They surely aren't the dedicated smokers they used to be. But they are not quite as colorful either.

Lol! What an interesting subject. Yes there have been some very unusual Chess masters. Quite colorful really. I do not know about GO masters nearly as well.

I do believe the current Chess masters are more balanced, they love Chess, work at it devotedly, but they have other interests as well. They surely aren't the dedicated smokers they used to be. But they are not quite as colorful either.

Heh, I don’t know where you draw the line to “mad”, but I can personally attest that it’s perfectly possible to be a Go player and at the same time to be a neurotic and to have depressions

For me, Go is also a means of coping, as — I think — is anything that is challenging and enjoyable at the same time.

My thoughts involve computation vs creativity. Chess mimics computer thought processes whereas Go mimics the human thought. There's a quote: “Poets do not go mad; but chess-players do. Mathematicians go mad, and cashiers; but creative artists very seldom. I am not, as will be seen, in any sense attacking logic: I only say that this danger does lie in logic, not in imagination.” - G.K. Chesterton

Interestingly, there's even a name for the opposite hypothesis that poets are particularly susceptible to insanity: "The Slyvia Plath Effect"

In the end, actually measuring any of this is extremely difficult. Was Edgar Allen Poe insane, or did he gather that reputation because of his subject matter? Was Emily Dickens reclusion insanity or just shyness? Are quantum physicists crazy, or does it just seem like it because the Paul Diracs make for better stories than the Neils Bohrs? How can you examine any of this in a double blind, clinical manner?

I suspect any real difference between insanity among Go and Chess players is going to be swamped by differences in cultural norms towards the topic in Eastern and Western society.

That's very fair. Just wish I could find more information on the psychology of the game and its players lol

My thoughts involve computation vs creativity. Chess mimics computer thought processes whereas Go mimics the human thought.

Here we go again. All hail Go, the most wonderful, creative and worthy game. Who plays chess anyway? It's really quite shallow and bleak.

I've heard people compare chess to painting, poetry and dance.

I strongly recommend "Chess Secrets I Learned from the Masters" by Edward Lasker yes one of the founders of the AGA. This book is reminisces of his games and the many Masters he played and learned from. A thoroughly enjoyable book. Many of the Chess Masters are from the 30's and 40's were quite unique. While it is not a documentary on madness it does a great job of revealing personalities. One does not have to play thru the games included to enjoy the book. And I daresay it is such a unique book that it may be of interest to people who do not like Chess. Mr Lasker generally writes with a certain respect and fondness for his opponents. He also mentions some Chess tournament shenanigans. A great place to start. Also he talks of his encounter with GO in the book but I do not wish to reveal any spoilers.

Some of the books about Fischer and the cold war taking place can be quite interesting.



Enjoy!

My thoughts involve computation vs creativity. Chess mimics computer thought processes whereas Go mimics the human thought. There's a quote: “Poets do not go mad; but chess-players do. Mathematicians go mad, and cashiers; but creative artists very seldom. I am not, as will be seen, in any sense attacking logic: I only say that this danger does lie in logic, not in imagination.” - G.K. Chesterton

Looking at most of present-day music scene, I would dispute this quote. Most of them seem absolutely nuts! As do many of the dancers I met, although much smaller percentage. I don't know that much about present day painters, sculptors, or writers. Historically, there were some/many cases...

Can it be that in "logical" profession(s), "mad" is a serious detriment, and so it gets attention and is recorded? In artistic and creative profession(s), "mad" can be beneficial (we call it by other words, like eccentric or something) - so it gets much less spotlight?

Not even one mention of Fujisawa Shuko?

...
Interestingly, there's even a name for the opposite hypothesis that poets are particularly susceptible to insanity...

I think that cause and effect are confused here. Writing poetry does not make one crazy; rather, crazy people gravitate toward poetry.