I recently played in the Vienna championship (im rated around 1200 fide) and played against higher rated players and FMs and ultimately was the only girl in Top50 . what matters is that i won a cup lmao
He literally said it's less women to begin with, and then the women that are there don't find it worth it because of the negative social consequences balanced against the extremely low chance of monetary compensation. And the fact that there's less people in the first place actually decreases the proportion of the number of people that take that decision. So the two reasons compound on each other not just add together. Seems pretty explanatory ngl tbh.
Like men aren't concerned with monetary compensation at all, i would make a case that chess doesn't even attract the best cream of the crop of intelligence from men as men who actually are more intelligent and other attributes which a person requires at chess would certainly choose a different career path such as investment banking, business or programming. Chess doesn't have the best minds from men but will certainly represent the best minds from women
Let me get this clear, There are no men only chess tournaments but there are many women only tornaments. Men have the only one option which is to join in open tornament( men and women). Still men dominated the open tornament . So that goes to show that men are just better at chess. It's the reality
i am girl i started learn chess before months i am good i always play with AI rate 3000 i don't win but also don't lose fast i don't play with humans because i get nervous When my game fully improves, I will show myself to the world But now I will only lose if I played with someone, so there is no need to lose. I don't want anyone to remember me for my bad play. In general, I think I am smart, I am talented in everything, so I trust myself
Chess, at its highest competitive level, is a mind game. If you believe you're better than your opponent and make all the right moves with no pressure, you win. Magnus Carlson always wins because nobody thinks they can beat him, so no one does.
I wonder about the extent to which "the obsession factor" of boys plays into it. How many hours per day do young male players practice? Some boys tend to isolate themselves and spend longer playing alone and doing solo activities (or at least almost alone). Young males could spend all day obsessing over a video game, playing alone with legos, or playing chess without connecting with another person. If that results in even 30 minutes more per day of practicing chess (vs. doing more social activities and building relationships), that would make a difference in their ELO scores over the long run. I can't back anything I'm saying up with statistics. I'm just going by what I've observed as a father among young males' "ability" to completely obsess for 6+ hours straight on a game. Either way, we should obviously not discourage female players. Heckling them in person or online is disgusting. If somebody wants to play chess, we should encourage them.
Have you ever thought that perhaps girls are given fewer chances to immerse in their obsessions, or perhaps their obsession are being overlooked because the girls or the subjects of their interest do not fall into the stereotypical categories of "talented" or "genius" child? (Or, nobody ever bought them Legos because they thought Legos are just for boys 😢)
As a girl who plays video games and is very introverted, I can tell you that this “obsession factor”is definitely present in girls as well. I can easily spend over 100 hours a week playing a video game that I'm obsessed with without interacting with other people.
As a girl I can paint for 10+hours a day even though my career isn't towards painting it's funny how you assume that there is no "obsession factor" in women
What you're saying reminds me alot of adhd, men are usually diagnosed earlier because they present more stereotypically (hyperactive) v women who present inattentive. This isn't biological. This is because being hyperactive, your hyperfixations are looked down upon, socially speaking women aren't *allowed* to have this "obsession factor" because it's considered masculine.
I'm very proud to say, that my country's - Lithuania's Parlament Speaker - Viktorija Čmilyte-Nielsen is a grandmaster. She even received a lot of encouragment to become FIDE president in 2018. But she denied the offers since she stopped playing competitively and turned to politics in 2015, which in my opinion makes a lot of sense, since that kind of rational and logical thinking you gain from chess is very useful in politics. She also wrote an autobiography "Between Black and White" in 2018, in which she talks about her experience. Chess community is harsh on women, and you constantly have to prove yourself to other's no matter how much you achieve. That's why there aren't a lot of women in the chess field. But I think times are changing, and I hope we see a lot more women chess players competing at the top.
I loved playing chess as a child and was good for my age. I was tought how to play by my grandmother. But I stopped playing at 19 due to the increased sexisum I expected. also when I move away from my home town for university I did not feel like going through proveing my self as a chess player to mostly men that would take one look at me and assume that I bad a chess because I am women. I keep thinking about taking chess back up but never do because I am allways made to feel unwelcome and finding a women's only chess club is hard.
Jesus christ, literally nothing you said has anything to do with why you quit playing chess. If you like playing chess, you play chess. Sexism? HAHAHA give me a break, come up with a better excuse. I didn't realize some people being sexist, throwing insults, or being mean could somehow physically force you not to play. At the end of the day, the only person that stopped you from playing and getting better was yourself.
@@johnherrin4043 Yikes, ma dude. Sound pretty triggered there. Maybe get a snack or try a nap to feel better before replying next time? "Unprovoked, agitated , and likely incel man randomly insults woman who chose not to remain around men like him to no one's surprise but himself." lol What a shame.
@@JustQuixa What the fuck are you talking about. Did you even read my post? Stop replying to people for some stupid conversation you are having in your own head.
Obviously they don't literally mean that most children are 500-600 since these ratings can easily be overcome, just a metaphor of how weak or how strong they are in chess
I think this is meant to be the ELO right from the start. To beat a 600 when you play the very first time as, let's say a 5 year old is pretty impressive to me
It's not. @@Ameliahorn6582 clearly just makes ignorant assumptions and knows nothing of chess. There are women's only tournaments and women's only titles. If a woman wants to compete in open tournaments they can and often do. If a woman wants to become a Grandmaster, they can. If a man wants to compete in a womens only tournament they cannot nor do they get to become a grandmaster with a lower rating (WGM). Unless Eli is saying that chess is sexists against men, Eli doesn't know what they are talking about. Most tournaments and games in chess make no distinction of sex: men and women play against each other all the time. Women's title / tournaments are like regional tournaments in a sense i.e. in the case of the US Regional Tournament: if you live in the US you can compete for the US title and be the US Chess champion. Same for women's world championship (if you're a woman). Just because you compete for the US or Woman's championship doesn't mean you're not allowed to compete for the World Championship. Everyone just wants everything to be sexist these days when the world is by far the least sexist it's ever been.
Create safe place for women they say. And it's not man and women category, it's all gender and women. Women can play against man in open game. Correct me if i'm wrong.
@@Nadia-yj5iy correct. Only limitation is men cannot play if women only. Also there are national, regional and age restricted tournaments (like most other competitive games / sports). There are no men only tournaments. There are under X age tournaments but nothing stops a 10 year old from completing in open tournaments they just might not be as competitive as an age restricted tournament
Take the Indian GM sibling duo of Pragg and Vaishali. Both of them got the same exposure, in fact, Pragg learnt chess seeing his older sister play at home. Both of them went to the same coach, to the same set of tournaments and were given equal access to all amenities by their parents and coaches.. Yet Pragg managed to hit 2750 and is currently one of the top players of the world, and considered a potential future world champion, but Vaishali is still languishing at 2500 rating. Just cannot understand this mystery of women hitting the ceiling at 2500s whereas sizable number of men go on to cross 2700.
@@2complex43 +++ They can cope but there is a reason why men are better at any fking thing. Even the top 100 cooks are all men, how can they keep lying to themselves this much. How can someone be so stupid?
I do believe women can do better in chess. I a 21 year old teenager but i have seen many girls who has got more potential than many of the boys. If they tried more harder many of them can become grandmaster and compete with World's top 10 players.
Stoped playing even for fun after winning aganst my British male friend and he flipped the board on me then humiliated me in our friends restaurant, and my boyfriend defended him
@@mmaxine1331 You have chosen the wrong path if you are serious for chess then don't play it for fun . Go and play FIDE tournaments where there is no criticism. You get equality therein and can become WGM , GM one day .
The quote at the end of your video applies to basically all artists. There are still plenty of artists, though. It comes down to whether you have a passion to play, because there are no guarantees hard work will translate to ELO gains anyway, especially at the master level.
I want to preface that this video's math is skewed and misleading. The probability of a child being a prodigy actually has a very low correlation coefficient with the sample size, albeit that is surprising. A logical consideration, and perhaps the most obvious one that people tend to ignore in fear of "sexism", is that chess, at the very high level, is iq driven as per the needed intuition. It is a well known fact that, whether it be biologically or socially evolutionary, men have a higher standard deviation on the iq bell curve, and as such are more likely to produce better players for a game like chess. It is also why, taking a median against girls and boys, girls will beat boys in chess.
A second thing to say that this is not necessarily the concrete answer to why women are performing worse than men, mainly because that question implies that men, on average, are better than women. This is false. It is equivalent to why men will dominate the elite rich and scientific profiles in the world, simply because there is a higher probability that our current capitalist system favours higher iq individuals, whether you deem that right or wrong.
@@adhit528 men have better spatial thinking which is extremely important in chess. also there are more men geniuses. i m not saying this simply there are studies that shows this. yes women have capability to be as good as top male players. but chances of it happening are very slim
@@Niganigaballsackboii I mean, even a woman is good enough to achieve more than 2882... or can start from 2700 It doesn't take many good female chess players to achieve that goal. And this is not my opinion I am just reacting to this video. That in this video he is saying that mangas are a product of high potential. My opinion is that... there is something genetically lacking in the female brain.
Some man want to look superior in chess by turning people off from chess, end up people not giving them any value because people not considered chess is a thing (cause they turn off).
I don't know where you got that study from If it's correct its either very very outdated or incorrect or irrelevant or just a lie Any chess player with even some interest in professional chess registers with fide Recent fide claimed 16% player are women that is 1:5 ratio but there is currently NO WOMAN in top 100 chess player list But just considering the ratio this must be 16 in top 100 There is a hell lot of difference between 0 and 16 Yes on average men and women play chess equally as in other fields of study but when it comes to elite chess(or any other similar option ) men drastically dominate females and this has to do with genes too rather than just interests Overall there should be no discrimination in chess but I see no point of preferential treatment of women in terms of funding Positive discrimination (whatever that means) is still discrimination I think most funds should be directed at best players in open chess(men or women) and especially chess prodigies like nodirbek gukesh and definitely alireza
What are you talking about with the "you need 60 million for a guaranteed success"? That's like saying the chance of flipping a coin on heads is 1 in 2, so you're guaranteed to get heads if you flip twice. Also going from 605 million to 37 million you're arguing there's only half the chance to get a prodigy? Half the chance of what? At 37 million, there's about a 57% chance to have at least 1 prodigy female player, but that doesn't mean anything other than the expected number of women prodigy compared to prodigies in general is about 1/20. You're also comparing everyone to just women. Of those 10 prodigies, the likelihood based on statistics is pretty good that one is a woman. Therein lies the problem with statistics though. The expectation is about 1/16 top players are women. Reality is more like 1/100. I don't think there's data to suggest this difference is driven by mistreatment of women in chess, that's merely an assertion. As for the women seeing the low expected pay, is the assertion there that women are smarter than men when it comes to making career decisions? Otherwise, men face that same reality of only the top few making anything and would surely come to the same conclusion. There's a lot of plausible explanations for why women aren't matching statistical expectations, but I think it's a disservice to just throw our hands up and say: well I guess society is sexist. For example, it could be that men experience greater variance as a group than women, meaning that at both the top and bottom they'd appear disproportionately relative to women. That's not to say sexism isn't real, but I don't think we have any reason to believe sexism is the only, or even the biggest, factor.
This was a reply to someone else but it applies to many more. Especially in this comment section for instance. Ok thanks Mr. Scientist. I bet you actually looked at some quantitative rigorous evidence for "compititiveness", analysed by appropriate people for manipulation and checked the methodology. Suuure. Or is it just that it "sounds" intuitiuve and like "common sense", but also logical and scientific sounding right. The points logically follow so we don't bother to check the actual quantitative facts. The psuedo science runs wild.
I am trying to create content just like you, but something that I find very difficoult is finding the right but also free music and the stock footage. How do you find that?
If you are just starting a new channel and really don't have much experience I really advise you to not purchase anything for stock footage or music. Use RU-vid videos for stock footage and make sure to use non copyrighted music or just music from the RU-vid library. It will definitely be a bit riskier on copyright claims but you won't waste 300$+. After your channel gets monetization, I suggest you research well what works for your videos regarding stock footage websites. And for the music just look into epidemic sound. Hope that helps, and best of luck!
There shouldn't be any gender separation in chess. I am trying to think of another purely intellectual competitive pursuit that is separated like this. It sends the wrong message. An absolutely horrendous message, actually. And this video makes zero sense. If there are 605 million chess players or whatever number, a woman still has the same odds as a man of making money. In fact, because of the existence of female-only competitions, her odds are much better. Its kind of extraordinary that this video uses blatantly false logic to reach a conclusion. Your audience is chess players, who will see the error easily.
@@sherllymentalism4756 Its an interesting strategy and not completely without merit...to claim that your response to an argument is so obvious that it does not need to be stated. The result is that your opponent has no good reply. If they claim not to know what your argument is, then they are not as smart as you had assumed. Well done! 😄 I will be using this trick in the future.
@@Princess_Blue380An average male players are stronger than average female players in Chess. Similarly, average male GMs outperform their female counterparts.
My theory is that cuz they are sexist, the culture teaches them to be sexist and they let that hold them back, I wud classify myself as being somewhat misogynistic, yet one of my idols is Marie Curie, I watch GM Irina's content religiously We should gather knowledge from whatever source we can get it
Do you know what it's like to be the only one of something in a field? If you're the only girl at your chess school, the only girl at chess tournaments, and have endured a lifetime of people making belittling or dismissive comments, sexual harassment, and more, it is natural to wonder if other girls have made it far and what their experience is like. She can't be inspired by Hikaru or Magnus because people will not treat her like Hikaru or Magnus simply because of her gender
@@CyberDork34 yea ive been the only one doing what i do my entire life, you don't have any idea of what someone else's struggle is like so stop generalizing, dork
@@CyberDork34 its funny how you guys act like you're so fair but are the most morally bankrupt people, fake victims who think other people don't struggle in life just cuz they are men
Interesting arguments. So what is the proportion of women among top chess players? I would guess 1 in 160, or less. So all the arguments you made would result in a 1 to 10 attrition in the woman chess player population, as they move up the ladder. I find it too high, not completely explained by this video. I think the main reason for many more male top chess players is the tendency for higher risk taking (to be positive), or the tendency for single-mindedness (to be negative), among men than among women.
Did you not finish the video? He then goes on to attribute the significantly lower proportion to the fact that there is negative pressure against women competing in chess at a young age all the way through to adulthood.
@@tomasmcilroy7032 There's also the fact that, Psychologically Males are more competitive. So it'd make sense the top X% in an industry/game is dominated by competitive personalities. No negative pressures of x-society needed. Also, there are plenty of industries/games that pay more than chess. Literally better off in there than to waste time in chess. I play chess cuz of "preserving the mind" and calorie reasons (heard a chess match can burn calories passively. Although it's probably concentrated on high-level chess which I'm not) If people actually took more factors into account, blaming society for the lack of females in X area goes down to near zero (usually)
@@NicitoStaAnaok thanks Mr. Scientist. I bet you actually looked at some quantitative rigorous evidence for "compititiveness", analysed by appropriate people for manipulation and checked the methodology. Suuure. Or is it just that it "sounds" intuitiuve and like "common sense", but also logical and scientific sounding right. The points logically follow so we don't bother to check the actual quantitative facts. The psuedo science runs wild.
this video has so many factors not considered and is relating to such irrelevant things... all you did was basically claim that the starting point of a child in chess determines their talent level, which is frankly comical, and proceeded to say that 1 in 60000 chess players is a magnus carlsen, garry kasparov or bobby fischer, and that there are 10 of these, which is nonsense, if you are putting bobby sixcher kasparov and carlsen in the same pool, you cant take 605 million or whatever number it is of chess players CURRENTLY, but you need to take ALL CHESS PLAYERS EVER, because these players arent from the same era. And if you do all that, all you basically are saying is why there isnt a female magnus carlsen, which has nothing to do with the fact that basically everywhere you look the general rating gap between male chess players and female ones is enormous, and if what you said was relevant, and women should have half the chance, then it should mean that for every 32 males in a certain rating category, there should be 1 female as well (according to your data of 1 - 16 ratio and 1/2 the chance with the number of players) - THAT would prove your point. AndI dont think a chess prodigy who got to 2000 will suddenly just quit chess all together because shes afraid of some ass holes calling her names - which btw, male chess proffesionals arent exactly the richest and happiest people in the world as well... Just had to comment something because this is just... How can you upload something like this? and what do you base your data on when you say 900 initial rating is so amazing? 😂 I started at 900, and after 2 weeks I was 1400, according to you im the brightest chess talent in history
Such a bad faith arguement You’re better then this Do something that educates and enlightens It’s not chess that women are behind It’s everything academic and athletic Truly gifted youngsters are all over 1000 My first rating was 1349
Women are not "behind", atleast not in academics. I have been enrolled in 6 schools because my family moves a lot, and in every single one of them, 7-8 of the 10 best students were girls. Also, maybe learn english before trying to write a comment in it.
1. Learn english. 2. Where do you live? Because often depending on the country, girls and boys are introduced to academic intelligence and differently, leading to higher success rates in schools for boys, but not at all because they're "smarter" in any way. 3. I don't get why it's so difficult for boys to admit their privileges. This world was literally built by males, for males. It's very obvious that women have it more difficult, if only you opened your goddamn eyes and actually educated yourself for once in your life. :)@@Miraan
The Problem with Women's chess is that in classical championships is that women play a best of 3, whilst men play a best of 7. The chess rating system is +200elo/ number of games. This means when a man plays 3 championship games, they played 21 games, meanwhile women play 9 games, thats why women are ranked lower in classical chess.
@@samsaxena6659 ....... Wait wtf , dude its more complcating than that. Believe me I've tried to calculate elo like that. But it doesn't work The only way you could come to that assumption. Is if you calculate every single opponent and their rating all the way they are now. Also women player can be more active than men sometimes. Like there's not like a limit of 30. BTW they don't play bo7 in the WC. Get your facts right.
Women can play in the open category, together with men in the same tournaments as them. Women's tournaments have lower points and therefore it is easier to win women's categories and titles, but women can still earn points and men's titles by playing joint tournaments with them.
It's really annoying that women want men to say that women can be just as good at chess. Wtf should men say that? Women don't deserve credit for something they didn't achieve. If you want men to say that, do it. Stop trying to get accolades you didn't earn.
@Nadia-yj5iy I didn't say mine I said men. If you didn't than what do you care if men say women aren't good as men in chess? So far that's what the record shows.
The IQ distributions for men and women are different: Roughly the same mean, but the standard deviation is higher for men which means there are more highly intelligent men than highly intelligent women. (This is seen in chess, in mathematics, in theoretical physics, in computer science, ...)
Like so often, this video assumes the results before diving deeply into the analysis. And the real question isn't even asked: Is it perhaps that statistically men are better in chess because of biological reasons? Men are better in solving spatial tasks. And you don't even mention this? Because you know beforehand that it must be the evil society/education.
If games were pure brain power than yes I would say no sex is better then the other in theory. But if you factor in variables like pressure and stress, I'm inclined to think males will have generally the upper hand.
@@Princess_Blue380 men don’t repress emotions they just don’t cry to all of their friends. They cry to the one friend they can trust. I’ve seen your other comments. There’s no explaining away that men are better at chess than women not for any outside factors. They are better because men’s brains are different than women’s brains.
@@-karma-2426men have better stamina so it will probably help them through long tournaments and long classical chess games where your calculations start to decline from fatigue.
@@sleepyduxx9555 yk I didn't even think about the stamina aspect of things, but your right, it probably gives men an advantage with dealing with mental fatigue during tournaments
@@sleepyduxx9555Men have superior physical stamina, referring to their cardio vascular capabilities. Studies on differences of mental stamina and toughness show no difference between men and women, so it bears no relevance as to these tendencies in chess.
Deleting comments like a boss. But really compareing the chess of men and women is like compareing a lion to a gazelle. I respect women and consider them equal but we all know the game is rigged.
Yes, and we have examined why they are less interested, you fool. Science isn't about saying "what if it's just like that", it's about finding out the why.
uhm... men have been proven to be better problem solvers, and puzzle solvers, its evolutionary biology.... women are better at throwin that @$$ in a circle..
@@Princess_Blue380 lmfao completely vague answer with no way of proving who is better, means nothing, but men are better at that too. Fact is you can't give on example because deep down you know the truth.
@@Princess_Blue380 They have this search engine called google, you should use it. If you look up the best players in Chess, Jeporady, poker (Magnus Carlsen, James Holzhauer, Phil Ivey etc.) you will see all the best players are men. That being said I challenge you to find any game where the best players are women in ANYTHING.
@@Princess_Blue380 So now you're backtracking and conceding the initial point to me lmfao. Of course there is some woman who is better at some man at something, but the fact remains that all the top mental giants are men. Men are smarter than women, sorry bud.
Can anyone even think of one field where women can compete with men? Music is the only one I can think of. But even there there's never been a female composer who comes close to Beethoven, Liszt, etc.
Their are many feilds women can compete with but why should we care about whos stronger men or women.If you look at them as both humans then you'll see it doesn't matter.
