England football international wins chess tournament.

[Neill Cooper]

Kiprian Berbatov said he was quitting chess for mathematics IIRC - has he yet achieved anything notable in the latter?

Nobody who quits chess for any career ever goes on to achieve anything of noteworthiness in their life beyond having more money , there's no place for individuality or creativity in the corporate world...

Demis Hassabis

[Mick Norris]

Back on topic, I gather Eze scored again last night, chess doesn't seem to be harming his football

Maybe he would like to be ECF President

Eze is in the World Cup squad

According to the Guardian, Harry Kane plays too

[LawrenceCooper]

According to the Guardian, Harry Kane plays too

https://x.com/chesscom/status/2055677977992614059

[Alan Walton]

Why do we always say footballers (or any other people) play chess, they really only know the moves like millions others; playing the game is totally different; I have played football in the past (and other sports) this doesn't make me a footballer; there are some chess players on this forum who I wouldn't categorise as good chess players only woodpushers, maybe we are trying to intellecutalise these people above the level they are (mostly idiots)

[Matt Mackenzie]

Most "celebrities" who supposedly play chess are rank beginners, agreed - but a significant minority are not. There are a few professional footballers with actual ratings - even if (as is often the case) these are "only" online ones, even this arguably means something.

[Jon D'Souza-Eva]

there are some chess players on this forum who I wouldn't categorise as good chess players only woodpushers

Hey, I resemble that remark!

[Tomis Chagall]

Why do we always say footballers (or any other people) play chess, they really only know the moves like millions others; playing the game is totally different; I have played football in the past (and other sports) this doesn't make me a footballer; there are some chess players on this forum who I wouldn't categorise as good chess players only woodpushers, maybe we are trying to intellecutalise these people above the level they are (mostly idiots)

no disrespect, but this is a very ignorant claim thanks to its generalization - and factually incorrect. whether someone is a good chess player or not offers no insight into their intellectual capacities. by that token, alan turing would be an idiot, because he was a terrible chess player.

baduk/wéiqí/igo is considerably more complex than chess, so in comparison to baduk players, most chess players would be simpletons by that logic.

the reverse is more accurate -- good chess players are often attributed with qualities they do not necessarily possess, merely based on their skills over the board, i.e. calculation.
take robson fischer, for example - decent chess player, but terrible and quite repulsive in most other respects -- and he didn’t come across as the brightest bulb, either. yet media and many people swoon over him even to this day just because he was an admittedly good woodpusher during his time in a board game who didn’t contribute anything else worthy of note.

playing a game makes you a player thereof by definition. if you played football, you are (or were) a footballer. you are not a PROFESSIONAL footballer, but a footballer nonetheless. same goes for chess players - there is a reason that there are ratings, but a certain rating doesn’t exclude you from being a chess player. i’m not sure if a statement that can be interpreted as snobism is conducive to such a discussion.

on another note, dejan joveljić, serbian international, would probably give a considerable number of forumites a proper run for their money:
std 2217 - rpd 2141 - blz 2040
https://ratings.fide.com/profile/9209233

given that he earns his money with football and only took up chess seriously around 5-6 years ago, i’d say that’s a very impressive level.

[Paul Cooksey]

There is a correlation between chess ability and IQ. Causality is hard to know but what science there is seems relatively clear. With that context, claiming to be a chess player is a simple way for a public figure to imply they are smart.

Alan is right this seems to happen a lot with sports people with minimal chess ability on investigation. But my personal take is that all the transferable skill chess teaches come quite early, say 1000 rating. Planning, patience, etc. So I'm quite forgiving of a celebrity claiming to be a chess player even though they are close to beginner strength provided they do actually play.

Harry Kane seems a different case. His reputation as a footballer is that he is smart so no marketing reason for him to associate himself with chess. He also seems to be a regular player. I think he is a chess player by both the broad definition of anyone who plays chess and a narrower one of someone who takes it seriously.

I understand Turing was a terrible player by all accounts. But seems likely to me that was due to lack of interest. I can't recall a story about a person famous for being smart who put a lot of time and effort into chess and was still very weak. I'd be interested if there are examples.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Why do we always say footballers (or any other people) play chess, they really only know the moves like millions others; playing the game is totally different; I have played football in the past (and other sports) this doesn't make me a footballer; there are some chess players on this forum who I wouldn't categorise as good chess players only woodpushers, maybe we are trying to intellecutalise these people above the level they are (mostly idiots)

no disrespect, but this is a very ignorant claim thanks to its generalization - and factually incorrect. whether someone is a good chess player or not offers no insight into their intellectual capacities. by that token, alan turing would be an idiot, because he was a terrible chess player.

baduk/wéiqí/igo is considerably more complex than chess, so in comparison to baduk players, most chess players would be simpletons by that logic.

the reverse is more accurate -- good chess players are often attributed with qualities they do not necessarily possess, merely based on their skills over the board, i.e. calculation.
take robson fischer, for example - decent chess player, but terrible and quite repulsive in most other respects -- and he didn’t come across as the brightest bulb, either. yet media and many people swoon over him even to this day just because he was an admittedly good woodpusher during his time in a board game who didn’t contribute anything else worthy of note.

playing a game makes you a player thereof by definition. if you played football, you are (or were) a footballer. you are not a PROFESSIONAL footballer, but a footballer nonetheless. same goes for chess players - there is a reason that there are ratings, but a certain rating doesn’t exclude you from being a chess player. i’m not sure if a statement that can be interpreted as snobism is conducive to such a discussion.

on another note, dejan joveljić, serbian international, would probably give a considerable number of forumites a proper run for their money:
std 2217 - rpd 2141 - blz 2040
https://ratings.fide.com/profile/9209233

given that he earns his money with football and only took up chess seriously around 5-6 years ago, i’d say that’s a very impressive level.

I should know whether "baduk/wéiqí/igo" is what I know as Go (it is, but I had to go look it up). I played both Shogi and Go at university many years ago, and it was indeed instructive to realise that being good at one game did not always translate to those other games (as an aside, I really cannot get to grips with contract bridge).

Is "robson fischer" a typo for Robert (Bobby) Fischer? Not disagreeing with your assessment, just wondering where that came from.

Great example of Dejan Joveljić. I was 95% sure he had come up before on this forum, but when searching I could not find the earlier posts. There was definitely an international footballer with a high rating that we found, and from the former Yugoslavia, but it might have been a different one (which would be no surprise).

I would like to know how strong Unai Emery is as a chess player. Being Spanish might be the next best thing to being ex-Soviet, Russian or East European.

Or rather, today, being Indian or Chinese. I would not be surprised if these conversations in 20-30 years are about how some professional snooker player or cricket player in China or India also happens to have a side hustle of chess and that they are rather good at it!

PS. The names of Go (from Wikipedia):

The name Go is a short form of the Japanese word igo (囲碁; いご), which derives from earlier wigo (ゐご), in turn from Middle Chinese ɦʉi gi (圍棋, Mandarin: wéiqí, lit. 'encirclement board game' or 'board game of surrounding'). In English, the name Go when used for the game is often capitalized to differentiate it from the common word go. In events sponsored by the Ing Chang-ki Foundation, it is spelled goe.

The Korean name baduk (바둑) is a native derived term, most likely originally consisting of 밭 (Yale: pàth, 'cultivated field') + *돍〯 (Yale: twǒlk, “stone”, presumed dialectal variant of Seoul 돓〯 twǒlh, 'stone'). Less plausible etymologies include a derivation of Badukdok, referring to the playing pieces of the game, or a derivation from Chinese páizi (排子), meaning 'to arrange pieces'.

PPS. To Paul C. I do recall other Turing-like examples, though not the names right now. Mostly genius-types like Erdos, who likely found chess only a small part of their incredibly fertile wanderings in the realms of pure mathematics. I had a quick look, and apparently Paul Erdos did play Go:

https://usgo.org/content.aspx?page_id=5 ... _id=109583

"Between long walks, loafing in the common room, and endless games of Go, it was hard to imagine when work got done," wrote Bruce Schechter in "My Brain is Open: The Mathematical Journeys Of Paul Erdos" (Touchstone, 1998) The famed Hungarian mathematician Paul Erdos (right) (pronounced Air-dish) became a go player when he moved to the United States in the 1930's; this passage describes Erdos's arrival at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, in 1938. "That Erdos and other mathematicians became addicted to Go at the Institute is easy to understand," Schecter continues. "The ancient Asian game is deceptively simple, played by alternately placing black and white stones (at the Institute they used thumb tacks) at the intersections of a 19x19 rectangular grid. A game of Go, viewed from the right perspective, is really nothing more than a problem in graph theory. If, as G. H. Hardy wrote, 'chess problems are the hymn-tunes of mathematics,' a game of Go is a cantata."

That is a comparison between chess and Go I had not seen before! I would bet the mathematicians were strong (but not professional-level) Go players. But some might well have been weak Go players? Not sure. Being a weak chess player might be more likely.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Found the earlier thread here:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5043&p=323952&hilit ... er#p323952

It was Matt Turner who pointed out Dejan Joveljić:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5043&p=323952&hilit ... er#p323981

[Alan Walton]

I am not saying certain "celebrities" and "sports-persons" cannot be good at the game, but I suspect when you see comments that they "play the game" I suspect it is a purely a PR ploy to improve their image, remember all top sportsmen have paid social media representatives doing that work for them

I meet many people (away from my chess world) who say I used to play and would easily beat me at a game; normally we don't play mainly because my close friends eventually persuade them that I am quite good; but when on the odd occasion I have, I easily win and take it very easy (one occasion I went full normal playing mode and won in 10 moves)

So I would say most sub 1500 players on Lichess (which is about 50% of the pool) are just casual players with minimal ability, but if they are young enough or keen with available time I could improve them through basic coaching

[Alex Holowczak]

So I would say most sub 1500 players on Lichess (which is about 50% of the pool) are just casual players with minimal ability, but if they are young enough or keen with available time I could improve them through basic coaching

Couldn't Magnus Carlsen say the same about, say, Alan Walton? Perhaps increasing Lichess 1500s to OTB 2100s?

Would that mean Alan Walton isn't a chessplayer?

[NickFaulks]

on another note, dejan joveljić, serbian international, would probably give a considerable number of forumites a proper run for their money:
std 2217 - rpd 2141 - blz 2040
https://ratings.fide.com/profile/9209233

I'd say 1800 at best, although if so that still wouldn't be bad.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Fischer had a lot of problems as we all know, and its also true that IQ tests aren't the be all and end all - but it is a recorded fact that he scored in the top few per cent of the population at them on more than one occasion. His school teachers also commented on both his obviously high intelligence and his near total lack of social skills.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"alan turing would be an idiot, because he was a terrible chess player."

But was he? He was associating with ALexander and Golombek, who beat him easily, but that could apply to a lot of us...