Yeah, that pisssed me off too, but I was vested. It did have fair warning on the front page before you started, and did seem legit, where the other free ones did not....

Sorry...

Don't take this too serious... It is just a matter of the headline...

Yes you are right - Steve Ritchie is a true pinball genius and I personally had, have and hopefully will have tons of fun playing his games! Thanks Steve!

No you are wrong - such things do not only happen on pinside... being cynical or funny is an essential part of the web as just reading headlines rather than listening to an one hour podcast.

There only are a few so I'm sure he'd be there.

Genius is as genius does.

I don't need a fricking IQ test result to know Ritchie is a genius. Real world success is SO much more than a multiple choice test.

The fact is, Steve's work is out there and embraced by people for the past several DECADES. What more proof do you need?

IQ numbers are poor predictors of anything. Heck, experts can't even agree on a DEFINITION of intelligence, let alone a scoring system. Real world performance is all that matters.

I didn't listen to the 1 hour podcast, so no clue the context SR used in describing his IQ as 163. But the few people that I have met that like to brag about their IQ strike me as far below said number.

Similar to contractors that show up to my home to quote a job, then proceed to tell me how religious they are and they have to answer to a higher power. Talk about triggering the danger sense

Yup

Mine is awesomer

Yup

Exactly! Great interview I never heard of before.

The most interesting aspect to me was that Steve had no cost ceiling on the LE for ACDC. I had not heard that before. My understanding that only Lawlor had that with TZ, and even he said that would never happen again, and he should not have been allowed.

You don't think of Stern (well, Gary) doing this, but when you look at everything included, I guess it makes sense.

Yours is wishful thinking.

The guy is smart but I would question anybody who says a high number. In any case, I would say that most occupations and I mean 99%+ don't demand more than 130-140. Most advancements from what I have seen in engineering do come from smart people but what really made them different was how much time, energy, and tears they put into their trade.

My father-in-law is a Mensa member with an IQ in the 140's and has a Phd in mathematics. He was a code breaker in the military and then became a college prof teaching statistical analysis so maybe you can consider that "important and impactful" but hardly something that makes a lot of money. On the other side of that he was able to plot stock trends and was successful enough at investing to be able to travel extensively, payoff his home and retire as a millionaire at 60.

130-140??? I think you will find the median is around 100 and 2% of the population would be over 130 and .1% over 140.

I have a saying I repeat to myself a lot: "It's all about effort." Everyone should try it. Next time you do any task, say to yourself "it's all about effort" and give it as much effort and focus as you can. The results will speak for themselves.

Success directly correlates to the effort you put in, be it cooking, work, or your family life. Being smart helps, but I know some smart people who aren't very successful, because they don't put in the effort. Conversely, I know some "average" people who work their ass off and are very successful.

Don't forget Steve Ritchie .00001% over 162.

Well, there you go, then...proved my point!

(And I know there are exceptions to every rule and that I made a blanket statement. Some people get SO literal... )

Steve Ritchie is the best.

Just ask him, he'll tell you.

When SR went into the Coast Guard for the Vietnam War, they automatically tested his IQ.

His IQ came back extremely high, so they started sending him to all sorts of technical schools. That's how he fell into all the electronic stuff.

It's not like he was bragging about his IQ, it was simply him describing the odd twists and turns that life took him on to the road to pinball nirvana.

=====================================

Everyone should listen to the interview BEFORE they post their opinion.

BTW, there are 9,000 people in the USA with an IQ over 160.

dupe

That's not the Pinside way...

1. Find topic that needs controversy
2. Post negative opinion
3. Vigorously defend it using personal attacks if facts get in the way

Pinside on!

I'm fairly certain the majority of the people I work with are > 120, and I'm sure there's plenty 130+, and even some over 150. The high end tech jobs really do require fairly high aptitude for the job (which I think IQ correlates well with for these particular jobs), and is generally tolerant of people with lesser social skills that are associated with many high IQ types.

If you consider how much the general population is "whittled down" from top tech school applications, weed out classes, GRE/graduate admissions, and the interview process of top tech companies, and then excelling your first N years on the job to be able to get into the more desired groups, it's very easy to see how a group can consist of top 2% and even top <1% IQ type of people.

Now pinball machine design, on the other hand, requires much more than high IQ(and may not require it at all). SR may have a high IQ, but I don't really believe that to be a requirement to excel at the job, though it certainly helps, and there's certainly more requirements along the creativity aptitude to be good than pure IQ.

An IQ score does nothing to measure intelligence. It only measures the ability to retain and recall information.

The main question is how to measure Steve Ritchie's creative intelligence?

imagination-is-more-important-than-knowledgeknowledgeknowledge-is-limitedimagination-encircles-the-world-imagination-quote.jpg

I think you have it backwards. IQ tests really don't test recall at all. They test logic and pattern identification. Maybe you were thinking about "Trivial Pursuit".... or maybe a non-STEM education.

And I'm definitely not one of 'em. Ignorance is bliss, yo!

I think I agree with you about filters and hurdles weeding down groups. The group I am with is pretty smart and I am pretty sure everyone could have gone to medical school had they been inclined.

Exactly.

If you ever took an IQ test in the military or your freshmen year in college, you will remember that it was a bunch of logic problems like:

===========================

Ritchie likes these numbers except one --- Which one?

1431 6581 7243 8656

============================

In a tug of war, four Tong can pull as hard as five Sams.
But two Sams and a Tong can pull as hard as one Fiji.

If the Fiji and two Sams tugged against the four Tongs, which side would win?

============================

A medieval soldier came to a crossing of six roads. There was a sign post pointing to the towns in the six directions, but a recent storm had spun the signpost so that all the arrows now pointed the wrong way. How did the soldier find his required direction?

============================

Because time is very limited, only fast, logical people are going to score well on this type of test.

When I started at my current employer I had to take all kinds of tests, including a handwriting analysis.

6581 because its the only one where the sum of the digits is not a square of an integer.

The Fiji and 2 Sams would win in a close match (5% more strength).

The soldier would rotate the sign until the arrow pointing to the direction he came from pointed to the correct town (his one known variable) and then he could choose the correct path for where he was going.

How did I do?

Weird, I experienced the same thing! What years are you talking about?

You did well my son. Your mother and I are sending you off to electronic boarding school........

How "fast" you are able to think through logic problems is worthless in real life.

I'll take a hard working, determined individual, with a good educational background, that processes information deliberately to make wise decisions!

In other words, give me somebody that is going to run through the wall for you.

I worked with a genius once and all the stereotypes you see and hear are completely untrue. She was 18 had just finished a double masters, I think biochemistry and physics. She wanted to piss her parents off so she got a very good job as software engineer. It was really funny because to her she was slumming it. She was decent looking, super social, she was just so fucking smart she could learn and adapt to any situation. When you have that kind of horsepower you too smart to ever be awkward or make people uncomfortable.

I think a simpler answe is 8656 because it is even.

Wise decision are based on logic. There are a lot of technical things that basically require a very logical person to do. Sometimes a very hard working person with bad logic is way more dangerous than a lazy logical person just due to the amount of stuff they will screw up. Most jobs aren't like this but as you get more technical you have people that either get it or don't and there really isn't any gray area.

I'm not sure what you consider "technical" or not but I'm a CPA, estate planning lawyer and licensed financial advisor.

I graduated magna cum laude and got 236 out 250 questions correct on the Series 7.

It ain't because I'm smarter than anybody else, I just worked hard at it. Throw in some common sense and that goes a long way in life.

In fact I'm just average at best. But I have to combine relationship and social skills to excel along with the hard work.

Technical people in most fields are a dime a dozen. Look at engineers. Most of them can do the business, the ones that rise to the top can SELL the business.

Not tooting my own horn, I'm just an average idiot technically. That's my point. What I'm great at is putting it all together. That took many years.

Both of the above are correct. Recent studies have shown that separate parts of the brain are used for different types of problem solving, at least 3 types at at minimum: short-term memory, reasoning and verbal agility. The IQ test only measures one of the 3, so using it as "the" measure of intelligence is flawed because it's not uncommon for a person to be good in one area and not so good in the others.

Iceman you said it best! However, you should give yourself more credit. Impressive score on your Series 7. You are probably in the top 5% if not higher overall intelligence than most people. In fact, most people on this thread are probably in the top 5% if not higher. (simple as reading one new book every week). The overall intelligence and creativity on Pinside amazes me.

1ad29be49c1a2f501103054683012fe6_1_orig.jpg

Mr. Pythagoras (or one of his followers) taught me to calculate 5.

I would conclude that the person who answered "Here it is" and circled X on that exam question would most likely be smarter than anyone who answered 5. As a teacher, I would give bonus points.

Nowadays, when it comes to math, helping my kids in school with Calculus, geometry and all that other worthless math (except for engineers) I don't know about you guys but Google is a dads best friend and even with that it's like Wtf is this!

The one class they don't teach in school that they should is everything about the "power of compounding". Einstein was no dummy

Thx Piper, intelligence is worthless if you don't use it. I'm just competitive and don't like to lose! Other than that, just average

I concur.
Heheh.

That may be who you want to do shit for you, but is that what you want for yourself? Certainly not, especially if you are a litigator.

I believe the saying is "thinking on your feet."

double............

I think on my feet every day when I meet with my clients to help them. Litigators, I hope you don't ever need them, you lose.

Btw Sack, you owe me a case of beer. What's up?

Compounding 0% interest sin't such a powerful thing.

That sounds like your problem, doesn't it? But compounding in reverse is maybe what you know about?

Obviously you haven't taken that class

LOL. .. didn't you not only sign up for predator, but multiple jpops too?

I thought we were talking about savings, not at-risk investments. at .2% you'd have to start with a large fortune to make a tiny income. But maybe you can do some projections with consistent 7% returns as you likely tell your marks... er clients.

BTW, if that MG from Tacoma made it back to JPOP's I'm still happy to buy you that case of beer. Who has the BOL?

Steve knows about this thread.
Not sure he can comment on it though. Would be nice if he could.

Great interview, then again any interview with a pinball designer is interesting. Heard some of it before, not sure if I ever heard him really talk about why he's got hearing issues. Even loved hearing him talk about the coast guard, wonder if he's ever thought about that as a theme for a pinball since it was such a big part of his life.

The raw IQ number can be misleading to an extent. You'll want to know the actual test that was taken which won't mean anything to you if you knew it anyway, so actually, you'll want the person to tell you the percentile that the raw number falls into, based on all the raw numbers of everyone else who took that particular test. The percentile is the better comparison as it equalizes all the different qualifying tests. I'll try to explain.

Different IQ tests have different maximum point values. Maybe Test A has a maximum possible points of 163. Test B has maximum possible points of 183. If Tom gets 150 on Test A and Mary gets 150 on Test B, did Tom get more questions correct than Mary? Is Tom smarter? Or was Test B simply harder than Test A? Is Mary smarter? Is it fair to compare 150 to 150 with these hidden variables?

I took two proctored IQ tests in the same day. On "Test C" my score was 143 and on "Test D" my score was 152. Of all of the people who (ever) took Test C, only 1 out of every hundred people got a score near 143 or higher. Therefore, my 143 placed me in the 99th percentile.

Of all of the people who (ever) took Test D, only 2 out of every hundred people got a score near 152 or higher. Therefore, my 152 placed me in the 98th percentile.

The higher raw IQ number was the lower percentile.

More people could get 152 on Test D than could get 143 on Test C. So, my lower IQ number 143 actually reflected better on me than the higher number 152. Who would ever know that if comparing raw numbers?

Which number do I throw around at cocktail parties? Neither, as it is considered gauche to mention them and besides, anyone "in the know" would know that the percentile is where the meaning is, not that raw number.

A raw score of 163 is still going to be impressive, but we really don't know if the qualifying test had a higher maximum possible point score than other tests, or if a score of 163 was hard to get on that test. The name of the test would tell you the former. The percentile would tell you the latter.

You can now see why comparing Tom and Mary's percentiles would be more fair than comparing their raw numbers.

Mensa, one of the high IQ organizations, requires a 98th percentile ranking or higher for admission, using any of a number of approved tests. Raw numbers are not really the point.

He won't. He's smarter than that.