qualities as a person. No wonder most of the male chest players are just DYING to talk to female chess players, because there are NO WOMEN in their own lives. They don't have the skills and/or the inclination to do the things that "win the hearts" of the women trained to be wooed in that manner.
This is why I brought up the thread on Cooperative Chess, because it is time to leave behind the tactics and qualities that will not serve us nor save us in the long run. Long past it.
It's funny, I've been on chess.com for over three years, and I've never seen this thread before.
Well, here are some - either directly or passive-aggressively - that addressed this same topic or devolved into the same discussion:
all these comments suck. you're a bunch of sexists and essentialists. there are historical reasons to explain why women weren't allowed/ encouraged to play and hence how it ended up being "a man's thing". read more here http://en.chessbase.com/post/when-knowing-is-losing-gender-factors-in-che and for the whole paper here http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.440/pdf
"FIDE Grand Prix Round 11 - Hosts: GMs Evgeny Miroshnichenko & Viorel Iordachescu "
People who play for free and complain
da wanmokewan 3 minuti fa
The ultimate lesson in chess humility
da IpswichMatt 5 minuti fa
999 & 1 Things to Do If Online Opponent Suddenly walks into Your Room
da Meet_Your_Sensei 12 minuti fa
5/26/2015 - Mate in 3
da yeunghimshun 12 minuti fa
da Mal_Smith 15 minuti fa
da BillMclean 20 minuti fa
Computer analysis of vote chess games?
da VyboR 20 minuti fa
Post your best miniatures here
da NewArdweaden 28 minuti fa
What are the sharpest D4 cont.
da skotheim2 28 minuti fa
Find the best move
da cj86yeah 49 minuti fa
Perchè iscriversi | Temi scacchistici |
Domande frequenti |
Aiuto e supporto |
Mappa del sito
Informativa sulla privacy |
Note legali |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Scacchi - Italiano
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!