Difference is he can follow through with his calculated line, ending in a better position than he started with. You get confused 2 moves later and abandon the line.
My dad played Levi in Dallas 2 years ago (or maybe it was Vegas). Had a drawn position but lost it (my dad is trying to make master at 60 years old). He’s about 2100 right now. Quit for a long, long time in his “prime”, before computers came and changed the chess game. Levi was kind enough to go over the game 2 years ago with my dad. A rare thing when an IM beats an expert. Very down to earth guy
@@thguzzo17 thanks to both of you! He’s been having some health problems lately (nothing serious) but he’s had to take some time off. Looking to play this a few tourneys to round out the year.
He's a great player, as well. I think he could be much better if he spent less time on the social aspect of being a chess player as opposed to just focusing on chess. But hey, he can do what he wants.
Carlsen has an eidetic chess memory, as well as just being a creative genius. It's hard to beat someone with either of those things, he's the greatest at both.
@@newt2120 Virtually all. Some might achieve GM status through sheer brute force studying, but most can memorize entire games... and hundreds of them.
@@trequor High IQ and chess ability has been disproven many times. In other terms lots of the skills that chess players have in terms of memory don't transfer to non-chess tasks. They are highly optimized for chess.
I think the real problem is that people don't get that Stockfish is evaluating a move based on a high level/perfect response. Maybe the person is not going to see that response at all, and that's where "knowing your opponent" REALLY comes into play. You can't just take look at the engine move and say "that move will always be bad." Maybe a particular opponent will be fooled by the first appearance of a particular structure and make a rash decision. It's happened many times.
I think I get what you're saying but the way you described it sounds like hope chess, playing a move that isn't the best in hopes that your opponent falls for it. I think what you're getting at is that you need to understand the reason and succession of moves before you play something. Otherwise you shouldn't?
@@marcomaniaci8821 almost all prep is high-level “hope chess”, getting to a position where your opponent can get into a bad position really quickly if they don’t play the best moved
@@apocalypseap yeah on a very basic level I agree, no one is going to play the perfect line that a computer will therefore the best move isn’t necessarily the human viable option, I think my only gripe is that there is such a thing as optimal moves within a position so the idea that I’ll taylor a move to an opponent sounds off to me, perhaps I’ll play a different opening depending on a player profile? But the best move is the best move and that’s what I’ll always be looking for against an opponent. Let me know if I misinterpreted.
@@thebcwonder4850 Yeah good players definitely squeeze water from stone. I don’t know if it’s hope chess since if the player doesn’t go the engine line they are usually also going to be playing viable moves which against another pro won’t generate TOO large of an advantage, but is the edge most players need to get a win, I agree with the notion though, gaining advantage by out prepping. I wouldn’t say that prep is based on hoping your opponent fails to play the proper move, there’s still a lot more game to play beyond the opening
@@tasnimulsarwar9189 if you read the report you'd know it literally says there's nothing suspicious about niemann's OTB chess, it only talks about online chess
Well, that's because he's disingenuous. Actually speak to the guy for a minute, and you'll realise what an absolute piece of filth that he is. But, when it's time to reach out to a new platform, then it's brown nose Levy going full force.
It is hard to explain why he is so good. He just is and I don't even think he could fully explain it. Obviously he has studied a lot, but so have the other GMs he destroys lol
Not only is his memory for memorizing lines and theory absolute world class but he’s one of the greatest chess tacticians. Being the greatest end game player of all time I think Magnus is so much better because he’s just so exceptionally well rounded. Unlike other GM’s that could rival Magnus in one particular category but can’t compare to him in another.
Its not rocket science lol . he isn't the most creative player but likes experimenting, he just plays extremely solid throughout all his games and maintains constant pressure over his opponent's pieces all the time. Ultimately the opponent makes one small slip up and magnus capitalizes on it HARD and staying solid throughout ensures that he can bounce back from the mistakes he himself makes . this is coupled with him playing near perfect endgames like an engine . "Extracting water from rock" summarizes Mag pretty much
I remember one interview of Magnus (I don't remember with who) when asked how he creates a strategy and he said something to the effect of: It's not so much strategy but when a move "doesn't look right" I somehow try to make my position look right. He also said he doesn't know how he does that, he just is able to when something doesn't look right.
Sounds like he gave a throw off answer. If your part of a professional sports team or if your a pro athlete and a reporter asks you what your strategy is going to be in order to win the match. Are you going to give them your play book? Or would you give them a throw off answer so as to answer their question without answering their question?
@@WaveformV1.0 Daniel Noroditsky is great but he talks way to much. I bought his Noroditsky method and I’m having a hard time getting through it. 20 minutes in and barely looked at one single position, but he shows he has a huge vocabulary and used a thesaurus when he was young.
@@Janet_Airlines802 I watched Levy too but he is too basic. What I mean is his analysis is excellent for an average viewer of an average chess players.
For the memory, a lot of people are assuming he's born with it. This is more from my experience, but I think what we remember shifts based on what we care about, and the way our memory recalls events is very practical in chess. I always joked about having bad memory because I need to write down peoples names and go through them so many times, because unless its someone I actively interact with the memory just escapes me. On the flip side, I can find myself randomly remembering algorithms and solutions I covered half a decade ago when solving certain coding problems. Our brains are incredibly powerful, and I think the best recollection happens through series of linked events. We link a memory to a specific idea, when we encounter a situation that reminds us of that one thing, it'll lead to another until we have the full image in our head. More like a recreation of what actually happened through key events. With that, I think for the super GMs who started playing chess as children and developed to truly understand the sport (usually GMs by 15), those games are what's essential in their heads. They don't need to remember the actual boards, just the specific series of moves. The ability to remember thousands of these and be able to recall ones based on similarity seems insane to us, but I think it's all the same idea.
@@mi_-lt4ws Kids in that age are sponges, they absorb information like crazy. That's how we pick up languages without thinking about it as kids, but struggle to start as adults. I'm sure he was born with a genetic lottery towards chess, but I think people put it all off on that when the biggest factor is definitely his early years (3-5). I wonder how his parents got him so involved before he even understood the world
@@noornasri5753 Lmao, you haven't been around too many kids if you think that is anything short of pure innate ability. You can have all the passion and hard work in the world, chances are you will never be a GM. Memory chunking has a lot to do with successful chess, and that's an innate ability you're born with. It's not like you can't memory chunk for subjects you aren't interested in, you memory chunk as a core mechanism for conscious thought. No matter how long I try to train, I will never be able to play 50 people blind fold and win each with ease....
For a lot of GMs it does develop because of their intense focus on the game from a young age. For Magnus, it's just something that he has always had. It's the same with Kasparov who has an extraordinary memory for all kinds of things. I remember reading once that he doesn't like to talk about it because it makes it seem like he's some kind of freak of nature whose chess genius just comes down to having an almost savant-level memory.
Magnus is one of those rare combination of talent, hard work, balance, humility, and activism that comes along only once in a millenium or so. We are lucky to have him IMHO .
Still one of my favorite pod casts and interviewers. The more I watch the more I enjoy and appreciate it . Quickly crawling into my top ten people I'd love to have dinner with and pick their mind. Keep up the great work!
I think the reason why chess is not as popular as it should be, is because it takes a lot of mental constitution to play just one game. I code 24/7 and that is like writing a math paper for 8h every day, but pales in comparison to just one chess game. One complex chess game can drain you completely. Fascinating really.
You summed it up. I used to love to play chess to relax, but once I got to the point where I'm obsessively calculating variations and considering positional aspects, it becomes more stressful. I prefer to spend my free time doing something that will recharge my batteries instead of require more mental energy. To get really good as an adult with many responsibilities you gotta be a certain type of person.
@@account2198 football actually has quite a barrier to entry in terms of understanding. As far as basic rules football is more complex than chess I'd say (even just in terms of pieces (positions), football has more). This is why its not so popular internationally whereas soccer is (because its the simplest sport possible, you kick the ball in the goal). But in terms of understanding the game once you have the basics, chess of course clears football a thousand times over. Sports are just easier to see the beauty in, football is a very dramatic and cinematic sport. With Chess, to see the drama you need an understanding equal or greater to the players you are watching.
The major factor Magnus dominated his generation is that he excelled at the most difficult part of the game of chess i. e. the endgame. Historically few players were endgame specialists, like Capablanca, Rubenstein, perhaps Karpov. Because of this he manages to save lost games and win seemingly dead draw games. Added to all that being talented, determined, and has something to prove and wants to leave his stamp on the game.
@@yeayeawhatevasureokayy you're right Smyslov was a great player, and what's also great about him is his uncanny ability of placing his pieces in the optimum squares even in difficult positions, for this reason he was necknamed : "The Hand".
With reference to UFC/BJJ, I'd liken the old school "first to x wins" to sub only matches. Going till no end in sight. Great for the purist, not so great for modern times with TV etc to organise
Magnus has lived and breathed the game his entire life, it's embedded in his soul. That's why from the start I thought if he felt like something was off against Neimann then it most likely was. He doensn't even have to consciously notice it, he can just feel it.
@@abidulmuhaiminrahbar It was Stockfish 13 i think, we're now at 15. Also, AlphaZero had 40 hours against itself, period. It literally started from the rules of the game, no openings, no strategies, it figured it all out by itself in 40 hours. Against a software decades in development. AlphaZero with a couple weeks training would wipe the floor with Stockfish for years.
@@feeadftth lol do you even understand the resources that are required to train a neural net in that amount of time. Only companies like google, Amazon or Microsoft can fund the hardware required. Also “couple of weeks of training”, you clearly don’t understand how neural network works. Longer training time does not equal better performance. Leela uses the exact same principle as alpha zero and hasn’t made a super linear improvement in strength. Current stockfish is simply stronger than alpha zero. If you doubt me put any of the positions that stockfish 8 failed and stockfish 15 sees it all. To put it in perspective stockfish 12 has a higher win % against stockfish 8 than alpha zero did.
@@wondays654 it's fascinating how people can put this much energy into dick riding a chess engine lol. And I always wonder why they hate Stockfish so much.
I don’t think that’s what he meant actually. He was pretty clear in saying that in certain very complex endgames, Stockfish itself literally doesn’t know which side has the advantage, because the possibilities are too numerous and diverse and Stockfish does not have an unlimited ability to look ahead. His point didn’t really have anything to do with how the players played.
It used to be the opposite: Tony Miles purposefully played bad moves against Karpov early to side-step the World Champion's superior opening memorization and get to having to play chess, and it turned out that Tony won! Now the champion is doing that to the underlings!
Levy isn't correct that Stockfish doesn't know. It does. HUMANS don't know every possibility is all and some sub-trees are more treacherous (from a human practical perspective) than others. Stockfish also has 7-piece endgame tablebases. Any node within its search that reaches it, it knows perfectly, including every move within in perfectly. If it's showing zeros, either it KNOWS how to force a draw, or all of the characteristics of the pros and cons for either side, in its estimation, completely cancel out for the moment.
Yeah I'm kinda surprised Levy didn't know this. And if he did know this, he definitely didn't do a good job of sharing it lol. I kept waiting for him to offer the correct explanation and he just never quite got there.
Hes an IM which is the second highest titel in the world, so he does know how Stockfish works buddy. But he wants his explanations to be understandable by somebody who has never played chess.
For Magnus choosing not to defend his title - I have a few thoughts. 1. If I've been world champion for almost a decade like Magnus has, I could see it losing the magic. When he was a teenager, he had a lot to prove. Winning the WC is the biggest single achievement in chess. After almost 10 years at the top with little by means of real competition, it makes sense that Magnus has stopped seeing the appeal. 2. Following on from my first point. Every 2 years Magnus has had to devote a bunch of time, effort and money to prepare for the championship, and has won convincingly every time. It's a lot of sacrifice for something that's losing its appeal to Magnus, and that he already knows the outcome of. Eventually the cons will outweigh the pros. 3. Again following on from the previous points... Magnus knows he's the best by a considerable margin. Of course he has to put in the work because chess is a game that is always developing. You have to keep learning to stay at the top. If Ian had 3 months to prepare and Magnus did not, Ian would have the advantage - but Magnus knows that with a similar level of effort in preparation to his opponent, he will always beat his opponent in the WC format. Magnus even gave us a hint himself, when he said he would only defend his title if Alireza won the candidates. This shows that Magnus does not see the value in playing against a 'known quantity' in the usual super-GMs, but he would give it a shot for the latest prodigy who has made rapid progress, and may surprise Magnus with a suitably prodigious performance. I can see how Magnus might view such a WC match against Alireza as similar to his own inaugural WC match against Anand. Alireza crumbled in the candidates, so Magnus chose not to defend his title against a more predictable opponent.
Yea memory is absolutely fundamental. Imagine you were able to play some 40 *million* games like Alpha Zero did. At some point it wouldn't matter for you though, because it'd be impossible to remember even a significant portion of those games. However, Alpha Zero or any computer could have a detailed database for every single move made in every one of those games, and use it for reference. Now scale that down, say Magnus has played or looked at 100,000 games in his life, but his exceptional memory allows him to remember a significant portion of those games. Whereas me for example, I could play the exact same amount of games, but not even remember half of them. Then of course there's the ability to calculate variations, which Magnus is also able to do well. Very well.
Carlsen is good at chess because he is the best at endgames. Endgames are extremely complicated and even Carlsen makes mistakes, but other people make more
chess is the only sport/game where some commentators and chess influencers earn more than many top 50ers .this happens because you don't need to watch players but need to look at the chess position live which is free on websites so players can't monetize that viewership to the best extent. ridiculous lol
Carlsen has special abilities, one of them is synesthesia, and arguably can enhance his intuitive and perceptive ability to see patterns where others cannot. But his super ability is his memory. Also, like Bobby Fisher, he is hyper-competitive.
@@MattMacKinnon I believe he used to play as a kid/younger person. I don't think he plays much or maybe at all anymore. "Why Lex Fridman doesn't play chess": ua-cam.com/video/ilm_qdPmPYc/v-deo.html but yeah, it would be cool to see him mess around with these chess gods
All the commentators are Grand Masters... Agadmator in the background: "cough, cough". Disclaimer: I'm not sure he was commentating on the WC event, but he's been on a lot of top end tournaments.
So weird, that IM Rozman misunderstood what happened in Game 6 of Carlsen - Nepo. When Stockfish was showing 0.00 as the evaluation, in that game it was because it had accessed the "perfect endgame tables" that it has access to, and the true evaluation of the position was a forced draw. The problem was that it was a 6-piece endgame that is too complicated for humans to play perfectly. The tables show how to do it, but there is no simple way of distilling the strategy down to a human expressible set of ideas that a player can execute to force the draw. So Carlsen and Nepo were still playing chess like they normally do, regardless of the true evaluation of the position. The commentators (even top GMs, and former world champions) couldn't say anything meaningful at that stage of the game because the computers had nothing to say other than "this position is a draw with perfect play" without an explanation of how or why. The other point is that Carlsen was digging very deep -- deeper than any player watching or commentating on the game and found a strategy for *trying* to win. When Nepo made the crucial error that let the draw slip through his finger, none of Carlsen, Nepo, or the commentators had any idea, at the time, that Nepo still had a way to save the game and how to do it except for the computer telling the commentators the exact move. It was examined afterwards, and the best people came up with, was the once Carlsen started pushing his pawns, Nepo needed to shift his Queen to the other side of the board to optimally slow down Carlsen's pawns, but he failed to do so in time. Carlsen demonstrated that he was deeper and better than anyone else, and that he could find ideas, even ideas that technically don't work in theory but nevertheless do work in practice, at a much more prodigious rate than any human alive.
It is either a solved position (there is a forced draw at reasonable depth or game reached the point where table bases are used) or it is still so complex that it just doesn't know how to evaluate accordingly.
top chess players earn more than 80% of olympic sports . why you gotta compare chess players to some of these big sports which has tv deal money .chess has free viewership via these websites . we don't have to see their faces but their chess positions
Paul Morphy also had an eidetic chess memory. He dominated his time and is known as the first unofficial World Champion of Chess ( William Steinitz is the official First World Champion). Returning to the United States in triumph, Morphy toured the major cities, playing chess on his way back to New Orleans. Returning to New Orleans in late 1859 at the age of 22, he retired from active chess competition to begin his law career. Morphy never established a successful law practice and ultimately lived a life of idleness, living on his family's fortune. Despite appeals from his admirers, Morphy never returned to the game, and died in 1884 from a stroke at the age of 47. Lets hope Magnus simply wants to take a break and enjoy his life at the top of his game.
How people can say and actually believe we are all equal is crazy!!! Magnus can literally tell you tye exact game the two chess players and when the game took place just by seeing one picture of how the board was set during match. Crazy
I think that's a huge part of it, to be honest. It feels like several of the other GM/SuperGM have something similar but they remember the games as a series of moves. It's super cool to be able to remember every game they've played/watched as a series of 30-90 moves, and pick out snippets and think 'so I've seen/been in a similar position before and after that it went tick-tick-tick-tick". Like I'd bet 99% of humanity simply couldn't do that. But Magnus remembers each board individually and then each board played after that to I can't even guess how many moves out he can think through like that. Maybe all the way to endgame of any games he's seen. I can't even imagine thinking in that way. The only thing beyond that would be literally being able to replicate a computer's ability to extrapolate out every possible move all the way to end game from every single board.
I'm pretty sure that, when people say things like "we're all equal", they don't mean that we're all equally talented at chess (or parkour, or sushi making, or sex, or harpsichord).
Very good point about the Olympics. I remember 2012 in the UK, which I personally part paid for (it was very expensive and my taxes were used, obviously). It was streamed by the BBC and kept on their website for some short amount of time, then disappeared. So I'm paying the BBC a licence fee per year + I paid for the event with my taxes, and incredibly enough I cannot access any of the content anymore. Money ruins everything doesn't it.
I know nothing about this Lex guy, 15 minute interview and I still know nothing about him he didn't talk about himself at all....FANTASTIC interviewer snd great voice. I like this guy im gonna check out more
Two of my favorite personalities that seem so different until they come together and totally hit it off. I can see the beauty in that because Im romantic
Carlsen has the most consistency and persistence, game 6 in 2021 finals vs Nepo is the best example of the difference between Magnus and the rest of the super GM top 10 players.
its like in the ufc when they give bonuses so the fighters are more aggressive. give incentives to olay more aggressive. like if you win so and so amount of games you get a bonus as well 👀
I feel like he can still sign World Champion forever since he held the title for 10 consecutive years outplaying everyone he could possibly do and having the highest score ever and steping away volunteraly for lack of motivation, he is the GOAT and he will probably be the best chess player that has ever lived, I think he earned to call himself World Champion
I question greatness. I find it curious how someone like Magnus dominates chess, Rapha dominates Quake, Michael Jordan dominated basketball. I watch Levy and Hikaru break down the game of chess to a laymen like myself in such a way there I have absolutely no doubt in their high level of skill and understanding of the game. This constantly triggers my nerves in a way to just repeatedly ask "Do they just have to accept their fate?" as in do they just have to accept that their skill would never/could never rise to be the greatest. I will go to my grave just in pure curiosity of what it's like to accept that your great could never be their greatness. How does it feel to just be very very very good at something while the tiniest percentage will just always be a head and shoulder above you.
3min30seconds. When people say "Magnus beats/surprises Stockfish", Levi sums up what I always say. Stockfish gives evaluations, but Stockfish is not the one actually playing. I don't care if you are Magnus or better(if it's actually possible) if Stockfish says it is a draw no human will beat it, you might lose but you are not beating Stockfish when it declares the position to be a draw. It's just impossible, for a human.
Lex the word you're looking for (about SpaceX vs NASA) is MARKETING. Marketing isn't just for products, it's for ideas. When you introduce the world to a new idea, or give more visibility to an old one, the way you present it is marketing. The words you use, the place where you "broadcast" the idea, the medium you use to convey, even how you say or write it, it creates an impression on the viewer. Both NASA and SpaceX want to get people excited about space travel. Elon is good at marketing, NASA hasn't quite got the hang of it.
I have that in common with MC. After 5 or 6 moves my game is no longer book moves either, and there's no announcers but if there was I'm sure they'd go " idk why he did that?" The same way lol
So Magnus spots them a couple of dubious moves, just to get past theory into wide open unknown spaces. FischerRandom. Magnus knows something about how to play that you often see in blitz games. His opponent will go for some time with no progress whatsoever while Magnus runs circles around them. He gets these free times too often for it to be random luck. His offensive play isn't spectacular. It's so ordinary nobody can believe he will win with it. But give any GM some free moves and see how amazing they suddenly become. It's very Botwinnik-Petrosian chess.
Imho, Magnus just isn't motivated. I wouldn't say he's bored; but, the man with that amazing recall loves new positions, which results in 'pure chess', where the victor should be the better chess player, not the one who knows the theory better, or knows a chess engine's top lines better - although that is always useful while prepping. Watch his streams. He's well past the point of feeling excited by theory or other moves which he considers boring. This includes a thousand lines of theory where finding an advantage is highly unlikely unless your opponent misplays. In fact, most grandmasters choose openings that are complicated; it's the best way to fight for a win, but the game can often be steered into drawish positions by such too.. A game that turns into uncharted territory always piques his interest, however. It's actually a testament to how good Nepo is at knowing theory, positional chess play, and solid yet tricky chess, that only in a long end game did Nepo give Magnus an opening. After that, things changed in that match, but if Magnus does not want to slog through that to defend his title, I totally understand. People say Ding is so solid, but Nepo - as long as he has not self-destructed - is almost bullet proof. Would Magnus do it to regain his title? Absolutely, if he wanted the title again.
I believe that Magnus doesn't have to rely on memory, because he very deeply understands what he is seeing. He has seen & understood the concepts again & again in many different chess scenarios.
When Magnus plays weird move he is a 'genius' and a 'chess prodigy'; but when i do it i get called and idiot and 400 elo
All that matters is if you win💀. When I blunder a queen and then checkmate in like 6 moves after I say it was a sack
Well, like Lord Hans always says: “Chess speaks for itself” 😅
Difference is he can follow through with his calculated line, ending in a better position than he started with. You get confused 2 moves later and abandon the line.
You got it easy, when Hans does it, he gets called a bot.
My god, Hans d riders invaded this space too? XD
Why don't you dolts explain to me why Hans is scared shitless to analyse/explain HIS OWN GAMES?
My dad played Levi in Dallas 2 years ago (or maybe it was Vegas). Had a drawn position but lost it (my dad is trying to make master at 60 years old). He’s about 2100 right now. Quit for a long, long time in his “prime”, before computers came and changed the chess game. Levi was kind enough to go over the game 2 years ago with my dad. A rare thing when an IM beats an expert. Very down to earth guy
Hope your dad can do it❤
Your dad is a legend
Correction: it was the Vegas Open. Not Dallas
@@thguzzo17 thanks to both of you! He’s been having some health problems lately (nothing serious) but he’s had to take some time off. Looking to play this a few tourneys to round out the year.
Makes me think of Khabib talking about taking his enemies to deep water
"They have to swim on their own" that was a cool quote. Like Magnus is taking them to the depths where you really need to know how to swim well.
That’s such a common phrase
@@labramso yeah I hear it in mma/boxing a lot. Still always sounds cool to me. Lol. I imagine just a 1on1 out in the ocean. All alone
I just imagine Magnus yeeting a kid into the deepest pool 😂
“Kid is on their own”
"The kids swim for themselves"
Levy is very good at explaining the nuts and bolts of the game. Not just, “if he takes here then I will recapture, blah blah.”
Blah blah of shame
Pure commentator
I can't teach my 8yo chess for 10 minutes but this guy taught kids many hours a day before covid. I guess that's where it stems from.
He's a great player, as well. I think he could be much better if he spent less time on the social aspect of being a chess player as opposed to just focusing on chess. But hey, he can do what he wants.
is this a shot at agadmator? If yes, I agree
Magnus is simply on another level, in a league of his own.
He is cheating I have 'anal'yzed his games thoroughly
Rolled by Hans Niemann
@@bobjones5825 yeah that one loss totally made him way better than magnus
@@bobjones5825 Are you trolling? Because Magnus has lost to GM kids just fine. Getting beat once by someone doesn't mean that much.
@@apocalypseap Hans is the new goat. You will see shortly
Carlsen has an eidetic chess memory, as well as just being a creative genius. It's hard to beat someone with either of those things, he's the greatest at both.
pffff
dont all GMs have eidetic memory?
Most GMs (all super-GMs) have a perfect memory when it comes to chess. You need a stellar IQ to be any kind of chess champion to start with
@@newt2120 Virtually all. Some might achieve GM status through sheer brute force studying, but most can memorize entire games... and hundreds of them.
@@trequor High IQ and chess ability has been disproven many times. In other terms lots of the skills that chess players have in terms of memory don't transfer to non-chess tasks. They are highly optimized for chess.
I think the real problem is that people don't get that Stockfish is evaluating a move based on a high level/perfect response. Maybe the person is not going to see that response at all, and that's where "knowing your opponent" REALLY comes into play. You can't just take look at the engine move and say "that move will always be bad." Maybe a particular opponent will be fooled by the first appearance of a particular structure and make a rash decision. It's happened many times.
I think I get what you're saying but the way you described it sounds like hope chess, playing a move that isn't the best in hopes that your opponent falls for it. I think what you're getting at is that you need to understand the reason and succession of moves before you play something. Otherwise you shouldn't?
@@marcomaniaci8821 exactly. Exploit your opponents weaknesses. That's how you win.
@@marcomaniaci8821 almost all prep is high-level “hope chess”, getting to a position where your opponent can get into a bad position really quickly if they don’t play the best moved
@@apocalypseap yeah on a very basic level I agree, no one is going to play the perfect line that a computer will therefore the best move isn’t necessarily the human viable option, I think my only gripe is that there is such a thing as optimal moves within a position so the idea that I’ll taylor a move to an opponent sounds off to me, perhaps I’ll play a different opening depending on a player profile? But the best move is the best move and that’s what I’ll always be looking for against an opponent. Let me know if I misinterpreted.
@@thebcwonder4850 Yeah good players definitely squeeze water from stone. I don’t know if it’s hope chess since if the player doesn’t go the engine line they are usually also going to be playing viable moves which against another pro won’t generate TOO large of an advantage, but is the edge most players need to get a win, I agree with the notion though, gaining advantage by out prepping. I wouldn’t say that prep is based on hoping your opponent fails to play the proper move, there’s still a lot more game to play beyond the opening
It's incredibly rare to see a champion dominate his sport so much as magnus has. Especially when there's as much competition in the sport as there is.
Well, maybe not so much if Hans gets to keep playing...
@@apocalypseap there really isnt any evidence to show that he is cheating over the board tho
maybe he is cheating and therefore he is sure niemann cheated.
@@piergiorgio919 what about the 70 page report? What do you make of it?
I haven't read it but I'm curious as to know what you make of it.
@@tasnimulsarwar9189 if you read the report you'd know it literally says there's nothing suspicious about niemann's OTB chess, it only talks about online chess
Didn't expect Levy to come across so well but he did. Well spoken and intelligent guy, good choice of guest again Lex! Legends
U all need to join Levy's channel... Hes soo connected.. Love from Norway
Levy has a couple different gears that he switches between.
That’s weird that you initially thought that
Well, that's because he's disingenuous. Actually speak to the guy for a minute, and you'll realise what an absolute piece of filth that he is. But, when it's time to reach out to a new platform, then it's brown nose Levy going full force.
@@jornavyr2459 and when did you speak to him to ascertain this information?
It is hard to explain why he is so good. He just is and I don't even think he could fully explain it. Obviously he has studied a lot, but so have the other GMs he destroys lol
He had the strongest buttplug.
Not only is his memory for memorizing lines and theory absolute world class but he’s one of the greatest chess tacticians. Being the greatest end game player of all time I think Magnus is so much better because he’s just so exceptionally well rounded. Unlike other GM’s that could rival Magnus in one particular category but can’t compare to him in another.
Its not rocket science lol . he isn't the most creative player but likes experimenting, he just plays extremely solid throughout all his games and maintains constant pressure over his opponent's pieces all the time. Ultimately the opponent makes one small slip up and magnus capitalizes on it HARD and staying solid throughout ensures that he can bounce back from the mistakes he himself makes . this is coupled with him playing near perfect endgames like an engine .
"Extracting water from rock" summarizes Mag pretty much
@@ShomilSaxena your explanation didn’t add anything to the conversation.
“It’s not rocket science”
@@Obiamajoyisrmd it literally did but ok
I remember one interview of Magnus (I don't remember with who) when asked how he creates a strategy and he said something to the effect of: It's not so much strategy but when a move "doesn't look right" I somehow try to make my position look right. He also said he doesn't know how he does that, he just is able to when something doesn't look right.
That’s called intuition
Intuition and some crazy pattern recognizing@@mi_-lt4ws
Sounds like he gave a throw off answer.
If your part of a professional sports team or if your a pro athlete and a reporter asks you what your strategy is going to be in order to win the match.
Are you going to give them your play book?
Or would you give them a throw off answer so as to answer their question without answering their question?
Levi is really good at explaining complex parts of the game for the average person. He has the best UA-cam channel to learn from.
His channel is great but I think there are a few more in the best category for learning.
@@WaveformV1.0 Daniel Noroditsky is great but he talks way to much. I bought his Noroditsky method and I’m having a hard time getting through it. 20 minutes in and barely looked at one single position, but he shows he has a huge vocabulary and used a thesaurus when he was young.
@@Janet_Airlines802 I watched Levy too but he is too basic. What I mean is his analysis is excellent for an average viewer of an average chess players.
@@rambo2667 that's why i think levy course is good for beginners
For the memory, a lot of people are assuming he's born with it. This is more from my experience, but I think what we remember shifts based on what we care about, and the way our memory recalls events is very practical in chess. I always joked about having bad memory because I need to write down peoples names and go through them so many times, because unless its someone I actively interact with the memory just escapes me. On the flip side, I can find myself randomly remembering algorithms and solutions I covered half a decade ago when solving certain coding problems. Our brains are incredibly powerful, and I think the best recollection happens through series of linked events. We link a memory to a specific idea, when we encounter a situation that reminds us of that one thing, it'll lead to another until we have the full image in our head. More like a recreation of what actually happened through key events.
With that, I think for the super GMs who started playing chess as children and developed to truly understand the sport (usually GMs by 15), those games are what's essential in their heads. They don't need to remember the actual boards, just the specific series of moves. The ability to remember thousands of these and be able to recall ones based on similarity seems insane to us, but I think it's all the same idea.
He was definitely born with it. When he was 5 he could memorise every country, their population and their capitals. Cant teach that
@@mi_-lt4ws Kids in that age are sponges, they absorb information like crazy. That's how we pick up languages without thinking about it as kids, but struggle to start as adults. I'm sure he was born with a genetic lottery towards chess, but I think people put it all off on that when the biggest factor is definitely his early years (3-5). I wonder how his parents got him so involved before he even understood the world
@@noornasri5753 Lmao, you haven't been around too many kids if you think that is anything short of pure innate ability. You can have all the passion and hard work in the world, chances are you will never be a GM. Memory chunking has a lot to do with successful chess, and that's an innate ability you're born with. It's not like you can't memory chunk for subjects you aren't interested in, you memory chunk as a core mechanism for conscious thought.
No matter how long I try to train, I will never be able to play 50 people blind fold and win each with ease....
For a lot of GMs it does develop because of their intense focus on the game from a young age. For Magnus, it's just something that he has always had. It's the same with Kasparov who has an extraordinary memory for all kinds of things. I remember reading once that he doesn't like to talk about it because it makes it seem like he's some kind of freak of nature whose chess genius just comes down to having an almost savant-level memory.
@@hansmahr8627 which sadly seems to be the case. Chess GMs have a memory like NBA players are tall.
Levy blew up so quickly for good reason. I can see these two being friends.
Magnus is one of those rare combination of talent, hard work, balance, humility, and activism that comes along only once in a millenium or so. We are lucky to have him IMHO .
Still one of my favorite pod casts and interviewers. The more I watch the more I enjoy and appreciate it . Quickly crawling into my top ten people I'd love to have dinner with and pick their mind. Keep up the great work!
I think the reason why chess is not as popular as it should be, is because it takes a lot of mental constitution to play just one game. I code 24/7 and that is like writing a math paper for 8h every day, but pales in comparison to just one chess game. One complex chess game can drain you completely. Fascinating really.
Wait you write code and can’t play chess 😂😂 I’m switching up jobs
Coding is far easier than chess.
@@WTfire10 Computers cannot code.
You summed it up. I used to love to play chess to relax, but once I got to the point where I'm obsessively calculating variations and considering positional aspects, it becomes more stressful. I prefer to spend my free time doing something that will recharge my batteries instead of require more mental energy. To get really good as an adult with many responsibilities you gotta be a certain type of person.
@@account2198 football actually has quite a barrier to entry in terms of understanding. As far as basic rules football is more complex than chess I'd say (even just in terms of pieces (positions), football has more). This is why its not so popular internationally whereas soccer is (because its the simplest sport possible, you kick the ball in the goal). But in terms of understanding the game once you have the basics, chess of course clears football a thousand times over. Sports are just easier to see the beauty in, football is a very dramatic and cinematic sport. With Chess, to see the drama you need an understanding equal or greater to the players you are watching.
The major factor Magnus dominated his generation is that he excelled at the most difficult part of the game of chess i. e. the endgame. Historically few players were endgame specialists, like Capablanca, Rubenstein, perhaps Karpov. Because of this he manages to save lost games and win seemingly dead draw games. Added to all that being talented, determined, and has something to prove and wants to leave his stamp on the game.
Can add Smyslov as an endgame virtuoso as well ...but Magnus is the best of them all
@@yeayeawhatevasureokayy you're right Smyslov was a great player, and what's also great about him is his uncanny ability of placing his pieces in the optimum squares even in difficult positions, for this reason he was necknamed : "The Hand".
With reference to UFC/BJJ, I'd liken the old school "first to x wins" to sub only matches. Going till no end in sight. Great for the purist, not so great for modern times with TV etc to organise
Having the possibility for 5 fights to take over 5 hours is exhausting. Forget TV that would be a lot in person
Magnus has lived and breathed the game his entire life, it's embedded in his soul. That's why from the start I thought if he felt like something was off against Neimann then it most likely was. He doensn't even have to consciously notice it, he can just feel it.
Great collab. Love all the chess love, Lex.
good to see Levy here, lex has the most interesting guests
0:41 -- What Bobby Fischer was worried about, namely chess becoming all theory and memorization.
3:00 I dont think "Stockfish doesnt know", its just a draw with perfect play. Also tablebase is coming to play at few pieces.
@@crabguy34 you talking alpha zero year or 2 ago? Then stockfish was 8 or something. Now stockfish 17 is way more stronger than alpha zero.
@@abidulmuhaiminrahbar You could say the same for a current hypothetical improved version of Alpha Zero or a future version. Point is you never know.
@@abidulmuhaiminrahbar It was Stockfish 13 i think, we're now at 15. Also, AlphaZero had 40 hours against itself, period. It literally started from the rules of the game, no openings, no strategies, it figured it all out by itself in 40 hours. Against a software decades in development.
AlphaZero with a couple weeks training would wipe the floor with Stockfish for years.
@@feeadftth lol do you even understand the resources that are required to train a neural net in that amount of time. Only companies like google, Amazon or Microsoft can fund the hardware required. Also “couple of weeks of training”, you clearly don’t understand how neural network works. Longer training time does not equal better performance. Leela uses the exact same principle as alpha zero and hasn’t made a super linear improvement in strength. Current stockfish is simply stronger than alpha zero. If you doubt me put any of the positions that stockfish 8 failed and stockfish 15 sees it all. To put it in perspective stockfish 12 has a higher win % against stockfish 8 than alpha zero did.
@@wondays654 it's fascinating how people can put this much energy into dick riding a chess engine lol.
And I always wonder why they hate Stockfish so much.
What levy meant was that in a complex endgame , the players wont play accurately all the time.
I don’t think that’s what he meant actually. He was pretty clear in saying that in certain very complex endgames, Stockfish itself literally doesn’t know which side has the advantage, because the possibilities are too numerous and diverse and Stockfish does not have an unlimited ability to look ahead. His point didn’t really have anything to do with how the players played.
Levy did so incredible here, despite being completely sleep deprived probably after all the travel. Also, that shirt is sharper than the Najdorf
It used to be the opposite: Tony Miles purposefully played bad moves against Karpov early to side-step the World Champion's superior opening memorization and get to having to play chess, and it turned out that Tony won! Now the champion is doing that to the underlings!
Neat to see GothamChess in such a different setting.
Lex looks like a rendered character from a game with excellent graphics.
Uh…I just thought it was because he’s named like a f*ckin Bond villain 😂🤣
There is always an agreed-upon platform to measure who is the best in a sport. Regardless of monetary compensation. Great point.
Levy isn't correct that Stockfish doesn't know. It does. HUMANS don't know every possibility is all and some sub-trees are more treacherous (from a human practical perspective) than others.
Stockfish also has 7-piece endgame tablebases. Any node within its search that reaches it, it knows perfectly, including every move within in perfectly. If it's showing zeros, either it KNOWS how to force a draw, or all of the characteristics of the pros and cons for either side, in its estimation, completely cancel out for the moment.
Yeah I'm kinda surprised Levy didn't know this. And if he did know this, he definitely didn't do a good job of sharing it lol. I kept waiting for him to offer the correct explanation and he just never quite got there.
Hes an IM which is the second highest titel in the world, so he does know how Stockfish works buddy. But he wants his explanations to be understandable by somebody who has never played chess.
Ding always goes from down to up, holy fuck that was an accurate call.
For Magnus choosing not to defend his title - I have a few thoughts.
1. If I've been world champion for almost a decade like Magnus has, I could see it losing the magic.
When he was a teenager, he had a lot to prove. Winning the WC is the biggest single achievement in chess.
After almost 10 years at the top with little by means of real competition, it makes sense that Magnus has stopped seeing the appeal.
2. Following on from my first point. Every 2 years Magnus has had to devote a bunch of time, effort and money to prepare for the championship, and has won convincingly every time.
It's a lot of sacrifice for something that's losing its appeal to Magnus, and that he already knows the outcome of. Eventually the cons will outweigh the pros.
3. Again following on from the previous points...
Magnus knows he's the best by a considerable margin. Of course he has to put in the work because chess is a game that is always developing. You have to keep learning to stay at the top. If Ian had 3 months to prepare and Magnus did not, Ian would have the advantage - but Magnus knows that with a similar level of effort in preparation to his opponent, he will always beat his opponent in the WC format.
Magnus even gave us a hint himself, when he said he would only defend his title if Alireza won the candidates. This shows that Magnus does not see the value in playing against a 'known quantity' in the usual super-GMs, but he would give it a shot for the latest prodigy who has made rapid progress, and may surprise Magnus with a suitably prodigious performance.
I can see how Magnus might view such a WC match against Alireza as similar to his own inaugural WC match against Anand.
Alireza crumbled in the candidates, so Magnus chose not to defend his title against a more predictable opponent.
We love Levi! Gotham is our chess translator! Thank you for having him on the podcast!
More chess videos, please!
check
mate
Ideally with no adverts, just them off. How much do you make anyway? 2 bucks a video?
This is your only comment on this channel .
Crazy combo... Thank you guys
Lex Fridman and Levy Rozman? What day is it? Hell yeah.
Nice shirt choice for Levy. Works well with the background
Good conversation. Rozman has one of the best UA-cam chess channels that I've viewed. Thanks
*Unexpected but welcomed collaboration!*
Yea memory is absolutely fundamental. Imagine you were able to play some 40 *million* games like Alpha Zero did. At some point it wouldn't matter for you though, because it'd be impossible to remember even a significant portion of those games. However, Alpha Zero or any computer could have a detailed database for every single move made in every one of those games, and use it for reference. Now scale that down, say Magnus has played or looked at 100,000 games in his life, but his exceptional memory allows him to remember a significant portion of those games. Whereas me for example, I could play the exact same amount of games, but not even remember half of them. Then of course there's the ability to calculate variations, which Magnus is also able to do well. Very well.
exactly. memory is nr.1. creativity is lower down the list like bobby fisher said
Carlsen is good at chess because he is the best at endgames. Endgames are extremely complicated and even Carlsen makes mistakes, but other people make more
chess is the only sport/game where some commentators and chess influencers earn more than many top 50ers .this happens because you don't need to watch players but need to look at the chess position live which is free on websites so players can't monetize that viewership to the best extent. ridiculous lol
The way chess gods talk bout magnus is how melee gods talk about mango
Above all, Magnus is creative
Carlsen has special abilities, one of them is synesthesia, and arguably can enhance his intuitive and perceptive ability to see patterns where others cannot. But his super ability is his memory. Also, like Bobby Fisher, he is hyper-competitive.
Lex, if you're gonna be having all these chess guys on you gotta be playing chess boi
He clearly alreqdy does play chess based on the questions he has been asking and his level of understanding.
@@MattMacKinnon He might mean playing a game with them on the show
@@Pazaluz Maybe.
@@MattMacKinnon I believe he used to play as a kid/younger person. I don't think he plays much or maybe at all anymore. "Why Lex Fridman doesn't play chess": ua-cam.com/video/ilm_qdPmPYc/v-deo.html
but yeah, it would be cool to see him mess around with these chess gods
It wouldn't even be competitive. Levy would crush him and massively tilt Lex
9:33 Yes great example here with GSP and Khabib ❤
The memory is part what makes him good. Interesting that Danaher says the same about what makes Gordon Ryan good in bjj
Nice to see Levy wearing sleeves.
All the commentators are Grand Masters...
Agadmator in the background: "cough, cough".
Disclaimer: I'm not sure he was commentating on the WC event, but he's been on a lot of top end tournaments.
So weird, that IM Rozman misunderstood what happened in Game 6 of Carlsen - Nepo.
When Stockfish was showing 0.00 as the evaluation, in that game it was because it had accessed the "perfect endgame tables" that it has access to, and the true evaluation of the position was a forced draw. The problem was that it was a 6-piece endgame that is too complicated for humans to play perfectly. The tables show how to do it, but there is no simple way of distilling the strategy down to a human expressible set of ideas that a player can execute to force the draw. So Carlsen and Nepo were still playing chess like they normally do, regardless of the true evaluation of the position. The commentators (even top GMs, and former world champions) couldn't say anything meaningful at that stage of the game because the computers had nothing to say other than "this position is a draw with perfect play" without an explanation of how or why. The other point is that Carlsen was digging very deep -- deeper than any player watching or commentating on the game and found a strategy for *trying* to win. When Nepo made the crucial error that let the draw slip through his finger, none of Carlsen, Nepo, or the commentators had any idea, at the time, that Nepo still had a way to save the game and how to do it except for the computer telling the commentators the exact move. It was examined afterwards, and the best people came up with, was the once Carlsen started pushing his pawns, Nepo needed to shift his Queen to the other side of the board to optimally slow down Carlsen's pawns, but he failed to do so in time.
Carlsen demonstrated that he was deeper and better than anyone else, and that he could find ideas, even ideas that technically don't work in theory but nevertheless do work in practice, at a much more prodigious rate than any human alive.
Now that’s a collab I wouldn’t have expected
Levy - very good explanation. You are an ambassador for the game
No, Xqc is ambassador of chess because he put chess on the map and he made it popular, nobody knew or cared about chess before twitch streamer xQc
@@wooshbait36 the guy that got smoked by Charlie? LMAAAO
So glad you had Gotham on! Chess needs more love and he’s great for chess
Wait... You're saying Bach was more interested in the math than the sheer beauty of his music? 8:31
literally the stupidest thing i’ve ever heard, imagine saying something that wrong that confidently…
Literally? 😂@@cocopopsbrahhh
@@VincesInHocSigno I mean yeah he’s just totally wrong, don’t you agree?
0:40 Was it Twain who said "First learn the facts, then distort them to your leisure"
Lex literally predicted Hikarus entire career
No mention or acknowledgment of his computation skill? End games are not random memorization....
Great talk Levy, amazing to listen to!
When stockfish says +/- 0.0 it means its a dead draw via perfect play from table bases. (when only 8 pieces left, or so)
It is either a solved position (there is a forced draw at reasonable depth or game reached the point where table bases are used) or it is still so complex that it just doesn't know how to evaluate accordingly.
magnus really is an intuitive player and i can see why a guy like that wouldn't want games that are still in theory after 30 moves.
He doesn’t think deeply, he thinks clearly.
top chess players earn more than 80% of olympic sports . why you gotta compare chess players to some of these big sports which has tv deal money .chess has free viewership via these websites . we don't have to see their faces but their chess positions
one of my fav guests. thanks lex
Is this two of my best UA-camr across the table I want more of that please
Paul Morphy also had an eidetic chess memory. He dominated his time and is known as the first unofficial World Champion of Chess ( William Steinitz is the official First World Champion). Returning to the United States in triumph, Morphy toured the major cities, playing chess on his way back to New Orleans. Returning to New Orleans in late 1859 at the age of 22, he retired from active chess competition to begin his law career. Morphy never established a successful law practice and ultimately lived a life of idleness, living on his family's fortune. Despite appeals from his admirers, Morphy never returned to the game, and died in 1884 from a stroke at the age of 47. Lets hope Magnus simply wants to take a break and enjoy his life at the top of his game.
I thought Morphy died from syphilis?
@@your_average_joe5781 what a weird rumor to spread when his cause of death is so easily verifiable.
How people can say and actually believe we are all equal is crazy!!! Magnus can literally tell you tye exact game the two chess players and when the game took place just by seeing one picture of how the board was set during match. Crazy
I think that's a huge part of it, to be honest. It feels like several of the other GM/SuperGM have something similar but they remember the games as a series of moves. It's super cool to be able to remember every game they've played/watched as a series of 30-90 moves, and pick out snippets and think 'so I've seen/been in a similar position before and after that it went tick-tick-tick-tick". Like I'd bet 99% of humanity simply couldn't do that. But Magnus remembers each board individually and then each board played after that to I can't even guess how many moves out he can think through like that. Maybe all the way to endgame of any games he's seen. I can't even imagine thinking in that way. The only thing beyond that would be literally being able to replicate a computer's ability to extrapolate out every possible move all the way to end game from every single board.
I'm pretty sure that, when people say things like "we're all equal", they don't mean that we're all equally talented at chess (or parkour, or sushi making, or sex, or harpsichord).
Because in the end chess is a board game...
He has a prodigious long-term memory (associative memory). He can match patterns from games he played years ago.
Didn't expect Levy, couldn't be happier though!
6:36 There’s that Joe Rogan and UFC influence, lol. “Who ya got?”
Very good point about the Olympics. I remember 2012 in the UK, which I personally part paid for (it was very expensive and my taxes were used, obviously). It was streamed by the BBC and kept on their website for some short amount of time, then disappeared. So I'm paying the BBC a licence fee per year + I paid for the event with my taxes, and incredibly enough I cannot access any of the content anymore. Money ruins everything doesn't it.
I know nothing about this Lex guy, 15 minute interview and I still know nothing about him he didn't talk about himself at all....FANTASTIC interviewer snd great voice. I like this guy im gonna check out more
I like how levy deliberately speaking slow.... that must have been painful 😆
Hes taking his time to fully word his thoughts and i dont mind since its one of the best explanations ive heard in a while
He didn't have to be "on" for this interview
Lex podcast is just superb!!
The answer is to look at Wsop the world series of poker. The coveted diamond bracelet... the huge prize purse its insane. Wsop is legendary
Two of my favorite personalities that seem so different until they come together and totally hit it off. I can see the beauty in that because Im romantic
Whooo happy to see this collaboration!
Magnus Carlsen is the modern day Emmanuel Lasker! he treat chess as a sport and relies heavily on practical play rather than chess theory.
Awesome feature! Love both your guys work 👏🏽
Carlsen has the most consistency and persistence, game 6 in 2021 finals vs Nepo is the best example of the difference between Magnus and the rest of the super GM top 10 players.
its like in the ufc when they give bonuses so the fighters are more aggressive. give incentives to olay more aggressive. like if you win so and so amount of games you get a bonus as well 👀
I strive to find a wife in life that will be as excited when talking about our child as Levy is when talking about Magnus
I feel like he can still sign World Champion forever since he held the title for 10 consecutive years outplaying everyone he could possibly do and having the highest score ever and steping away volunteraly for lack of motivation, he is the GOAT and he will probably be the best chess player that has ever lived, I think he earned to call himself World Champion
I question greatness. I find it curious how someone like Magnus dominates chess, Rapha dominates Quake, Michael Jordan dominated basketball. I watch Levy and Hikaru break down the game of chess to a laymen like myself in such a way there I have absolutely no doubt in their high level of skill and understanding of the game. This constantly triggers my nerves in a way to just repeatedly ask "Do they just have to accept their fate?" as in do they just have to accept that their skill would never/could never rise to be the greatest. I will go to my grave just in pure curiosity of what it's like to accept that your great could never be their greatness. How does it feel to just be very very very good at something while the tiniest percentage will just always be a head and shoulder above you.
I feel like this is a good chance for Ding to take advantage being over the board.
I also play like that, after 5 moves no more database moves! ;)
3min30seconds. When people say "Magnus beats/surprises Stockfish", Levi sums up what I always say.
Stockfish gives evaluations, but Stockfish is not the one actually playing. I don't care if you are Magnus or better(if it's actually possible) if Stockfish says it is a draw no human will beat it, you might lose but you are not beating Stockfish when it declares the position to be a draw. It's just impossible, for a human.
Magnus, Levy, Travis Stevens, Jimmy Pedro, Duncan Trussell
Ty Lex! From a fellow Judoka ameuter chess enthusiast and forever student of life
Lex the word you're looking for (about SpaceX vs NASA) is MARKETING. Marketing isn't just for products, it's for ideas. When you introduce the world to a new idea, or give more visibility to an old one, the way you present it is marketing. The words you use, the place where you "broadcast" the idea, the medium you use to convey, even how you say or write it, it creates an impression on the viewer.
Both NASA and SpaceX want to get people excited about space travel. Elon is good at marketing, NASA hasn't quite got the hang of it.
I have that in common with MC. After 5 or 6 moves my game is no longer book moves either, and there's no announcers but if there was I'm sure they'd go " idk why he did that?" The same way lol
03:13 What a delivery: because a machine could stop him... but not Yan.
Love this interview. Gothem Chess has a cool channel. Thanks Lex!
So Magnus spots them a couple of dubious moves, just to get past theory into wide open unknown spaces. FischerRandom.
Magnus knows something about how to play that you often see in blitz games. His opponent will go for some time with no progress whatsoever while Magnus runs circles around them. He gets these free times too often for it to be random luck.
His offensive play isn't spectacular. It's so ordinary nobody can believe he will win with it. But give any GM some free moves and see how amazing they suddenly become. It's very Botwinnik-Petrosian chess.
You gotta love Levy
Imho, Magnus just isn't motivated. I wouldn't say he's bored; but, the man with that amazing recall loves new positions, which results in 'pure chess', where the victor should be the better chess player, not the one who knows the theory better, or knows a chess engine's top lines better - although that is always useful while prepping. Watch his streams. He's well past the point of feeling excited by theory or other moves which he considers boring. This includes a thousand lines of theory where finding an advantage is highly unlikely unless your opponent misplays. In fact, most grandmasters choose openings that are complicated; it's the best way to fight for a win, but the game can often be steered into drawish positions by such too.. A game that turns into uncharted territory always piques his interest, however. It's actually a testament to how good Nepo is at knowing theory, positional chess play, and solid yet tricky chess, that only in a long end game did Nepo give Magnus an opening. After that, things changed in that match, but if Magnus does not want to slog through that to defend his title, I totally understand. People say Ding is so solid, but Nepo - as long as he has not self-destructed - is almost bullet proof. Would Magnus do it to regain his title? Absolutely, if he wanted the title again.
I believe that Magnus doesn't have to rely on memory, because he very deeply understands what he is seeing. He has seen & understood the concepts again & again in many different chess scenarios.
so you mean the memory then ! ? haha .. yes the memory !
@@CaptivuSBardacK memory yes but with understanding which supercharges the memory
Game 6 was absolutely amazing. I had the day off and I watched the whole thing live.
Simple, make matches, the classic ones, 1 hour. I would watch that 100%.