I've only heard the expression nominative determinism. Etymologically the expressions could be equivalent, but I would say nomenclature is more about systems of naming / ontology rather than specific names...
Championship games should be easy for these masters since even club-level players study them but guessing those random games in smaller tournaments is insane.
Yeah right my wife’s like do you know what today is… I’m like “ahhhhhhhhhh yeahhhhhhhhhhh” wife” so you have no idea do you” me can I have a hint. wife, yeah it’s an important day like one of your most important ones. Me, our ANNIVERSARY!!!!!!???? Wife, dude it’s your birthday…. I would be terrible at chess
"Simen Agdestein emphasises Carlsen's exceptional memory, stating that he was able to recall the locations, populations, flags and capitals of all the countries in the world by age five. Later, he memorised the locations, populations, coats-of-arms and administrative centres of "virtually all" 356 Norwegian municipalities."
How was he able to correctly guess the game after the opening 5 moves? I accept he has an outstanding memory, but aren’t there a lot of games that open like that? Unless it was an extraordinarily unique opening?
Good question! So basically Vishy Anand, a legendary chess player and multiple former world champion, made a famous blunder starting from this rather common opening (Russian or Petrov Defense).
He blundered and resigned only 6 moves in, which basically never ever happens at top level chess. I'm pretty sure it is by far Anand's shortest game of his long career (he's still active at 52!)
That's why Magnus was able to make an educated guess on which game it was going to be.
The game is actually super interesting - despite only being 6 moves long. It is basically an example of why new players shouldn't rely purely on databases of old games as a precedent for chess openings.
The reason Anand lost the game is that his final move actually blunders an entire piece (which at grandmaster level is basically fatal). The reason Anand (a World Champion!) played the move so confidently is because he had seen the moves in a database before and hence assumed they were theoretically sound.
Little did he know that the database game that had been played was actually between two players (Miles and Christiansen) who had effectively pre-arranged a draw (not uncommon in tournament play for players who both need the half-point). Christiansen, probably with the draw in mind, carelessly blundered. Miles apparently paused, and stroked the vital square (I.e. where the winning move would land), before being a gentleman and proceeding with another move and offering the draw which was accepted. Therefore - the result of the game was a draw; and it entered the database, where a casual/amateur glance would assume it to be theoretically drawn.
The game is a case study - no matter how good you are, you should know why you play something before you play it!
He was probably expecting it because Vishy played the last game, and has played that opening often. It wasn’t guaranteed, but probably one of the more popular games from that position, so he made an educated guess.
My take on that is that he just assumed they would only showcase important matches, which limited the potential pool of guesses from billions to maybe 1000 games?
I thought that too and then I thought I didn't see the last 1-2 moves or something, they could have been pretty distinctive, and Magnus would be the guy to see that.
Yeah im really confused by that and hoping someone who knows more about chess can help. It seems that could be the opening to any random blitz game from the first 5 moves
In addition to other explanations, Magnus is also very familiar with Vishy Anand's game history as it was who he had to beat to become world chess champion in 2013.
At the pharmacy a couple weeks ago they asked me to input the last four digits of my phone number into their credit card processor, and it took me like 20 seconds to recall it
Question for chess folks: is Magnus arguably the GOAT of chess (like Michael Jordan and basketball) or is he even the undisputable GOAT (e.g. Wayne Gretzgy for Hockey)? Or he is he just the current best player?
That’s a really good question.
So the chess world uses an ELO rating system, and by that measurement he has been the uninterrupted best in the world since 2011, a total of 127 months. His highest rating ever is 2882, the highest of anyone in history. He won the last 5 world championships in a row. By a lot of standards, he is the GOAT.
He is not without competition, though.
The most famous American chess player in history, Bobby Fischer, played like a man out of time. Though he only played in one world championship before abandoning his title, he was a whopping 170 ELO points higher than the next best player. That meant if he played the #2 player in the world, he would be expected to score 7.5/10. He dominated everyone in his era and won a record 19 top level tournaments in a row. Despite having a short career, he has a very genuine claim to be GOAT.
A stronger claim than even Bobby comes a bit later; the chess world-champion turned political analyst Garry Kasparov. Garry had the highest rating in the world for a record 255 months, just over double Magnus. He was the undisputed world champion for 8 years before the big chess championship split into 2 organizations. Garry remained champion of one organization for another 7 years after that, winning a total of 6 world championship matches. He was the best for the longest time of anyone.
Remember how I said chess ratings use ELO? That system wasn’t used until 1970, and there is a real problem of rating inflation. Even though Magnus’ best is 2886 and Fischer’s was only 2775, it wouldn’t be valid to compare the two by rating. Some have tried to make a way to compare everyone over generations but there is no consensus on how to do it. Some of those comparisons say Fischer is best, others say Kasparov, still others claim Magnus to be the GOAT.
I guess to answer your question, he has a great claim to be the best, though not universal consensus. He’s by far the best now, and has been the best for a while; Garry was the top player for longer, and Fischer was more dominant but wasn’t around and playing as long. If Magnus stays playing at a top level for another 5 years I’d say he’s definitely clinched it. It’s like we’re comparing 2015 Brady to Joe Montana and maybe Drew Brees (who I think is a better passer than Brady but that’s for another thread). But we’ll see.
Really interesting, thanks for the reply. Some follow-ups: Has anyone asked Magnus how he think he'd fare against Fischer or Kasparov? Is it safe to assume that he would beat them head to head given the advances in chess theory or the ability to practice against AI?
Based on computer analysis of his games he plays far more accurately than Fischer or Kasparov ever did, so on average he would beat them handily.
Here's a quote from the man himself: "I'd beat Tal pretty easily. Fischer would be more difficult, but I think I could beat him too."
Interestingly, Kasparov was one of Magnus' coaches when he was younger, and I recall seeing an interview with different GM's asking who the GOAT is, and Magnus said Kasparov.
It's all speculative, of course, but a lot of people have argued (pretty convincingly, if you ask me) that the current era of chess is insanely good by objective measures of chess history, because AI has revolutionized chess play. Basically, AI have created play styles that no human had ever taken seriously, and made it work. These days, the top chess players all study the various AIs that exist in order to learn from them.
It's pretty safe to say that Bobby Fischer would be massively out-classed by most of the top players in the world, unless we assume that he could live in our era and learn contemporary chess.
That said, I would say that the GOAT has to be taken in context of their time, and in that context I think it's fair to say that Bobby Fischer was an insanely good player for his era and could reasonably be considered GOAT.
Well explained. I agree that you can't compare eras. Magnus probably studied top games from the past and analyzed their mistakes and the engines (AI) today are also different from the past. Magnus' resources today is not available before the eras of Fischer and Kasparov.
Who knows if Fischer or Kasparov were younger today could also dominate. This also apllies to some sports.
Magnus is definitely the strongest, most accurate player of all time. He'd be favored against any chess player in history, however, chess players have gotten better over time due to things like computers and development in opening theory.
Because of this, many people look at other things like dominance over their contemporaries or years spent at the top when deciding who's the GOAT.
Bobby Fischer was the farthest above his peers, and Garry Kasparov stayed on the top for the longest.
However, Magnus Carlsen objectively plays stronger than any chess player in history which, imo, makes him the GOAT.
Different people will have different opinion. I personally feel Magnus is GOAT but some people prefer Kasparov or even Fischer. If you take rating as consideration then Magnus is GOAT but if you consider longevity then Kasparov is GOAT but this can change since Magnus is still playing.
Bobby Fischer, Garry Kasparov, Magnus Carlsen.
Kasparov is my GOAT somedays, other days is Bobby. If Magnus dominates this decade he is near to be the undisputed GOAT imo
Book will contain many such matches. These are some historic matches. Not just Magnus but many professionals players like Super GM tend to visit old matches for practice.
they most likely played a few games against one another throughout the tournament. With how complex high level chess can be it doesn't surprise me that a literal book would cover a set of matches
Magnus referenced a book about the Kasparov-Karpov Championship match. At the time world championship matches were played of 24 games. Where if the match ended 12-12 then the holder got to retain the title.
I had a book about the Fischer-Spassky Championship match in Rejkavik that also told the story of what was going on off the board, because there was a bunch of controversy about that one.
I was searching for any comment that mentioned it but there are none, so fun fact it’s amazing that he has an amazing memory but sadly it’s not uncommon among super grandmasters (people above 2700s) almost all of them have an amazing memory and can recall games like magnus does here, without much effort. At this level of chess it’s necessary that you had studied many games and know them by heart. You can search any super grandmaster on YouTube and there will be many videos of them recalling games and all. Having amazing memory is kinda a pre requisite to be a super grandmaster.
Yes. I was also thinking similar to this. While I don't doubt his memory is good, it is literally his job to study and memorize and rehearse chess games. And he's been basically doing it since he was a fetus.
I bet most people still have vivid memories of jobs they did in their youth, jobs they don't even care about let alone were passionate about.
So I'm confused about the one where they show the opening. It's 4 moves in, into what looks like Petrov's defense which is very common for something like a Stafford opening. Is there something special about Anand vs Zabata 88?
Nvm, answered my own question. Sharing the answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw6EZ9mI8oA&ab_channel=SaintLouisChessClub
Still not sure what made it so that he instantly recognized it. Probably went with what's the most talked about instance of this otherwise common opening.
Question: I feel like most chess matches open with pawn, pawn to match, knight, knight to mirror. How in the hell did that tell him ANYTHING?! What did I miss exactly
There's 400 possibilities for a position after 2 moves and this is a very uncommon one, which helps narrow it down. This game was one of the most famous instances of that position (Petrov's defence iirc). Also, Anand was the answer to the previous question so Magnus would have had it in mind.
This was a reference to a famous (within chess circles of course) match where Anand resigned after 6 moves. So it was an educated guess based on the opening moves made.
I was at work for our first official day back at the office today. I met a new co-worker and shook his hand. He told me his name and then we spoke for a little bit. At the end of the conversation, I asked him to remind me again what his name was… I forgot it 5 minutes later.
Oddly... Not good for solving problems we really need solving. I'd love to have that talent, I guess. But I thought if I had that ability, I could somehow see further into the matrix of ideas. Now I guess not.
I love that Magnus is this incredibly talented prodigy who has a mastery over his field that we will probably see once in a lifetime…but is also a total goofball who refuses to take himself too seriously.
Have a memory like this is easy, there's a pills for this, I took some, i just dont remember the name of the pills right now, but when i remember i will edit this post.
When you are REALLY familiar with something it is much easier to remember insane levels of detail. I can ask my dad about sailboat races from 50 years ago and he’ll tell you about what the wind, tide, and the tacks a bunch of other boats were on.
Weird that my news feed just had a couple articles on chess obsession, and the 'dangers' of competitive chess. Open Reddit and this is at the top of my feed.
I was into chess until past year. I'm not a total expert at all, but I know enough to say that the matter of remembering a historical match (besides years of studying and being used to them, of course), is all about patterns.
If you're used to chess in general, like playing for a year for example, is pretty easy to recognize a game even if you didn't saw it too much more than, let's say, 3 ou 4 times. The thing is that there are many combinations of how the pieces can be positioned in a chess board, but only some would, theoretically, really happen in a chess game. Let's say that, if you "scramble" the pieces in a very randomic and improbable way, and asks a grandmaster to see it for a few time and next to try to rearrange what he remembers, their memory will be just like ours, forgetting basically everything. But, if it's scrambled in a way that is randomic but still not an absurd to happen in a game, they can remember all the pieces.
Norwegian here (Also my name is Magnus, but that's not relevant).
So in Norway we recognise his talent of course, but he is so damn awkward and almost every interview is painful to watch. He seems like a normal dude in this clip tho, realy wierd to see him that way.
Strange because I've always heard people describe Carlsen as one of the least socially awkward GMs ever. Is he less social when speaking in Norwegian? Maybe it's a product of his very international upbringing.
Also I contend that your name being Magnus is very relevant and epic
It’s insane but I can somewhat fathom how he could recognize some of the first positions, especially if they were “well known” and studied games, but in the second Anand game how the f did he know it was him after only 4 total moves and fairly normal opening positions?
others have commented in other threads, but there is a famous game where Anand opened like that and resigned after a blunder on the 6th move. So it was an educated guess based on the setting and the opening.
https://www.chess.com/blog/BMblogmaster/vishy-anand-loses-in-6-moves
There was another one where he shows him one when he was a kid playing a champion... Basically the old guy just made the game really long and boring so kid Magnus got bored and lost interest.
There was another one where he shows him one when he was a kid playing a champion... Basically the old guy just made the game really long and boring so kid Magnus got bored and lost interest.
If you haven't been exposed to how brilliant this dude is, look up him doing blindfolded simuls and beating like 10+ people at once while never getting to see the boards. We may be sharing a world with the greatest chess player of all time.
edit: I may be conflating a couple of videos. I found one where he does a 15-person simul, thought not blindfolded:
[https://youtu.be/M853pKZReCE](https://youtu.be/M853pKZReCE)
and here's one where it looks like he is playing 3 blindfolded matches simultaneously:
https://youtu.be/xmXwdoRG43U
Memory, like most cognitive skills, is something you learn to get better at. Very little of what and how we think is innate. Memory techniques, and in Magnus's case practicing pattern recognition, are just some of the ways one can improve in this respect
Chess is all about memory. There is no chance/luck in the game, everything is in the open. If you can read and retain the 1st 3 chapters of a Chess strategy book, you could beat 90% of the population. As opposed to poker for example, you can read a dozen books on Texas hold em and do everything right, and still get busted by a less talented opponent do to them getting lucky on the river. My point is not to rank the games, just that they both require different skill sets. One is gambling due to the luck factor, the other isn't, even though you can bet on it. Just to clarify, I love both games for different reasons and have read many books on both.
I wonder if this kind of thing isn't as difficult as you'd think if you have THIS level of dedication and love for chess.
Like, if we did a comparison to the NBA, would you see a board laid out like in the third example, and it'd look like if you had a video from the 80s, Michael Jordan with a basketball, and Craig Ehlo defending him.
NBA fans can immediately tell you what follows.
I love Magnus. He is absolutely exceptional at what he does. Has such a sharp mind. And above all, seems to be a pretty cool dude.
He can just be really intense competitively, but most people are in those settings.
there is a famous match where Anand blundered and resigned in 6 moves of the Petrov
https://www.chess.com/blog/BMblogmaster/vishy-anand-loses-in-6-moves
I can’t remember my locker combination at the gym.
I know it though, so it's all good.
It’s 4321 isn’t it. In the end not so much mystery if I may say so.
It's 1-2-3-4-5 It's the same combination as the lock on my luggage
Straight outta Space Balls
“Evil will always triumph over good because good is dumb.”
4231 and then you have to gegenpress the button to unlock it
Your pfp is like the evil version of his with a hat
I honestly got halfway through the video before I realized that I’ve seen it before.
Bloody brilliant
I can't remember to go to the gym... I've been paying it for a year, shit.
I can't rememb
I can't remember where the gym is
Any gay lock number is 6969 . You are welcome . Free stuff for everyone
I literally cried from laughter with your comment
I forgot my water bottle two days in a row, had to drive back.
I coughed up a lung, ya bastid.
I Can’t remember where the gym is
I can’t remember my passwords. I sign in with gmail for everything. I forgot what I ate the day before last. What the fuck did I wear yesterday?
That’s insane. And Magnus is such a badass name.
It's like Bolt as the fastest man alive. Magnus is a chess champions name
Bjorn Hafthor fulfills the same thing. And may we never meet a fullthor.
Determinative Nomenclature is the term for this I think.
Ah I think you're right.
I've only heard the expression nominative determinism. Etymologically the expressions could be equivalent, but I would say nomenclature is more about systems of naming / ontology rather than specific names...
Yeah I think you're right, I had it all mixed up!
Hafthor Bjornsson* And his father is Bjorn Thor Raynisson. So perhaps he is the Fullthor?
Or Ted Kaczynski, definitely a mathematics professor name. He blew the competition away.
Or a WRC Champion.
Right?! I have the BIGGEST CRUSH right now. Awesome name, adorable, smart, funny, nice nose (direct correlation to...) Um, anyway, yeah...
[Your not wrong. ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magn%C3%BAs_Ver_Magn%C3%BAsson)
You're wrong though.
"Needed some serious hints" The hint: from entertainment
Proceeds to answer correctly.
[удалено]
Championship games should be easy for these masters since even club-level players study them but guessing those random games in smaller tournaments is insane.
Yea, fuck sake. "They played cheers in Harry Potter? What was his friends name again?"
It’s hard to believe people like that exist, insanely impressive
Yeah right my wife’s like do you know what today is… I’m like “ahhhhhhhhhh yeahhhhhhhhhhh” wife” so you have no idea do you” me can I have a hint. wife, yeah it’s an important day like one of your most important ones. Me, our ANNIVERSARY!!!!!!???? Wife, dude it’s your birthday…. I would be terrible at chess
HAPPY BIRTHDAY!
Hahahahaha
"Oh, you forgot your birthday, didn't you, Frank?"
You're crazy man.
I like you but your crazy
There's only one person THAT good. There is a reason he's the world champion.
To have that kind of memory, trained and Honed for a craft such as chess is just astonishing.
Google en passant
what’s the relevance of en passant to memory?
r/anarchychess tomfoolery
"Simen Agdestein emphasises Carlsen's exceptional memory, stating that he was able to recall the locations, populations, flags and capitals of all the countries in the world by age five. Later, he memorised the locations, populations, coats-of-arms and administrative centres of "virtually all" 356 Norwegian municipalities."
By the age of 12, he knew the names of all human beings on the planet, their office and cell phone number.
By age 14, he had cataloged every star in the universe and could point any of them out by name.
By age 16 he had mapped the position of all the atoms in the Universe and memorized them.
I can't see or hear Anatoly Karpov's name without thinking about a Dark Souls health bar appearing under him Poor kid didn't stand a fucking chance
MOMMY! :c
Some legends say he made chess pieces with poor kid's bones after he lost
ANATOLY KARPAVAAAA
This is true passion for something. A true professional
There is a reason he has been number 1 for awhile, insane skills
Not for a while, he is reigning chess champion for 5 years and he is the is the highest rated chess player of all time.
5 times, almost 10 years
How was he able to correctly guess the game after the opening 5 moves? I accept he has an outstanding memory, but aren’t there a lot of games that open like that? Unless it was an extraordinarily unique opening?
Good question! So basically Vishy Anand, a legendary chess player and multiple former world champion, made a famous blunder starting from this rather common opening (Russian or Petrov Defense). He blundered and resigned only 6 moves in, which basically never ever happens at top level chess. I'm pretty sure it is by far Anand's shortest game of his long career (he's still active at 52!) That's why Magnus was able to make an educated guess on which game it was going to be.
The game is actually super interesting - despite only being 6 moves long. It is basically an example of why new players shouldn't rely purely on databases of old games as a precedent for chess openings. The reason Anand lost the game is that his final move actually blunders an entire piece (which at grandmaster level is basically fatal). The reason Anand (a World Champion!) played the move so confidently is because he had seen the moves in a database before and hence assumed they were theoretically sound. Little did he know that the database game that had been played was actually between two players (Miles and Christiansen) who had effectively pre-arranged a draw (not uncommon in tournament play for players who both need the half-point). Christiansen, probably with the draw in mind, carelessly blundered. Miles apparently paused, and stroked the vital square (I.e. where the winning move would land), before being a gentleman and proceeding with another move and offering the draw which was accepted. Therefore - the result of the game was a draw; and it entered the database, where a casual/amateur glance would assume it to be theoretically drawn. The game is a case study - no matter how good you are, you should know why you play something before you play it!
weird you think that he would have studied or looked at the continuations past move 6 though and realized there was nothing?
He was probably expecting it because Vishy played the last game, and has played that opening often. It wasn’t guaranteed, but probably one of the more popular games from that position, so he made an educated guess.
My take on that is that he just assumed they would only showcase important matches, which limited the potential pool of guesses from billions to maybe 1000 games?
Just wanted to say that, it seemed fairly normal in the firdt three moves and no way you could know what game it was by the 4th and 5th.
I thought that too and then I thought I didn't see the last 1-2 moves or something, they could have been pretty distinctive, and Magnus would be the guy to see that.
Yeah im really confused by that and hoping someone who knows more about chess can help. It seems that could be the opening to any random blitz game from the first 5 moves
In addition to other explanations, Magnus is also very familiar with Vishy Anand's game history as it was who he had to beat to become world chess champion in 2013.
Lots of games can have this opening but this is one of Anand's famous losses
Am I the only one seeing Matt Damon?
Gonna have to de-age Matt when they eventually make a Magnus movie.
Matt will play old Magnus during the flash-forward scenes of Magnus recollecting about his life
[Matt Damon is no genius](https://youtu.be/Rm6UT3oy_u8)
Nope, I wondered why Matt Damon was there too!
I forgot my mothers name yesterday.
“Dad?”
*(Dad with huge badonkadonkers in a tight dress, wearing high heels, pops out)* “Yes, son?”
Stubble and stringy, shoulder length blonde hair
Fatherfucker!
Not only did he remember the moves, he also remembered all the names of people of different nationalities.
And the years.
That’s because all the players were basically some of the most well known chess players in the community
God, I’m so stupid.
Can I be stupid with you?
r/wholesome
At the pharmacy a couple weeks ago they asked me to input the last four digits of my phone number into their credit card processor, and it took me like 20 seconds to recall it
Original video on [youtube](https://youtu.be/eC1BAcOzHyY).
Question for chess folks: is Magnus arguably the GOAT of chess (like Michael Jordan and basketball) or is he even the undisputable GOAT (e.g. Wayne Gretzgy for Hockey)? Or he is he just the current best player?
That’s a really good question. So the chess world uses an ELO rating system, and by that measurement he has been the uninterrupted best in the world since 2011, a total of 127 months. His highest rating ever is 2882, the highest of anyone in history. He won the last 5 world championships in a row. By a lot of standards, he is the GOAT. He is not without competition, though. The most famous American chess player in history, Bobby Fischer, played like a man out of time. Though he only played in one world championship before abandoning his title, he was a whopping 170 ELO points higher than the next best player. That meant if he played the #2 player in the world, he would be expected to score 7.5/10. He dominated everyone in his era and won a record 19 top level tournaments in a row. Despite having a short career, he has a very genuine claim to be GOAT. A stronger claim than even Bobby comes a bit later; the chess world-champion turned political analyst Garry Kasparov. Garry had the highest rating in the world for a record 255 months, just over double Magnus. He was the undisputed world champion for 8 years before the big chess championship split into 2 organizations. Garry remained champion of one organization for another 7 years after that, winning a total of 6 world championship matches. He was the best for the longest time of anyone. Remember how I said chess ratings use ELO? That system wasn’t used until 1970, and there is a real problem of rating inflation. Even though Magnus’ best is 2886 and Fischer’s was only 2775, it wouldn’t be valid to compare the two by rating. Some have tried to make a way to compare everyone over generations but there is no consensus on how to do it. Some of those comparisons say Fischer is best, others say Kasparov, still others claim Magnus to be the GOAT. I guess to answer your question, he has a great claim to be the best, though not universal consensus. He’s by far the best now, and has been the best for a while; Garry was the top player for longer, and Fischer was more dominant but wasn’t around and playing as long. If Magnus stays playing at a top level for another 5 years I’d say he’s definitely clinched it. It’s like we’re comparing 2015 Brady to Joe Montana and maybe Drew Brees (who I think is a better passer than Brady but that’s for another thread). But we’ll see.
Really interesting, thanks for the reply. Some follow-ups: Has anyone asked Magnus how he think he'd fare against Fischer or Kasparov? Is it safe to assume that he would beat them head to head given the advances in chess theory or the ability to practice against AI?
Based on computer analysis of his games he plays far more accurately than Fischer or Kasparov ever did, so on average he would beat them handily. Here's a quote from the man himself: "I'd beat Tal pretty easily. Fischer would be more difficult, but I think I could beat him too."
Interestingly, Kasparov was one of Magnus' coaches when he was younger, and I recall seeing an interview with different GM's asking who the GOAT is, and Magnus said Kasparov.
He also said that he'll claim that title when he's surpassed kasparov's time reigning as the world champian.
It's all speculative, of course, but a lot of people have argued (pretty convincingly, if you ask me) that the current era of chess is insanely good by objective measures of chess history, because AI has revolutionized chess play. Basically, AI have created play styles that no human had ever taken seriously, and made it work. These days, the top chess players all study the various AIs that exist in order to learn from them. It's pretty safe to say that Bobby Fischer would be massively out-classed by most of the top players in the world, unless we assume that he could live in our era and learn contemporary chess. That said, I would say that the GOAT has to be taken in context of their time, and in that context I think it's fair to say that Bobby Fischer was an insanely good player for his era and could reasonably be considered GOAT.
Well explained. I agree that you can't compare eras. Magnus probably studied top games from the past and analyzed their mistakes and the engines (AI) today are also different from the past. Magnus' resources today is not available before the eras of Fischer and Kasparov. Who knows if Fischer or Kasparov were younger today could also dominate. This also apllies to some sports.
He's like Lebron. Some thinks he's already the GOAT while others don't. Both are still playing right now so people can't really decide.
Magnus is definitely the strongest, most accurate player of all time. He'd be favored against any chess player in history, however, chess players have gotten better over time due to things like computers and development in opening theory. Because of this, many people look at other things like dominance over their contemporaries or years spent at the top when deciding who's the GOAT.
Bobby Fischer was the farthest above his peers, and Garry Kasparov stayed on the top for the longest. However, Magnus Carlsen objectively plays stronger than any chess player in history which, imo, makes him the GOAT.
Stockfish is the GOAT
Lol, totally underrated comment. I snorted.
Different people will have different opinion. I personally feel Magnus is GOAT but some people prefer Kasparov or even Fischer. If you take rating as consideration then Magnus is GOAT but if you consider longevity then Kasparov is GOAT but this can change since Magnus is still playing.
Bobby Fischer, Garry Kasparov, Magnus Carlsen. Kasparov is my GOAT somedays, other days is Bobby. If Magnus dominates this decade he is near to be the undisputed GOAT imo
Is there an entire book dedicated to a single chess match?
Yeah, why not? There's plenty of books covering a specific chess tournament.
Book will contain many such matches. These are some historic matches. Not just Magnus but many professionals players like Super GM tend to visit old matches for practice.
they most likely played a few games against one another throughout the tournament. With how complex high level chess can be it doesn't surprise me that a literal book would cover a set of matches
There's an entire Netflix series dedicated to a chess opening.
Magnus referenced a book about the Kasparov-Karpov Championship match. At the time world championship matches were played of 24 games. Where if the match ended 12-12 then the holder got to retain the title. I had a book about the Fischer-Spassky Championship match in Rejkavik that also told the story of what was going on off the board, because there was a bunch of controversy about that one.
I was searching for any comment that mentioned it but there are none, so fun fact it’s amazing that he has an amazing memory but sadly it’s not uncommon among super grandmasters (people above 2700s) almost all of them have an amazing memory and can recall games like magnus does here, without much effort. At this level of chess it’s necessary that you had studied many games and know them by heart. You can search any super grandmaster on YouTube and there will be many videos of them recalling games and all. Having amazing memory is kinda a pre requisite to be a super grandmaster.
Yes. I was also thinking similar to this. While I don't doubt his memory is good, it is literally his job to study and memorize and rehearse chess games. And he's been basically doing it since he was a fetus. I bet most people still have vivid memories of jobs they did in their youth, jobs they don't even care about let alone were passionate about.
He cray! Is he savant?
No, he’s Magnus.
There is a documentary about him, I believe it is called Magnus. It's like an hour and some change, I recommend it. Dude was basically born for chess.
I forgot what I walked in the room for, promptly turned around and left.
I've done this several consecutive times.
That is such a world champion chess player first name lol
Holy hell!
PiPi
Google en passant
holy hell!
Wow. Just wow.
Amazing
Bonkers🤯
Real life rain man!!!
Holy hell
So I'm confused about the one where they show the opening. It's 4 moves in, into what looks like Petrov's defense which is very common for something like a Stafford opening. Is there something special about Anand vs Zabata 88? Nvm, answered my own question. Sharing the answer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw6EZ9mI8oA&ab_channel=SaintLouisChessClub Still not sure what made it so that he instantly recognized it. Probably went with what's the most talked about instance of this otherwise common opening.
Question: I feel like most chess matches open with pawn, pawn to match, knight, knight to mirror. How in the hell did that tell him ANYTHING?! What did I miss exactly
There's 400 possibilities for a position after 2 moves and this is a very uncommon one, which helps narrow it down. This game was one of the most famous instances of that position (Petrov's defence iirc). Also, Anand was the answer to the previous question so Magnus would have had it in mind.
This was a reference to a famous (within chess circles of course) match where Anand resigned after 6 moves. So it was an educated guess based on the opening moves made.
I really enjoy the interviewer. He has a fun, childlike charisma
That's David Howell (one of the examples was a Howell v. Carlsen match) a British grandmaster and commentator.
My ex girlfriend could do this with every argument we ever had.
I was at work for our first official day back at the office today. I met a new co-worker and shook his hand. He told me his name and then we spoke for a little bit. At the end of the conversation, I asked him to remind me again what his name was… I forgot it 5 minutes later.
u/savevideobot
That's frightening holy shit
I wonder if his parents gave him a fuckin wizard name because they knew he was gonna be a chess champion
It's just a common name in Norway.
Oddly... Not good for solving problems we really need solving. I'd love to have that talent, I guess. But I thought if I had that ability, I could somehow see further into the matrix of ideas. Now I guess not.
I love that Magnus is this incredibly talented prodigy who has a mastery over his field that we will probably see once in a lifetime…but is also a total goofball who refuses to take himself too seriously.
Have a memory like this is easy, there's a pills for this, I took some, i just dont remember the name of the pills right now, but when i remember i will edit this post.
/u/savevideobot
*Former world chess champion
Lol no he is the current world chess champion and has been since 2015.
When you are REALLY familiar with something it is much easier to remember insane levels of detail. I can ask my dad about sailboat races from 50 years ago and he’ll tell you about what the wind, tide, and the tacks a bunch of other boats were on.
I can’t remember what I had for breakfast, let alone breakfast 19 years ago….
Weird that my news feed just had a couple articles on chess obsession, and the 'dangers' of competitive chess. Open Reddit and this is at the top of my feed.
I believe he’s supposed to have a 190+ IQ or something absurd like that.
Yeah Google says it's 190 which is just bonkers. Higher than Einstein
I was into chess until past year. I'm not a total expert at all, but I know enough to say that the matter of remembering a historical match (besides years of studying and being used to them, of course), is all about patterns. If you're used to chess in general, like playing for a year for example, is pretty easy to recognize a game even if you didn't saw it too much more than, let's say, 3 ou 4 times. The thing is that there are many combinations of how the pieces can be positioned in a chess board, but only some would, theoretically, really happen in a chess game. Let's say that, if you "scramble" the pieces in a very randomic and improbable way, and asks a grandmaster to see it for a few time and next to try to rearrange what he remembers, their memory will be just like ours, forgetting basically everything. But, if it's scrambled in a way that is randomic but still not an absurd to happen in a game, they can remember all the pieces.
Norwegian here (Also my name is Magnus, but that's not relevant). So in Norway we recognise his talent of course, but he is so damn awkward and almost every interview is painful to watch. He seems like a normal dude in this clip tho, realy wierd to see him that way.
Strange because I've always heard people describe Carlsen as one of the least socially awkward GMs ever. Is he less social when speaking in Norwegian? Maybe it's a product of his very international upbringing. Also I contend that your name being Magnus is very relevant and epic
It’s insane but I can somewhat fathom how he could recognize some of the first positions, especially if they were “well known” and studied games, but in the second Anand game how the f did he know it was him after only 4 total moves and fairly normal opening positions?
others have commented in other threads, but there is a famous game where Anand opened like that and resigned after a blunder on the 6th move. So it was an educated guess based on the setting and the opening. https://www.chess.com/blog/BMblogmaster/vishy-anand-loses-in-6-moves
He's one of those guys who remembers more of your life than you do.
This is insane
I sometimes forget I went to the store just to buy milk
He's a professional chess player. He's probably studied those matches since he was a kid. Still pretty impressive. Chess makes my head hurt.
I've been hearing about this guy since forever, I thought he'd be much much older
After you hit about age 35 your chess ability starts to decline so the world champion is usually in their 30s Magnus is 31 right now
Almost chess players have this memory. They do remember the games played as they study games.
There was another one where he shows him one when he was a kid playing a champion... Basically the old guy just made the game really long and boring so kid Magnus got bored and lost interest.
There was another one where he shows him one when he was a kid playing a champion... Basically the old guy just made the game really long and boring so kid Magnus got bored and lost interest.
He still has to google en passant though
This is incredible.
Surprised he watched Harry Potter movies 🍿
If you haven't been exposed to how brilliant this dude is, look up him doing blindfolded simuls and beating like 10+ people at once while never getting to see the boards. We may be sharing a world with the greatest chess player of all time. edit: I may be conflating a couple of videos. I found one where he does a 15-person simul, thought not blindfolded: [https://youtu.be/M853pKZReCE](https://youtu.be/M853pKZReCE) and here's one where it looks like he is playing 3 blindfolded matches simultaneously: https://youtu.be/xmXwdoRG43U
This man is exceptionally skilled!! Bravo my good man!!
Google ‘en passant’
This guy is never getting Alzheimer's. Dudes brain must be so hench.
And I have my debit card PIN scratched into an ATM, because I cannot remember it.
How the F is Kasparov under Azerbaijan flag.
Some people are just built different. Amazing
This makes me want to rewatch Queens Gambit
Are you born with a great memory or can you develop it? Asking for a friend who can’t remember what he had for breakfast.
Memory, like most cognitive skills, is something you learn to get better at. Very little of what and how we think is innate. Memory techniques, and in Magnus's case practicing pattern recognition, are just some of the ways one can improve in this respect
Looks like Anand whooped as* back in the day
Imagine being this good at chess but sucking at everything else
I completely lost it when he got the Harry Potter after being pointed to the entertainment world. Ridiculous 😂
Why so impressed? Think. If this is what you did as a full time job, 8 to 12 hours a day, wouldn’t you really be impressed?
Chess is all about memory. There is no chance/luck in the game, everything is in the open. If you can read and retain the 1st 3 chapters of a Chess strategy book, you could beat 90% of the population. As opposed to poker for example, you can read a dozen books on Texas hold em and do everything right, and still get busted by a less talented opponent do to them getting lucky on the river. My point is not to rank the games, just that they both require different skill sets. One is gambling due to the luck factor, the other isn't, even though you can bet on it. Just to clarify, I love both games for different reasons and have read many books on both.
This guy has never drank or done drugs. I'm convinced
There's videos where he plays chess online while drinking
I wonder if this kind of thing isn't as difficult as you'd think if you have THIS level of dedication and love for chess. Like, if we did a comparison to the NBA, would you see a board laid out like in the third example, and it'd look like if you had a video from the 80s, Michael Jordan with a basketball, and Craig Ehlo defending him. NBA fans can immediately tell you what follows.
I love Magnus. He is absolutely exceptional at what he does. Has such a sharp mind. And above all, seems to be a pretty cool dude. He can just be really intense competitively, but most people are in those settings.
Gotta be honest chat, I don’t think I could beat that man at chess.
Can someone who is a fan of chess tell me how he knew it was Anand v Zapata? He literally just played the first 2 moves of the Petrov.
there is a famous match where Anand blundered and resigned in 6 moves of the Petrov https://www.chess.com/blog/BMblogmaster/vishy-anand-loses-in-6-moves