Great piece! However, this is incorrect:
"In short, the study concludes that ‘the great discrepancy in the top performance of male and female chess players can be largely attributed to a simple statistical fact—more extreme values are found in larger populations.’ That is to say that the more people in a group, the more likely it is that people within that group will be anomalous in some way. "
It does not mean that the more people in a group, the more likely it is that people within that group will be anomalous in some way. The two groups may be equally likely to have anomalous individuals. What it means is that, conditional on being anomalous, an individual is more likely to belong to the group with more people in it.
"In short, the study concludes that ‘the great discrepancy in the top performance of male and female chess players can be largely attributed to a simple statistical fact—more extreme values are found in larger populations.’ That is to say that the more people in a group, the more likely it is that people within that group will be anomalous in some way. "
It does not mean that the more people in a group, the more likely it is that people within that group will be anomalous in some way. The two groups may be equally likely to have anomalous individuals. What it means is that, conditional on being anomalous, an individual is more likely to belong to the group with more people in it.