[univalent]

IM checking in. My cousin became a GM while still a teenager. There will come a point sometime in your life (for me that was the ripe old age of 14 or 15) when you realize that you are simply not smart enough to make the cut. When that point come, the best thing to do is bail, play for fun and focus on academics.

[nextlevelchess]

If you were an IM at this age (14-15), you were actually stronger than myself at this age. I believe it is not about being smart enough, but more about what you are willing to invest (time/energy/finances). I understand everybody that says it is not worth it to go for the GM title or more. But saying you are not smart enough is a limiting believe I don't really like, especially if you got so close. Certainly not everybody has the ability to get a GM title, but 99% that get the IM title can also get the GM title with the right work.

[pmoriarty]

"There will come a point sometime in your life (for me that was the ripe old age of 14 or 15) when you realize that you are simply not smart enough to make the cut."

Chess playing ability is not a good measure of intelligence.

[password321]

I think it is safe to say when both players have had the same level of training and same level of interest that the better player has better analytical ability. I can't see why else there would be a difference in chess ability at that point.

[kzrdude]

Winner instict, competitive drive and other such things?

[password321]

Level of interest = competitive drive. And not sure what winner instinct means.

[kzrdude]

competitive drive is also about how you feel about winning or losing. A competitor "needs" to hate to lose or love to win - it helps. Just look at the world champion (of chess) - he can be a sore loser, because he has very strong feelings about it. He has a competitive drive way above mine, and many others.

[argc]

If you can remove opening preparation (and all preparation) I think it probably is. Calculating moves is a good measure of working memory and is an important aspect of intelligence. There are certainly other things that are important, like creativity, but anyways, intelligence is probably not a specific enough word for this to be meaningful. But as an example, I think I'm intelligent enough in a lot of ways but my ability to calculate far ahead is held back by my mediocre working memory.

[glxxyz]

Yes brute force RAM that works with these types of problems is of important, and is the reason why the vast majority of us would never be able to become a grandmaster no matter how much of our lives we devoted to it. Here's a clip of GM Peter Svidler talking about his memory: https://youtu.be/ssBcIg3cEPI?t=3622

In the same way, most of us would never be able to compete at any given physical sport no matter how much time we put in.

[darkwizard42]

I think the poster was just generalizing there. Playing chess at the GM level just requires an astounding leap in working memory and recall to be able to remember similar board positions and then further thoughts on end-game and mid-game macro strategy.

Chess playing ability is probably a good correlation with higher intelligence (if intelligence is measured by strong working memory)