Average SMP IQ.

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
NotReady - why would you make an assertion like that with no evidence whatsoever?

Others - Agree Sklansky's IQ is 125-135. Ready to compare to actual tests.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would expect David is smarter than that.

[furyshade]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe poker players have higher Iqs on average to normal peeps.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not too sure. I make a poker product and you wouldn't believe the volume of retarded emails I get. I'd say 80% of users don't even understand the basic idea of EV, which really anyone playing poker should instantly grasp. I believe HUDs, formulaic play and chimp trainers like Sklansky and Miller are the reason most people win.

That said, 2+2 has the largest collection of very smart people on the internet imo, and the high stakes cash games are mostly where they congregate (with a nod to SMP).

[/ QUOTE ]

id argue this, on the basis that some of the most intelligent people i've ever met are computer illiterate. i had two teachers, one a philosophy PhD from harvard and one an astrophysics PhD from caltech, both were absolutely computer illiterate. they could check email and use google but that was just about it. i think for people born in the last 20 years it is easy mistakenly judge intelligence by certain technological abilities because stupid people in our age group tend to be bad with computers etc. but a lot of people who didn't grow up with computers can be very intelligent but technologically inept

[Arp220]

Instead of sitting around quoting IQ scores at each other (which is, let's face it, a barely disguised 'size' comparison of another sort), I suggest we do something more interesting, and design an 'improved' intelligence scoring system. I confess my suggestion is motivated by me coming to the conclusion that these online multi choice tests are [censored] - I just did four chosen at random and scored 131, 138, 140 and 152. I then did another where I just went through randomly clicking... and scored 128. Hmmmm.

Some initial ideas:

1 - There should be no time limit. Take it home and work on it for a week if you like.

2 - There should be 'essay' type questions and 'calculation' type questions, but no multiple choice questions. Some questions should have open ended answers, and some should be very specific.

3 - Free access to any book in a well stocked library AND to the internet.

So, sample questions could be something like:

"What makes most of the dust that exists now?"

"Which of these numbers is higher; a 5 in a hexagon in a hexagon, or a g with a little 64 just to the right of it?"

[hitch1978]

[ QUOTE ]

Instead of sitting around quoting IQ scores at each other (which is, let's face it, a barely disguised 'size' comparison of another sort), I suggest we do something more interesting, and design an 'improved' intelligence scoring system. I confess my suggestion is motivated by me coming to the conclusion that these online multi choice tests are [censored] - I just did four chosen at random and scored 131, 138, 140 and 152. I then did another where I just went through randomly clicking... and scored 128. Hmmmm.

Some initial ideas:

1 - There should be no time limit. Take it home and work on it for a week if you like.

2 - There should be 'essay' type questions and 'calculation' type questions, but no multiple choice questions. Some questions should have open ended answers, and some should be very specific.

3 - Free access to any book in a well stocked library AND to the internet.

So, sample questions could be something like:

"What makes most of the dust that exists now?"

"Which of these numbers is higher; a 5 in a hexagon in a hexagon, or a g with a little 64 just to the right of it?"

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[Arp220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Instead of sitting around quoting IQ scores at each other (which is, let's face it, a barely disguised 'size' comparison of another sort), I suggest we do something more interesting, and design an 'improved' intelligence scoring system. I confess my suggestion is motivated by me coming to the conclusion that these online multi choice tests are [censored] - I just did four chosen at random and scored 131, 138, 140 and 152. I then did another where I just went through randomly clicking... and scored 128. Hmmmm.

Some initial ideas:

1 - There should be no time limit. Take it home and work on it for a week if you like.

2 - There should be 'essay' type questions and 'calculation' type questions, but no multiple choice questions. Some questions should have open ended answers, and some should be very specific.

3 - Free access to any book in a well stocked library AND to the internet.

So, sample questions could be something like:

"What makes most of the dust that exists now?"

"Which of these numbers is higher; a 5 in a hexagon in a hexagon, or a g with a little 64 just to the right of it?"

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

??

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Instead of sitting around quoting IQ scores at each other (which is, let's face it, a barely disguised 'size' comparison of another sort), I suggest we do something more interesting, and design an 'improved' intelligence scoring system.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't a bad idea. I suggest that since David Sklansky is the self-anointed point of reference as it relates to logical soundness, he draws up the test. I strongly doubt he would actually do it though. But he'd probably make a good test.

[furyshade]

"What makes most of the dust that exists now?"

"Which of these numbers is higher; a 5 in a hexagon in a hexagon, or a g with a little 64 just to the right of it?"


the first one tests random knowledge, you could be the most intelligent person here and not have read this particular snapple fact

the second one, wtf are you even trying to say?

[hitch1978]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Instead of sitting around quoting IQ scores at each other (which is, let's face it, a barely disguised 'size' comparison of another sort), I suggest we do something more interesting, and design an 'improved' intelligence scoring system. I confess my suggestion is motivated by me coming to the conclusion that these online multi choice tests are [censored] - I just did four chosen at random and scored 131, 138, 140 and 152. I then did another where I just went through randomly clicking... and scored 128. Hmmmm.

Some initial ideas:

1 - There should be no time limit. Take it home and work on it for a week if you like.

2 - There should be 'essay' type questions and 'calculation' type questions, but no multiple choice questions. Some questions should have open ended answers, and some should be very specific.

3 - Free access to any book in a well stocked library AND to the internet.

So, sample questions could be something like:

"What makes most of the dust that exists now?"

"Which of these numbers is higher; a 5 in a hexagon in a hexagon, or a g with a little 64 just to the right of it?"

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

??

[/ QUOTE ]

1) You don't think that more intelligent people solve problems faster?

2) Open ended answer questions are too subjective and therefore impossible to mark for this purpose. Who decides how points are scored?

3) Why?

Also I don't like the questions for the reason's furryshade has allready mentioned.

I like the idea of attempting it though, and would happily be involved in any work involved if a few of us decided to give it a go.

I think the discussion around it would be good in any event.

__________________

Scrap that, the only thing it would do is start a 'define intelligence' thread that would go nowhere. (Read above, or the other thread currently running on the subject.)

[Arp220]

[ QUOTE ]
"What makes most of the dust that exists now?"

"Which of these numbers is higher; a 5 in a hexagon in a hexagon, or a g with a little 64 just to the right of it?"


the first one tests random knowledge, you could be the most intelligent person here and not have read this particular snapple fact

the second one, wtf are you even trying to say?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that's pretty much what I was getting at [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] What I really hate about IQ tests is that they're virtually all a case of "turn the handle and the answer pops out", where some have a more difficult handle than others. But in nearly all cases the handle is obvious. To me, a better test of intelligence is finding the right handle to begin with.

Both questions (which in fairness I just made up) appear random and, perhaps, even nonsensical, because they're deliberately written so as to not make the 'path' to the answer obvious, even though both questions have specific and unique 'correct' answers.

They're designed to be answered with the help of any book you like, and with complete access to the internet, so as to remove the random knowledge angle. The trick is using those tools correctly.

I wasn't however looking to get into the details of these questions, but rather the broader principles they embody - I can post the solutions if that would help...?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Two IQs I'd like to know:

Borodog: I'd put him at mid 130s.
Sklansky: Around the same.

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

For the record, I have always tested at 135-140 on various internet tests (which I admit I find enjoyable). But since:

1) I have never been "officially" tested, and
2) I have always suspected that those internet tests are designed to give inflated, i.e. flattering, scores,

I can't really say, and would not be at all surprised if it were actually lower. Although, I am surprised by the consistency of the scores over maybe half a dozen such tests. Maybe they tell everyone they score 135-140. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

I would like to say that while I believe "IQ" tests (at least real ones) measure something, it is not exactly clear what that is, and that I believe something like "intelligence" is a highly dimensional thing that cannot be reduced except in a completely crude way to a single number.

My SAT score was 1470 ([censored] up a math question that prevented me from scoring perfect in math, damnit), and I know for a fact that there are many, many posters on 2+2 who scored perfect on their SATs.

If I had to, I would venture to guess that my IQ is greater than maybe 2 out of 3 2+2 posters, but significantly less than that against SMP hardcores. Perhaps only 50%.