Chess and health: 9 myths put to the test

Updated 18 October 2026 · Written by the How To Play Chess editorial team · Studies checked in the original journals

1. “Chess is dangerous for your health”

False. No study has found any danger specific to chess. A competitive game provokes a moderate stress response: heart rate rises and the sympathetic nervous system activates, as Troubat and colleagues measured in 20 players (European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2009). These reactions are passing. The real points to watch are those of any seated, absorbing activity: sitting still, sleep cut short by late games on a screen, playing game after game in the grip of frustration. Details on the page chess, stress and anxiety.

2. “Chess raises IQ”

Not demonstrated. This is the most widespread myth, often accompanied by a figure (“+X IQ points in a few months”) with no source. The meta-analyses by Giovanni Sala and Fernand Gobet show that the effects of chess lessons on general abilities are small and shrink when studies are better controlled; the largest randomised trial, among 4,009 English pupils, finds no effect on school results.

Population IQ scores did rise over the 20th century in many countries, by around three points per decade: this is the “Flynn effect”, named after the New Zealand researcher James Flynn who documented it. It is attributed to factors such as schooling, nutrition or familiarity with abstract thinking, not to board games. Details: does chess make children more intelligent?

3. “Being bad at chess means having a low IQ”

False. A link between IQ and chess skill exists, but it is modest: a correlation of about 0.24 according to the meta-analysis by Burgoyne and colleagues (Intelligence, 2016), which weakens among experienced players. Level depends above all on the quantity and quality of practice. A brilliant player who is just starting will lose to an average player who has been playing for ten years. See the IQ of chess players.

4. “Chess prevents Alzheimer’s”

Exaggerated. Several cohorts associate playing mentally demanding games with less dementia, but none proves that the game is the cause. In the French PAQUID cohort, the 15% gap observed in board-game players disappears when baseline cognitive state and depression are taken into account (Dartigues et al., BMJ Open, 2013). The first signs of the illness, which precede diagnosis by several years, can also lead people to give up playing. See chess and Alzheimer’s.

5. “A grandmaster burns 6,000 calories a day”

An estimate with no measurement. The figure comes from an ESPN article published in 2019, which attributed it to the neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky. No published study has measured it. The available physiological measurements show a moderate rise in heart rate and a change in the body’s fuel during a game, not an expenditure worthy of a marathon. See the detail of this contested estimate.

6. “Playing makes dendrites grow and activates both brains”

False or meaningless. No study has observed dendrite growth in chess players; current imaging cannot see it in living humans anyway. MRI studies show structural differences between experts and non-players, without being able to say whether they are a cause or a consequence of practice, as Hänggi and colleagues write (Neuropsychologia, 2014). As for the opposition between a “logical left brain” and a “creative right brain”, it is an abandoned simplification: almost every complex activity engages both hemispheres. See the chess player’s brain.

7. “Chess cures schizophrenia”

False. This very widespread claim rests on a single short publication.

The study suggests that the game can serve as a cognitive remediation exercise, an approach that trains attention and planning in patients who are otherwise being followed and treated. It measures no effect on the symptoms of the illness and has not, to our knowledge, been confirmed by a larger trial. Presenting chess as a treatment for schizophrenia is therefore unfounded.

8. “Online chess is worthless for the brain”

Not studied. No study compares the cognitive effects of online play with play on a board. The mechanisms involved are the same: calculation, pattern recognition, decision-making. Two practical differences do deserve attention, however: very fast games favour reflexes over reflection, and the screen deprives you of the social dimension of face-to-face play. Population studies on ageing precisely stress the value of activities that are both intellectual and shared. Nothing prevents combining the two: learn online, play for real.

9. “You have to start as a child to play well”

To be qualified. Nearly all champions started young, and the amount of practice accumulated explains a large part of the level reached. But no study rules out improving as an adult: neuroplasticity persists throughout life. An adult who starts will probably not become a grandmaster, but can reach a very good club level and derive lasting pleasure from it. And for older people, chess remains a suitable activity (see chess for seniors).

In summary

None of this takes anything away from the pleasure of playing. A beautiful solid wood chessboard set out in the living room invites a game more than any health promise.