Carlsen was a Grandmaster at age 13. I’m pretty sure there’s more to it than “practice.” The guy has innate talent most people could only dream of. Aside from witty rejoinders, I’m rarely the best guy in the room at anything, let alone the world.
I don’t. The thing is, without a specific sport star, the games would still be there for the fans. Just not him specifically. So what is contributed to society by him? Possibly a little bit of entertainment value by his specific style. Certainly not something in the magnitude of his earnings.
Yep. At grandmaster level you need to be able to play out a number of permutations in your mind and be able to evaluate the final position clearly. It would be notable if there were a grandmaster that couldn’t play simul blind chess at all.
(Also note that while the games are within the opening book, carlsen only needs to know what move they’re up to. Then, assuming a player like carlsen will have superior book knowledge, when they drop out of the opening book, and carlsen must now memorize a board configuration, it’s at a point where carlsen already has an advantage)
He did a lot of voiced tutorials for the chessmaster series of games, and they’re very good.
Missed edit window:
Sorry Simplicio, I meant to quote Nava.
He finished high school while he was working his way up through the chess world. He’s got an academic diploma and can go on to college/university… when he has the time. Right now he’s a bit busy.
Incidentally, Josh Waitzkin is the one who coined the term “chessic sense” to describe a trained instict for the right move. “Playing by feel,” so to speak.
Nava, did you happen to mean to guess “Capablanca”?
As Paul Morphy once claimed, “All chess is blind.” At a certain point, the pieces actually get in the way of thinking. It’s easy to mentally erase or create pieces, but it’s hard to actually move them. So you tend to forget that this piece already got traded or that piece is not blocking the c-file, or whatever. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve gone through a calculation and finished it with “and then I’ll capture with my bishop” only to find out two moves later that- oh, yeah- I already sac’d my bishop on the fourth move of the combination.
A lot of chess players, when they get to a tough position, actually close their eyes to do their calculation. It’s easier that way, sometimes.
So? I think the Polgar sisters put your theory in the grave. Susan (Zsusza) was the top-ranked woman in the world at age 15. Her sister Judit was a Grandmaster by 15 as well. Their sister, Zsofia, only made it to International Master, but at the age of 14 put on a clinic at the infamous “Sack of Rome,” scoring a record-setting 8.5/9.
Why were they so good? Because Laszlo taught them to be good. Kids don’t start young because they’re prodigies. They’re prodigies because they start young.
Topalov was a Grandmaster at 17. Kasparov, 17. Anand, 19. All top-flight players of any sport reach the top levels when they’re just teens.
Yeah, and without a specific doctor, I could still get medical exams.
I’m looking for GQ answers. Would you happen to have some?
As an internationally ranked chess player, I find some worrying ignorance in this thread.
-
Chess is difficult. Really difficult.
I spent 10,000 hours on it during my teenage years. I achieved an ELO of 2390 and qualified as a FIDE* Master.
When I played Kasparov in a 9 board clock simultaneous (the World U-18 champion and the World Girls U-21 Champion were also playing on my team), he crushed me like a grape.
*World Chess Federation -
It’s also (as Chessic Sense said) a widely-played (over 150 countries play in the Chess olympiad) and widely-respected game.
The top 10 players are undoubtedly all millionaires. They get paid to travel all over the World, stay in top hotels, receive appearance fees and play for prize money in sponsored tournaments.
So even if ‘chess all that Carlsen can do’, it seems a pretty good life.
Anyway why would Carlsen want to change careers? Chess is deep and enjoyable (especially if you’re winning!)
- Being a ‘prodigy’ is over-rated. Josh Waitzkin got a lot of publicity over ‘Searching for Bobby Fischer’, but he never got his rating above 2465.
By comparison, when I met Kramnik aged 16, his rating was already around 2600.
Carlsen says it’s easy. It’s just what he does.
But then someone else would not get his medical exam. Or some other medical thing would be cancelled to give him the exam.
Kasparov speaks at least 3 languages, is a contributing Editor to the Wall Street journal, runs a profitable business in Russia (plus two chess academies) and even gave a two hour history lecture at my school. (The History Department wanted to hire him on the spot!)
Describing this as a mildly successful career is ludicrous. Kasparov reached the very top in chess (he still holds the highest ever ELO rating), then successfully diversified into other fields.
Saying someone is ‘an ineffectual political figure in Russia’ means you don’t understand the grip that Putin has on the country.
When billionaires supporting opposition parties can be jailed, it’s unreasonable to expect Kasparov to make swift changes.
"Khodorkovsky was the wealthiest man in Russia and one of the richest people in the world, ranked 16th on Forbes list of billionaires.
He was arrested in October 2003 on charges of fraud. The government under Vladimir Putin then froze shares of Yukos shortly thereafter on tax charges. The state took further actions against Yukos, leading to a collapse of the company’s share price and the evaporation of much of Khodorkovsky’s wealth. He was found guilty and sentenced to nine years in prison in May 2005. While still serving his sentence, Khodorkovsky and business partner Platon Lebedev were further charged and found guilty of embezzlement and money laundering in December 2010, extending his prison sentence to 2017.
There is on-going debate about whether the trials and sentencing were politically motivated.The trial process has received criticism from abroad for its lack of due process."
Do you have that actual quote?
Was he just being modest?
If chess was so ‘easy’ for Carlsen, why did he hire Kasparov as his coach?
I know how hard Kasparov works and I assure you that Carlsen (like any chess professional) will spend masses of time studying his opponent’s openings, plus analysing all his own games etc.
Mozart apparently once said: “I write music the way cows piss”, i.e., copiously, and without any effort.
It took me 4 years to learn how to play simultaneous blindfold chess, so if you can do two games that’s impressive.
(What sort of standard were your opponents? How long did the games last?)
Chess players earn money from sponsored events (Banks + Insurance companies in particular get value from associating their names with chess.)
Many other club players in these events pay entry fees, attracted by the prospect of seeing these top players.
Chess players can earn money from newspaper columns, teaching and simultaneous displays.
What this shows is that there is a huge interest in chess and the player’s salaries reflect that.
As for ‘contribution to society’, I think chess is a highly desirable activity for school children. It teaches concentration, memory, analysis, self-reliance and sportsmanship.
I love chess and many other games as well, board games, video games, sports, etc. I wonder how these chess players combat “game fatigue”, as in, playing the same game over and over and over has got to get tedious at least sometimes…doesn’t it?
I know I would get sick of any game that I had to play so often and regularly, even if I was getting paid to do it. Too much monotony.
From 60 Minutes (at the end of the article):
“Natural” isn’t exactly the same as “easy,” I guess, he does work out everyday to keep his endurance up so he can concentrate 8 hours at a time, etc. Flipping through 10,000 famous chess games in his head, in a few moments, certainly comes easier to him than to the rest of humanity.
It’s a good question, but there’s a lot to chess.
For starters, every game is different:
- different opening moves (having played thousands of games, I can only recall using the same initial 10 moves twice.)
- different opponents (some like to attack, some to trap, some to defend and some to try something new…)
- different situations (e.g. the last round of a tournament matters if you’re in contention for prizes)
- different tactics (I’ve checkmated a strong club player in 8 moves and defended King, Rook and Bishop v King Rook, Knight and opposite-coloured bishop for a game lasting 80 moves)
It’s a bit like eating. If each meal is identical, that would be boring. But otherwise you look forward to satisfying your hunger.
What was un-GQ about my answers? Fact: Superstars start young. Fact: You can train anyone to be a superstar, given enough free time and money.
Really? I doubt that. I bet if you went through your games, you’d find more that are the same through 10 moves. What about a Sveshnikov with 9. c3 and 10. Nc2? Or a Bayonet Attack with 9. b4 in the KID?
Yes, or perhaps reading a book. Avid readers don’t read the same book twice (or three or four times), so do they get tired of reading?
That was a GQ answer. Laszlo Polgar had three daughters. He carried out an experiment to prove what he had always believed - that anyone can achieve exceptional results if she is trained in a specific discipline from a young age. If he had done it with one daughter you might be able to argue that it was a coincidence that his daughter just happened to have what it takes to be a chess grandmaster. He did it with all three daughters (though one came up a bit short as an International Master).
You can turn just about any child of normal intelligence into a chess grandmaster if you start her young and she finds it enjoyable (it won’t work if the kid hates it because you won’t be able to get her to practice). Laszlo Polgar showed that practice (directed practice with good teachers, not just going through the motions) and dedication are what matters. Innate talent is a myth. Genius is unnecessary. Look into the past of any “prodigy” and you will find that he or she practiced many thousands of hours to get there. Every single one of them.