# Maralyn Vos Savant **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 28, 2000, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734 "2000-05-28T14:20:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Cogitoergosum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Cogitoergosum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cogitoergosum)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2000, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/1 "2000-05-28T14:20:20Z")
Well, looking through my morning paper today, I, as usual, read Maralyn vos Savant’s column (she’s the one that claims to have the world’s highest IQ.) Anyway, I noticed that on the bottom it says that she her Intelligence Quotient is something like a 225. I was surprised to see this since, 1) I was pretty sure that IQ tests maxed out at either 160 or 200; 2) IQ tests are generally not comparable. So for instance, somebody could have a 125 IQ on one test and be “smarter” than somebody else who has a 150 IQ on a different test. So anyway, can anybody explain this?? ---
**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2000, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/2 "2000-05-28T16:04:57Z")
**Abe** posted [this link](http://home8.swipnet.se/~w-80790/Index.htm) in the [What was Einstein’s IQ](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=24931) thread. [quote] With regard to super-high childhood IQ scores [derived from: (MA/CA) x 100]: It is clear from Hollingworth’s work and the work of others that there is a marked “regression to the mean” with maturity. It has been suggested that childhood “ratio” scores have a natural standard deviation of 24 (cf. the Cattell Scale), so it is necessary to multiply the excess above the mean by 2/3rds to convert a childhood score to an adult score with the conventional SD16. That would imply the following adult scores: IQ 200+ for Sidis, and IQ 185 for Savant. Still, extremely high, but more probable. [quote] If true, that would make M v S something like the 500th smartest person alive, I’m estimating. ---
**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2000, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/3 "2000-05-28T16:43:01Z")
I mucked up the quotes. The last sentence was mine where I estimated M v S was the 500th smartest person alive. A closer approximation would make her the 406[sup]th[/sup] smartest out of 6 billion, if her IQ is 185 with a SD of 16. By the way, the (MA/CA\*100) method that gave her an IQ of over 218 means "Mental age over chronological age times 100). This is a method never used with adults, and rarely with children. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Zambezi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7cd45c/32.png) [@Mr.Zambezi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Zambezi)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2000, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/4 "2000-05-28T16:49:35Z")
And today she gets two out of three questions wrong. **Call to Uncle Cecil** : Address her probability answer and her manhole cover answer! This evil woman must be stopped! For those who avoid the Parade section, she stated that manhole covers are round NOT because this stops them from falling down the manhole. In her retarded-ass opinion it is the LIP that stops them from falling down the hole. Of course any other shape except for a puffy triangle will fall down the hole, lip or no lip. The other gem was: you have 7 keys. One will start the car. You pull one key out at a time and discard it if it does not work. Her contention is that the first key has a 1:7 chance of starting teh car and that every key therafter also has a 1:7 chance of starting the car. So,I ms.Savant’s world, if the first 6 keys fail, the last remaining key has a 1:7 chance of starting the car. Bullshit. With one key left the chance is 1:1. Will somebody please stop this woman? ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2000, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/5 "2000-05-28T18:54:48Z")
With all due respect to Cecil, maybe manhole covers wouldn’t be the best topic for him to challange Marilyn vos IdiotSavant on. He booted this question himself, thusly > [@](#): > > A cover shaped like an equilateral triangle won’t fall in either. Here’s [the column](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_247a.html) and here’s an [SDMB thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=2255) discussing the column. ---
**Author:** ![jcgmoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a9adbd/32.png) [@jcgmoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jcgmoi)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2000, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/6 "2000-05-28T20:36:32Z")
Here’s what MvS said: ‘Say that Brian drops his own car key into that original box of six keys, making the number of keys total seven instead. He’s going to randomly remove one key at a time and then try to start his car with it. (If the key doesn’t work,he’ll discard it.) We know that the chances are one out of seven that he’ll retrieve his own car key on the first try. But what are the chances that he’ll get back has key on the second try?’ The chance that the first key fails and the second key succeeds is 6/7 \* 1/6 = 1/7. Score one for MvS. Manhole covers are round because manholes are round. Half credit. ---
**Author:** ![SilentKnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SilentKnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SilentKnight)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2000, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/7 "2000-05-29T02:20:30Z")
I remember Cecil had a column about how Marylin wrote something similar to this. If you are a contestant on a game show and you have three doors to choose from to win a prize. One door has a prize inside, the other two, nothing. Let’s say that you pick door number one. The host then opens door number 2 and shows that nothing is inside. So do you stay with number 1 or switch to number 3? According to Marylin, you would increase your chances of winning by switching to door number 3. What??? I personally think this is bull. It makes no sense at all. Can anyone direct me to the column that Cecil wrote about this? Thanks ---
**Author:** ![Ringo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/779978/32.png) [@Ringo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ringo)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2000, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/8 "2000-05-29T02:49:29Z")
The Cecil column **SilentKnight** requested: [http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3\_189.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_189.html) Both of these questions depend for their correct answer on the phrasing of the question. If one asks “In the initial condition, what is the chance that the seventh and last key to be tried will be the correct one?” the answer is 1/7 (assuming you might try all 7 even if you started the car with key #3), while if one asks, “Well, you’ve tried all the other keys and now you’ve got one key left, what are the chances that this one key out of one is the correct one?” the answer is 1/1. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2000, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/9 "2000-05-29T12:31:20Z")
Perhaps a better wording, beatle: Q: What is the chance that it will be EXACTLY the 3rd key that starts the car? A: 1/7. The chance of it being exactly the 3rd key is no different from the chance of it being the first or the seventh. Think of the keys being lined up, 1 through 7. If you’re looking for EXACTLY the third key, you don’t even need to try keys one and two, they are irrelevant. All that you care about is key #3. Q: What is the chance that the car will have started in the first three tries (that is, with keys 1, 2, or 3)? A: 3/7. So, there’s a fine distinction between the questions. I didn’t see the paper yesterday, but the phrasing can be used to deliberately mislead. ---
**Author:** ![billehunt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c37758/32.png) [@billehunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billehunt)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2000, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/10 "2000-05-29T22:49:07Z")
Re: the original question… MvS takes IQ tests on a regular basis; it’s a hobby of hers. Like any hobby, you can’t help but get better as time goes on. In fact, here’s one standard question (from Stanford-Binet? I can’t recall): Given 60 seconds, name all the animals you can which start with the letter ‘S’. If you took this one-question IQ test every day, you could be at 300 in no time at all. Given, this example doesn’t apply to all IQ test questions, but I think you catch my meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Zambezi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7cd45c/32.png) [@Mr.Zambezi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Zambezi)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/11 "2000-05-30T04:12:33Z")
ARRRRGGGGHHHHH! Not the “Let’s Make a Deal” question again! First key = 1:7, Second Key = 1:6, third key =1:5 …and so on. No there is no advantage to being either first or 7th . The odds are the same, but she fucked up the answer. And as for the manhole cover, the equilateral triangle will not work , but the puffy triangle will. Regardless, the reason that the cover is round has NOTHING to do with the lip! %%^_(^##_&$#, My lowly 160 IQ wants to wring her freaking Savant neck! ---
**Author:** ![Ringo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/779978/32.png) [@Ringo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ringo)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/12 "2000-05-30T04:47:17Z")
We’ll try again (and to think I actually enjoyed _Let’s Make A Deal_ as a sprite). Since I don’t read a paper anymore, I am relying on **jcgmoi** ’s transcript of the MvS question: > [@](#): > > Say that Brian drops his own car key into that original box of six keys, making the number of keys total seven instead. He’s going to randomly remove one key at a time and then try to start his car with it. (If the key doesn’t work,he’ll discard it.) We know that the chances are one out of seven that he’ll retrieve his own car key on the first try. But what are the chances that he’ll get back his key on the second try? What are the chances that he’ll get back his key on the **second** try? 6/7 \* 1/6 = 1/7 What are the chances that he’ll get back his key on the **third** try? 6/7 \* 5/6 \* 1/5 = 1/7 What are the chances that he’ll get back his key on the **fourth** try? 6/7 \* 5/6 \* 4/5 \* 1/4 = 1/7 Those are the probabilities based on the **initial** condition, i.e., seven untried keys. The **tertiary** condition would be that encountered when two keys have already been tried and there are five yet to be tried. In that case, the chances for any remaining key are 1/5. The difference in the probabilities is that of considering the whole compound case (i.e., probability viewed from the initial condition) versus the remaining case. Hope this helps. ---
**Author:** ![WhoaNellie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c37758/32.png) [@WhoaNellie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhoaNellie)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/13 "2000-05-30T04:49:10Z")
She’s a lot smarter than Cecil, and he’s made up. ---
**Author:** ![Ringo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/779978/32.png) [@Ringo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ringo)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/14 "2000-05-30T05:33:35Z")
I get the distinct feeling that you’re made up, hoo-ha nellie. ---
**Author:** ![billehunt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c37758/32.png) [@billehunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billehunt)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/15 "2000-05-30T06:06:28Z")
Sorry, but I just read the column and she’s right on both questions. You might want to take that 160 in for a retest. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/16 "2000-05-30T06:54:20Z")
No, no, no, she’s got a higher IQ than Cecil, but Cecil is smarter. There’s a difference. And what do you mean, Cecil is made up? Who wrote all those columns? Somebody sure did, and since “Cecil Adams” is a pseudonym anyway, we might as well say that whoever wrote the columns is, in fact, Cecil. By the way, any shape manhole cover with a sufficiently wide lip won’t fall in, and a round manole cover without one will. The only thing special about a round cover (or one of those funky curved triangles) is that you don’t need a particularly wide lip. ---
**Author:** ![Dragwyr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dragwyr/32/2855_2.png) [@Dragwyr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dragwyr)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/17 "2000-05-30T14:19:15Z")
You all may be interested in the following URL: [http://www.wiskit.com/marilyn.html](http://www.wiskit.com/marilyn.html) ---
**Author:** ![SingleDad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9e8a1a/32.png) [@SingleDad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SingleDad)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/18 "2000-05-30T14:36:49Z")
Marilyn is a toy. She rarely applies her powerful intelligence to anything but puzzles. She’s not completely stupid; her answers are usually right, but she has a depressing tendency to specify her problems poorly, and then get defensive when challenged. This may be intentional; she makes people look stupid when they challenge her, and she gets a lot of press from her critics. Cecil applies his intelligence to real issues. He doesn’t create pseudo-problems to demonstrate his own intelligence, he _delivers the goods_ and satisfies our curiousity on a weekly basis. Marilyn is in the fluff section, Cecil is in one of the nations most respected alternative newspapers. _You_ do the math. ---
**Author:** ![missbunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/76d3ee/32.png) [@missbunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/missbunny)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/19 "2000-05-30T15:44:02Z")
I actually think that Marilyn is _very_ precise in both the wording of her own questions and the way in which she interprets the questions posed to her. It seems to me that it is usually the questioner (or the person who claims her answer is wrong) who has misinterpreted the question, and when this is pointed out to them, Marilyn’s answer is correct. I don’t know where you guys read her column, but in my paper it’s in the Sunday Parade magazine. That’s no more “fluffy” than the Style section of the Boston Phoenix, which is where I used to read Cecil before I found this website. She has written several books, as has Cecil. And I think the majority of questions that Marilyn answers are sent to her by readers; they are not problems, pseudo or otherwise, that she herself created. All that said, I don’t think she has an I.Q. of 225 any more than I do, and I think she should be putting her intelligence to better use. ---
**Author:** ![Necros](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/necros/32/11086_2.png) [@Necros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Necros)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2000, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734/20 "2000-05-30T16:11:38Z")
Just FYI, she did phrase the question this weekend (the one about the keys) in such a way that she would be right with her answer, one-seventh. I had to read her answer a couple of times to make sure, but she’s right. The problem is that she is looking at the odds for each key from the beginning of the contest, which, I’ll grudginly admit, makes sense in the context of the question. Therefore, the odds of each key starting the car are equal. But I simply cannot see why, after one key has been drawn, the odds are not one-sixth that the next key will start the car. After all, there are six keys. One of them starts the car. The contest no longer is about seven keys. As far as the odds are concerned, there’s no reason it should be. I guess it just depends on whether you are looking at the contest from the “outside” (the total is seven keys) or “inside” (the total is how ever many keys there are at a certain time) as **beatle** said. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maralyn-vos-savant/20734.md?page=2)