|
West Michigan Chess > Authors > Katy Ford
|
|
3/21/2007
Garry Kasparov has said that men are better than women at chess because every single component of chess (sport, psychological warefare, science and art) belongs to areas of male domination. Judit Polgar is usually credited with disproving this theory, since she defeated him in 2002 match. Polgar achieved grandmaster status at an even younger age than then esteemed Bobby Fischer. At every level of chess, however, there are far more men than women. Why aren't women drawn to chess the way men are?
Susan Polgar writes a column for ChessCafe.com, and discussed this discrepency in a 2002 article. She cites many reasons that women don't compete in chess, such as their biological clocks, social expectations, and the fact that most women don't take chess as seriously as men do. Polgar writes that if women won't put the time and effort into becoming good at chess, then they can't expect to compete on the same level. In the following month's article, she discussed ways to entice more women into playing chess, such as encouraging girls to get into the game.
My very informal polling of friends and family shows that most women just have other interests besides chess. Indeed, a couple people didn't even know how the pieces moved, and told me that they had no interest in learning when I offered to teach them. "You spent a whole day playing a chess?!" one friend commented to me after I told her I played in a local chess tournament. "How do you stand it?" I told her I loved it - that it was at once grueling and rewarding, exciting and full of possibility, and that I enjoyed the company of the people I was with. I read somewhere that there are more possible combinations of pieces on a chessboard than electrons in the universe. I'm not sure how accurate that is, but explains in part why some of us are so drawn to the game: its seemingly infinite possibilities, and many opportunities for victory.
As a woman who loves the game, I often wonder why I have so few women sitting across from me at tournaments. I think one must possess a certain analytical aptitude and problem-solving abilities, as well as a competitve spirit, to enjoy the game and be motivated to reach their full potential with it. For social, cultural or biological reasons, women (the ones in my life, anyway) don't seem to be drawn to the game of chess.
To each his own, I suppose. Anyone want to play? 3/17/2007
Chess enthusiasts agree that it can, detractors disagree, and everyone else is thinking about something more important. But is it true: is there an activity, a game no less, that can actually improve the intelligence of everyone, from the learning-challenged to the gifted?
I was surprised to learn that the answer is a resounding 'yes'. Chess is an intellectual gymnasium of sorts, and much has been written about its positive effects. James Liptrap published a study in the March 1998 Chess Life which concretely linked chess participation between third and fifth graders to an increase in standardized test scores. Mr. Liptrap says that while chess can help all children improve math and reading scores, the most significant improvement is for "regular" kids. (Read it here).
Chess can do more than just exercise existing minds; it can physically change the structure of them as well. Most chess players have heard of Susan, Sofia and Judit Polgar, who blazed their way to the top of the chess hierarchy early in life. Their father, Laszlo, was a psychologist who believed that one could shape children into dedicated intellectuals through intense study of a specific subject. He tested his theory on his daughters, with resounding success. This theory is somewhat controversial, but it seems that Laszlo was ahead of his time. Psychology Today has a fascinating article about the Polgars and brain growth here.
So, in addition to being an addictingly fun way to waste a couple of hours, chess can make you smarter. What more could you ask for?
|
|
|
|
|