Ed Seedhouse wrote:
On 20 Oct 2006 10:34:34 -0700, "Martin Brown"
wrote:

Ed Seedhouse wrote:
On 20 Oct 2006 03:11:29 -0700, "Martin Brown"
wrote:

I have yet to meet any strong chess player that didn't have powerful
innate pattern matching and abstract reasoning ability

Of course such a claim, as well as once again being supported by not one
bit of evidence, is unfalsifiable, a typical pseudo-science approach.

It isn't a claim it is a statement of fact.

Your confusion of "opinion" with "fact" is noted. Welcome to the
"ignore" file.

Your reading comprehension is sadly lacking. And you have deliberately
snipped the overall context to try and make a straw man argument. The
set of traits found in strong GM level players are perfectly amenable
to scientific testing and analysis.

And I did not say that all strong chess players must have certain
traits (although I suspect it might be the case) I said that I had
never met any that did not. That is a statement of fact.

Perhaps someone here has met a very strong player that cannot think
logically, and lacks innate pattern recognition skills. If they exist
then the ball is in your court to find one.

I do know a top mathematicain with a measured IQ of 60 (on a standard
test). But the problem there is with the test (and his lack of common
sense) not his intelligence.

Regards,
Martin Brown