It's tempting to look at IQ as a potential for everything, but as one having access to a lot of ultra-smart people (I'm doing PhD in theoretical physics) it's very easy to see that creativity lies on a different axis.
And during studies I've met many people who were able to solve very hard mathematical problems, but at the same time - were seemingly unable to create new ones on their own.
(And also, creativity many times is counterproductive, as encourages to try something new rather than using a good, already tested solution.)
See also:
http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/a/72/28
(a good answer to a silly question "Is IQ really unimportant for creativity beyond a certain basic IQ of roughly 125?")
the problem is that for higher IQ's you at the end of the distribution so the effect of errors is much higher maybe the two Nobels just had a cold or a bad day when they took the test.
And how do you factor conditions like dyslexia in I have seen suggestions that dyslexics score 15 or 20 points off so by that mark I am a genius :-)
That's a very good point, especially given that the standard deviation of IQ scores is 15, which suggests that scores of between 125 and 140 are possible (indeed, somewhat likely) for the same individual - a finding which I have found in my own experience of taking them.
Additionally, IQ tests were developed to assess someone's ability to benefit from formal education, and to the extent that these skills are uncorrelated with successful outcomes, IQ will be a poor predictor of it.
When it comes to IQ - think as is you wanted to assign one number to describe individual's sport ability. It will serve[x] some purpose for average (from bed-ridden ill to a healthy athletic person), but most likely - it will be almost useless for sports(wo)men, where more specialistic predispositions are required (sometimes contradictory; e.g. a great heavy weight boxer won't be even an amateur marathon runner).
[x] Actually, it's used in military, to rate conscripts - if they should be enrolled.
Good point on the drawback of creativity. I suffer horribly from that. I'll spend weeks or months trying to solve problems in unique/clever ways when there's already a clear solution if I just took a day to read and understand it.
That feeling you get when you do figure out a new way to do something though...I like to think it's worth it.
And during studies I've met many people who were able to solve very hard mathematical problems, but at the same time - were seemingly unable to create new ones on their own.
(And also, creativity many times is counterproductive, as encourages to try something new rather than using a good, already tested solution.)
See also: http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/a/72/28 (a good answer to a silly question "Is IQ really unimportant for creativity beyond a certain basic IQ of roughly 125?")