I remember when everyone used to say Fabiano was bad at blitz chess because he was #2 in the world in classical and "only" about #9 in the world in blitz.
LIFETIME RECORD: Classical games: Fabiano Caruana beat Daniil Dubov 1 to 0, with 1 draw. Including rapid/exhibition games: Fabiano Caruana beat Daniil Dubov 4 to 1, with 3 draws. Only rapid/exhibition games: Fabiano Caruana beat Daniil Dubov 3 to 1, with 2 draws. *The figures above are based only on games present in our database which may be incomplete.
I believe Dubov has his own distinct interpretation of 'naturally gifted,' placing greater emphasis on creativity and intuition rather than deep calculation and preparation. In his view, Dubov likely sees Fabi as akin to Batman-intellectual, methodical, and someone who triumphs through relentless hard work and unparalleled preparation, albeit without the billions of dollars. This contrasts with the idea of a Superman figure, who is seemingly born great but still vulnerable to defeat by mere mortals through cleverness and meticulous planning.
Yeah, using fictional characters as a analogy just doesn't work. It's pointless - Superman and Spiderman can do whatever the scriptwriter says they can do.
It was a compliment: he actually meant Fabis moves are always understandable (at the highest level) meaning reproducible, which explains Fabis long term success. Talent and gift alone doesnt provide reliable success. Magnus is working his arse off, but maybe he loves chess the most (like Aljechin and Fischer).
Just a reminder, Kasparov said being able to work extremely hard; harder than the rest; is a talent. So Fabi may lack the intuition magnus and other intuitive players have, but he sure as hell works hard. Also, I disagree with Dubov. Carlsen already said that Fabi just "Calculates everything to a tee". So that's extreme talent.
I agree with this 100%. The ability to focus for long periods of time and grind is a tremendous talent that not everyone possesses. I do not have it, and I wish I did.
but what he calls work includes the work of their seconds and Kasparov happened to have the best of all because the Soviet Union was very dominant for a very long time.
@@paulgoogol2652Kasparov dominated his soviet colleges, who had access to the same seconds, funding, etc, if not more, as Kasparov was in a very tense relationship with the government and FIDE.
@@LasCosasDeBrunin yes. that's why Soviet Union as a whole was very dominant. so how does Kasparov being better than the others contradict what I just said?
@@friendsfrenz1944 in this podcast it is, he is very precise in his words and the meaning he is atributing to them, not just spilling words without a clear definition like dubov does.
We all know Fabi is in The Mafia. Basically a discrete don. So when he says he does not take it personally... Dubov should not go to a restaurant with him, especially in Tessio's territory.
Let's just take a moment to appreciate how eloquently Fabi articulates his thoughts with such clarity and objectivity, never allowing emotion or offense to cloud his perspective.
Ok guys I just have to comment - I’m the same age as Gary Kasparov - for a brief time Leonard Barden even ranked me as the number two nine year old in the world behind Kasparov (or Gary Weinstein as he was known back then) - the good old days lol. Anyway over the years I’ve had quite a few conversations with Gary and he said to me - Julian people say I’m very talented but you know what my greatest talent is? I replied no what Gary? He said my ability to work on chess incredibly hard - to out work all my competitors!!
_"So many would have taken it as a personal affront."_ It *IS* a personal affront. What do you think calling someone 'the least talented of the pack' is? The lack of class of Dubov is showing. Fabi took it well because he is well above Dubov both at a personal level and at a chess talent level.
It's funny how you can start with a great reputation for working hard and consistently doing a lot of prep. Everyone will naturally assume you are talented but that you're outworking similarly talented people. After a long time of people saying these things about your prep consistently you'll start to get comments, even from high level grandmasters who should probably know better, claiming you never had much talent at all and all you are is a prep machine. Frankly, even if he was right, the ability to dedicate yourself more than anyone else is also a talent. It's one of the least common and most useful talents in my experience.
"... claiming you never had much talent at all" Now you're claiming he claimed Fabi doesn't much talent at all, which he didn't. He's talking within the narrow context of the top 20. I'm sure he takes it as read that Fabi is more naturally talented at chess than most of the 8 billion people on earth. His argument, true or not, isn't that Fabi has no talent at all, bur that he relies more on hard graft than the other 19 players at the top of the game.
@@8964TS so you agree that in terms of natural talent fabi is not in top 20? Lmao this is such a L take And his statements on gukesh and arjun, that they're good only because they study 10 hrs a day, and he can be just as good if he only puts more work in. This is just pure cope, convincing yourself that you are exceptional enough, just need to put the work in.
I didn’t say I agree. I corrected the OP’s misinterpretation and mischaracterization of Dubov’s comments. To argue against someone’s argument, you have to actually understand it first.
@@sumanraj9394 he never said that “they’re good only because they study 10 hours a day”. He never said he is very exceptional and I don’t believe thinks that.
Fabi's calculation ability is natural talent. His winning mentality is natural talent. There are all qualitative skills which he possesses. There is no one size fits all natural gift - they're all talented and they're all hard working
Man, I really love how Fabi expresses himself. His thought process is so clear and structured, to me that is always a sign of high intellect, or excellent analytical skills at least
To clarify, there are some exceptions. A 6'7" athlete has obvious natural advantages in most sports. Let's say IQ is a good metric for chess (it may or may not be, but just as an example) - someone with a 150 IQ has a natural advantage. But that's not what people are generally talking about when they speak of talent. They're talking about something subjective and ultimately impossible to separate from the player's experience, work ethic, coaching, etc.
I think talent is a simple concept. Say two people achieve the same results in some activity, the one who had to invest less time and effort can be viewed as having more natural talent for said activity.
@@prenticeanyonywrightiq measures human intelligence Definitely not education, honestly iq might actually be a pretty decent metric for chess talent. But people can be good at chess but also dumb in everything else
As someone who kept telling myself I had natural talent but simply don't work hard enough to reach top in my field, I ended up realizing that this is just cope. If you are the top in the world at anything, you have both hard work and natural talent. And its very hard to distinguish which one lead to it more.
I mean yeah if he said like fabi is not as talented as magnus and a few other players then maybe you can atleast make some sense of it But to say that fabi is the least talented player in the top 20 is just copium deluxe
We see under time pressure in shorter formats Fabi struggles, intuition can be a weakness here.... and thats why its so so impressive he is so incredible at classical and shows how much hard work he puts in. This is what Dubov means, it is definitely a compliment but I can see how some would see it as an insult. He is praising Fabis work ethic
But is this talent or skill what fabi lacks in speed chess he makes up for it in playing perfect classical chess (specially when he was in prime) but someone like magnus has this insane moments like loosing to 2600s in qatar or to esipenko and others cause he has become a lazy calculator which inturn means blunders can happen if your intuition doesn't turn out to be right To me it seems like playing with intuition and speed, and extreme calculation ability are just two seperate skills Magnus possesses both (iguess thats what you need to be GOAT) but at this stage of his career he has just become a lazy calculator.
I think that's mainly due to exactly what he alluded to in this video, tactical awareness. A lot of time scrambles are decided by someone missing a tactic so the player who can spot them quicker always have an advantage. Fabi acknowledges this. In classical he has more time to spot the tactics so he's probably not going to miss it.
I totally agree, I blunder pieces left and right in bullet, but my longer time format rating is 2000 on lichess. I just don’t have the talent to blitz out my moves, I always need a several minutes think or I might sometimes forget a piece controls a square or miss some other detail
Except Fabi is 2766 FIDE in Rapid (world #4) and 2796 in Blitz (world #5). He's better in classical, but this idea that he's weak in faster time controls is completely bogus
Fabbi was an uncommonly talented prodigy who made it to the world championship. You can't make it to the world championship on hard work alone. Ask all those just below super GM's level who have been grinding it out all their lives.
@@fundhund62 The statement suggests that any top 20 player could reach the world championship through sheer hard work. I disagree. I don't believe we'll see Hans Niemann there solely based on his effort and talent, no matter how impressive.
@@sorenzollamaswhat Dubov is primarily talking about are the moves that one makes on the chess board and how theh insinuate genius in regard to how rare it would be even for top level gms to find the moves. With Fabi he is saying that he doesnt really make any moves that particularly stand out to him, among the too 20, as bejng genius, but rather thag his hard work has allowed him to play the consistently best moves whereas Magnus can find brilliancies that are generally hard for even the top 20 to miss. Like a top 20 player might see Fabi make moves and be like “wow he continually makes the best move, and while the move isnt necessarily anything special like Magnus: its the best move and he consistently finds because he understands the principles on a deeper level because of hard work”. Those same players may have moments of brilliance but they arent as consistently technically sound as Fabi who likely relies on and executes the basics very well all the time.
What a class act Fabi is. This is not a "reaction" but a sincere, prudent and thoughtful response. Even if it were true that he's the least "talented" chesswise of the elite, he's certainly one of the most intelligent. My respects. If this was the first time I listened to Fabi, I would have become immediately his fan. But I'm already am :)
Such a high level talk. Listening to Fabi should be a course in school. Such clear thoughts. he actually talks like machine looking for logic and meaning in every sentence. Amazing.
Fabi is good man, good in explaining, good in going into detail. He has the gift to Explain in a very detail Way about many things. We are lucky to be able to listen Fabi in this podcast. always interesting
Maybe Dubov looks at talent by how much a player can navigate "weird/non-traditional" positions that dont fall into theory, and their fluidity in understanding those kinds of positions without having to spend much time brute calculating. And that his "compliment" is more aimed at the idea that though Dubov doesn't think Fabi excels in those kinds of positions, his willingness to still fight in them if it means the best chances of winning, along with his prep are what Dubov thinks are Fabi's main strength. Just my interpretation but could be wrong.
Well if we discuss talent in chess, it's also worth to look at the Polgar experiment. Particular one interview of Judith Polgar's Dad saying, that Judith was the least talentet of his daughters. but the one who was working the hardest and therefore she was the most sucessful one. If you look at this perspective: 'working hard' means a lot more than 'talent' (survival of the fittest - a very sowjet style of thinking), Dubov's saying really is meant as a compliment.
I think talent is simply the result of hard work. As in, if you take 10 chess beginners who have exactly the same level and then these 10 beginners invest 100 hours of hard work each. Then after these 100 hours of hard work, the most talented in chess is the one who has reached the highest level.
Same for Nakamura brothers. Hikaru said his older brother is more talented than him in term of learning chess. However, he did/could not work hard enough when he stuck in 2000+ elo range.
I teach a lot of beginners. And I understand concept of talent. It's especially visible when the kids starts to learn, some of them learn things faster than others, some of them catch the ideas if you tell them once, others struggle to remember how the bishop moves after 4 hours of active learning. But then sometimes I see super talented kids who get to quite decent results and others who get beaten all the time - they spent the same amount of time with chess. But at the end of the year some of these struggling kids work harder, just follow my basic advises, like try to play 1-2 games a day and try to implement what we were learning today, and analyze what you could do better... and they beat talented ones who believes that they're better so they don't need to train. I've seen that plenty of times.
Yeah, talent is how much time you need to put in to improve one "level of strength/understanding", so a more talented hard working person is unreachable, but talent needs hard work to shine and a dedicated "untalented" person, will with time overcome a "talented" lazy person.
@@skurrskurr2032 I think so... but this is how most of people will describe talent. I would add one more thing after reconsidering my experience. Some people can implement what they learn fast in their games... some of them will do well in training, but in games they follow old habits. But this is maybe not talent but psychological limitations, confidence, trust, etc..
@@peterfischer2039 Yep, that's why I am surprised that Fabi is not sure how to define it. Maybe he looks at this from 2800 perspective and 2600+ students :)
@@yuriscaramussa how do you define talent in football?. It's seem everyone have their own strength. In the end it was decided by the number of output they produce / G+A, achievement / trophies. In chess we call that rating and title.
@isaac7272 Dubov is like Rafael Leao who just plays for the love of the game and Fabi is more like Salah who is very hardworking and effective but not the best to watch. Salah and Fabi are way better but Leao and Dubov are more entertaining to watch.
for example Wesley So without any major coach or big culture of chess in Phillipines grew up to be 2700s even 2nd in the world at some point. That's a talent
I think it’s pretty clear what dubov meant. Fabi is the kind of player who relies more on hard work, being well studied, strong opening preparation, and a good mindset rather than relying heavily on raw talent like magnus or ivanchuk do. It’s like capablanca & alekine, capablanca studied a bit but he mostly relied on his pure genius while alekhine relied on working super hard both in studying, training, and calculating over the board, but both are still great players despite different styles. A different example would be Kobe Bryant, since Kobe didn’t rely on his raw talent to be one of the best but rather he trained harder than anyone else in the NBA and he studied the rules of the game and his opponents playing style until he knew them better than anyone else & had greater technical skill. Fabi is like Kobe in that regard. Meanwhile Magnus would be like Larry bird who was great not because he was more physically fit or hard working but instead he just simply had an uncanny intuitive understanding of the game. Dubov isn’t trying to be insulting, he’s literally complimenting fabi. Obviously dubov knows that fabi is undeniably one of the best players ever so dubov is literally using fabi as an example to say that hard work and a good mindset are just as effective as raw natural talent. We also have to consider that dubov has never been in the top 20 yet he is known to be as talented as just about any top 10 player (even Magnus on a good day). So it’s fair to assume that dubov still considers “being less talented than the top 20 players” to not be a bad thing at all. He’s not saying that it’s a bad thing at all, he’s actually saying that hard work and a strong mindset are just as effective and important as raw talent.
Bro when dubov gives you a compliment and he says it's a compliment, it's a compliment. Admittedly, he said that he aspires or would aspire to fabi's level, so immediately we already know that dubov is talking upward to fabi. That's all that needs to be understood
He's not saying Fabi isn't talented, it's specific to the top 20. I'm sure he recognizes that Fabi has real talent for chess, but that without the hard work maybe he'd be 21st in the world, not a former WC candidate. Clearly Fabi has a genuine gift for the game and his baseline level was miles ahead of 99% of us even before he studied.
@@8964TS how did he measure the talent of top 20 and ranked them and whats his metric of ranking them. nothing. he just blabbered something, pure opinion and feel, right? so, he is just being an asshole.
Dubov doesn't see talent in Fabi becouse they are good at the same thing: calculating deep. Magnus and Hikaru are better at evaluating than calculating (at least in terms of natural talent), which to Dubov seems amazing becouse it's a different talent.
No matter how much hard work you do - and Dubov is saying that Fabi is the hardest working man in Chess - you cannot possibly be in the top 5 for a dozen years without a massive dose of natural talent.
Fabi surely has his own special gift or talent. His feeling when and how play more aggressive, his middlegame technique, his capability to keep the concentration move by move, match by match through the competition... And this gift is gorgeous.
Anyone in the top 100 or 200 in something as competitive as professional chess is naturally talent. It would be an insult for the other hundred of thousands who try with maximum effort but will never get there
I love how Fabi takes a calm and factual stance in matters that others would find provoking. If this was some other GM, we could have seen trash talk starting on Twitter and a drama ensuing out of it (which would also be fun to watch, I have to admit 🙂); but instead, we listened to Fabi's inspiring thoughts on what "talent" could be and how difficult it is to define that. Very mature and amazing response!
"Talent" is the refuge of losers. Like Nick Kyrgios in tennis - if I just goof off and pretend I don't care, then I don't have to face my fear that no matter how much I tried, I could never be good enough.
Talent exists, but it still has to be cultuvated. Magnus is talented. His memory as well as his self proclaimed ability to just know the best move proves this, but he spent time cultivating those skills with heavy practice
Says a random youtube commenter about a tennis player who very clearly had to work very hard to become good enough to play professionally at a very high level for over a decade, reaching the final of Wimbledon in 2022, earning millions and having a very successful career.
Talent is a measure of how strong a player would be if they never had any chess training, or at least no higher level structured training. If you look at people like Capablanca and Morphy, they got to GM level with no engines, very few chess books, and opposition that was club level at best. The problem with judging talent of modern players is that they start getting structured training and using books and engines at such a young age that we don't really know what their natural talent level would be without those.
That's a fairly common perspective but maybe there are different types of talent and some types of talent require more training to be energised but when they do they are also more expandable. I study wood fires for fun and some wood fires require more ignition fuel (more smaller sticks and straw) and more fanning because the wood is denser, but when they light up you have an inferno. Beware of convention. It moulds us to see things in narrow binary terms. Fabis answer touches on this.
I honestly think Dubov’s view is a legacy of the period when Fabi struggled at blitz relative to his classical form. Some people equate a strong ability at blitz to demonstrating ‘natural’ talent, and vice verca.
you spend 5000 hrs of your life getting skilled at something and someone comes up to you and says "you're so talented!" They haven't seen the blood, sweat, and tears, so they chalk it up to talent.
Fabi is just very methodical so it's easier to understand why he does the moves he does and not just from a move to move basis but from like a concept perspective on how he plays a full game, and strategy.
@@dinotje51 Maybe not to you but a lot of people want to see these endless ''responses'' just for the beef of it. And these guys have been milking the whole Hans thing into oblivion
Fabi never disappoints! One of the reasons I absolutely love listening to what he has to say!! A lesser player/human would've taken it as an insult. Loved how Fabi takes it neither as an insult nor a complement and gives his analysis as objectively as possible! I could absolutely learn from this!!
What's also impressive is that it appears Fabi is going over this entire game with Keymer from memory, including multiple variations that weren't played.
If winners mentality is the key to getting to Fabiano's level, it's only a matter of time before Hans Niemann becomes WCC because he has that in spades.
Like Federer and Novak. federer is talented, and novak is hard working man. Surely Novak is talented as well, but compare to Federer, i think not as much. Novak has to work very hard to be in his position today. We dont really see that on Federer. I am sure Federer also training hard but we can really see that he is something else. At least in his prime. Dubov said least talented not not talented. Compare to the 20 best. So still talented. But compare to Magnus. Then Magnus is somethjng else.
Yeah but he said fabi is one of the least talented players Now you can speculate whether he means fabi is least talented in top10 or 20, but he clearly stated fabi is least talented, this is such a L take I can't even put effort into justifying it I mean if he said fabi is less talented than magnus and a few other players then ok i could see it being somewhat true But to say fabi is the least talented, this just complete bs Plus hearing his take on Arjun and gukesh that they are just good cause they study chess for 10 hrs every day And he can be also at their level if only he puts more time in My god its just cope at this point just telling yourself that yea im as good as world no 5 only if i bothered to work is all
@@sumanraj9394 fabi mentioned something interesting, he said maybe it s language barrier. The way russians say things always to the point but it does not mean he belittled fabi. It s language thing.
Novak is honestly more talented than federer, his game doesn’t have any weakness. Federer got amazing finesse, but as all around player i think novak has amazing ability to grind points methodically. Something Feda dont have
What Dubov has done here is committed a type of logical fallacy. I'm not sure if there's an actual name for it but I see this happen a lot and I'll explain it. Before I do, I just wanna say that I agree with Fabi. I think it's clear from Dubov's comments as well as the way in which they were said that Dubov clearly means this as a compliment. In fact, IMO you can see he has a great deal of admiration for Fabi. But basically what Dubov has done is common psychological trick people can play on themselves. It can be very easy to do, even when trying to be conscious of biases, etc. Fabi is IMO very different from most of the others chess players that you see compete in the top 1-50. He's highly articulate, but more than that he's particularly careful about how he speaks and you can tell he's very mentally disciplined. He's always 'serious' and I don't mean that in a bad way. He's always trying his best and not just in the matches, which is where that ends for most players. He takes media responsibilities very seriously and tries to give thoughtful answers to questions. He's also *incredibly* knowledgable. He comes off as a very 'Book Smart' person, because he speaks very coherently, in complete sentences, little to no slang, very 'proper'. Sometimes a reaction people will have to people like this is "Wow, that person is really smart" But another type of reaction is some people assume that just because someone is highly knowledgeable that they are *only* book smart. In other words, there tends to be a type of cognitive bias against highly conscientious intelligent people. People tend to not see their intelligence/talent as 'genuine' because it's assumed they're only as knowledgeable as they are, or *appear* as talented as they are, because of their work ethic. Someone like Hikaru, who is clearly highly intelligent/talented (like Fabi), gets seen as genuinely being intelligent/talented because he often times has a very blasé type of attitude in interviews, etc. There's nothing wrong with this of course, it's just personality differences, but he seems *less* invested and *less* of a try hard, even if those things aren't true. So there's this aura about him where people would assume he's much more talented because he's as good as he is despite not caring as much. (Again, I'm NOT saying he doesn't care. I'm just saying that his attitude gives off that impression.) So Duvov essentially recognizes how committed to excellent Fabi is, but that very observation has also biased/blinded him a bit from realizing that their is a huge 'talent' component for Fabi as well. His intuition regarding the game is exceptional. I also think Fabi's style of play could also contribute to this characterization by Dubov. I feel like many times when people assess Fabi's play, they tend to find it a bit sterile compared to some of the more flamboyant 'aggressive' top players. The irony is Fabi does tend to like to play with an aggressive edge, but it's highly based in calculation so it doesn't come off as aggressive as others. People are again thinking that his play essentially seems 'booksmart'. That he sticks a bit too closely to popular lines, etc. Plays too conservatively, etc. However, what people don't realize is that when you're such a strong calculator that style of play is just simply advantageous to you. If you're just *better* than your opponent, then it suits you to *not* make the game messy and attempt to *control* the game, like Fabi does with calculated aggression. Play as sound a game as possible while trying to find low risk ways to apply pressure to your opponent, etc. Last thing, in terms of "Winners Mentality" I think what is commonly meant by this word, and what Dubov means here, is that someone with a winner's mentality will do anything necessary to win that's not cheating/underhanded, etc. Many players, evens some *really* fucking good players, are stubborn and tend to like to win, but only on their own terms. In other words, they're very stubborn about things like style, particular practice methods, etc. A player with 'Winner's mentality' is not only going to work the hardest they can, but they're going to be open to doing whatever it takes to win, no matter if they like the practice methods or have to change their tactics/style that they're fond of, etc. They'd truly do anything to win.
No, you are the one having fundamental misunderstanding that's about all there is. Dubov is completely right, fabi is only hard work, has no feeling for the game, no good intuitions.
@@golendorfjules1838 That's an insane thing to say. At best, I would accept that his he's not 'as talented' as a very short list of specific players, but even here we're likely talking small margins. You can't just will yourself to being the third highest rated player in history without having any feeling for the game/good intuitions. Magnus has said on record that while overall, in terms of accomplishments, he is fairly peerless, especially in this generation, that his WC match with Fabi was *incredibly* close and that Fabi was *very* near his own level in that match. That simply wouldn't be possible if he had no aptitude for the game at all, but beyond that just using the eye test you can clearly see the aptitude.
@@tox_ph0b0s80The other comment is obviously a troll comment. Anyone speaking in absolutes like that is either very young, very naive, or intentionally pushing people's buttons.
You made the fallacy of associating chess talent with high intelligence. I don't see why Fabi would be considered highly articulate, he's simply precise with his words.
Fabi is completely right: Talent is really subjective and a core thing is awareness. Knowing and fast learning different concepts does not automatically translate into higher proficiency. You need to be able to see things in the moment. If you are talented in learning new concepts quickly, you'll still end up being a weaker player if you lack this awareness. But you can make up for it in being very disciplined and diligent in your calculations. Fabi is the type of person, who is talented in discipline & going through with his calculations as well as applying different kind of concepts of good chess play consistently and meaningfully across basically all of his game. He is more akin to a top-notch scientist of chess, rather than some "flashy wizard" like Vassily Ivanchuk is and was a lot in his games, thus amplifying his genius status. I personally lack that discipline and follow-through, which makes so many things in life much easier. And I admire it. For me, subjectively, that is a talent. Conclusion: IMO Fabi has a lot of talent.
He is adult= can control/handle/put into perspective his feelings. It doesn't mean that emotions don't exist, not at all. Untypical in the latino/mediterrenean culture, much more common in (northern) Europe
It's simple Dubov is saying Fabi doesn't feel the chess like magnus does. Magus can gut tells this is the best move and then he calculated whereas Fabi gut don't talk, he calculates everything that's why he does more hardwork than anyone. Wait best analogy, FABI IS MIGHT GUY of Naruto and Magus is .. well MADARA obviously 😂
@@sullystpatrick no its not *fantasy* , fabi is not a top 10 player in speed chess, why? cuz his intuition isnt the best in the world . But fabii is clearly the 2nd best chess player of last decade of top3 highest rated all time , why? cuz he has worked on his calculations to such extents
Natural Talent vs. Hard Work in Football : In football, Lionel Messi exemplifies natural talent. His ability to effortlessly dribble past opponents in training showcases a gift that many recognize, including his fellow players. Diego Maradona is another iconic example of natural talent in the sport. In contrast, Cristiano Ronaldo represents the power of hard work and discipline. His remarkable achievements highlight how dedication and perseverance can lead to success. It’s no surprise that my young son admires Ronaldo, as his journey is truly inspiring. I completely agree with Dovov’s statements that this dynamic applies to nearly all sports.
I think there is a case to be made that the more you can attribute a player's success to factors outside of their pure understanding of and ability for the game of chess (intuitive understanding of a variety of different positions, creating plans, sensing good candidate moves, tactical awareness, speed and accuracy of calculation, etc etc), and instead can attribute it to other factors, the more you can say they don't owe their success to 'natural' talent, but are instead maximizing their talent. I'm thinking of factors like: Work Ethic -- how much time they devote to chess and how efficiently they spend that time Opening Preparation -- how thoroughly they know their openings; ability to surprise opponents Pragmatic Play -- making practical decisions on the board and managing time effectively Consistency -- avoiding unforced mistakes and excessive swings or slumps in performance Professionalism -- maintaining discipline in terms diet, exercise, fitness, sleep and structured study Not that the skills we associate with 'chess talent' aren't also improved through work and experience, but I think that if a player excels in some of the above categories, they can become a better and more successful chess player without necessarily being a more talented chess player.
Obviously that wasn't an insult to Fabi. You have a lot of people that are successful because of their drive and determination (not because of physical or born talent). Tom Brady, Steph Curry...effort and hard work can make up for lack of born talent (I'm convinced Magnus has a photographic memory).
I'm convinced Fabi has 200 IQ, doesn't mean shit, I don't know the guy, I've never talked to him personally nor saw his skills at face value in person, and yet, I'm convinced he has 200 IQ. Do you see how bizarre that thought is? Because that's exactly what you did...
@@saenstopie I'm also going by what other chess players have said about Magnus...they believe he has a photographic memory...but like you said...doesn't mean shit. I'm glad you're so passionate about a comment related to chess.
I think with talent he means the amount of effort a player needs to put in to figure out a position. Especially in shorter time frames, your natural speed of thought and decision-making shines through.
If you accept there is something in what Dubov says, what does the reverse side of that coin say about Dubov? I sometimes think he is squandering his "natural talent". Granted, he has an aggressive style, but I think he sometimes attacks for the sake of attacking, without caring enough about whether that produces more wins. That seems a bit lazy to me. I think the main reason Fabi has been ranked in the top 5 for all but about 10 months in the last 10 years is he ALWAYS gives absolutely all-out efforts in every game he plays.
But I feel dubov would admit that about himself. He never said it as an insult and realistically he was right (to a point in his premise, however superlatives aren’t accurate at this level)
My view of talent and gift is really about how high potential you have that can be seen when you're young and also how intuitive/fast you are able to understand stuff.
Fabi destroyed Dubiv. Fabi’s elaboration on the notion of “talent” is in line with the modern scientific work (see the book “Talent is overrated”), while Dubov’s logic is at the level of a lost teenager. You may speculate it’s part of the reason why Dubov is not even remotely as successful as Fabi, you really have to figure out what it’s all about as Fabi did
The cartoonist Scott Adams coined the term "Talent Stack" which accurately describes what Christian and Fabi are trying to say regarding 'what is talent'. It's the development of a variety of skills which combine to make someone a highly talented and sought after. This stack includes work ethic. In fact strong work ethic is the bedrock of the stack. Without it the stack would collapse.
Dubov is one of those guys at highest level of chess. He can have own opinion about collegues in sport. He didnt tell anything rude. And btw he is a world champion.
This reminds me of the people who insist that Larry Bird wasn't very athletic. Watch any highlight reel of Bird - the man had incredible body control, hand-eye coordination, and saw the game like he was living 2 seconds in the future. He was an all-time great in a sport full of elite athletes. So I don't know what people mean when they say he wasn't athletic - that he wouldn't win a 100m race against other ball players, or didn't have the vertical of some other player? It's just all in people's heads; by any objective measure, Bird is one of the top 20 athletes in the history of basketball, and Fabi is one of the top 20 most talented chess players in the history of chess.
I don‘t agree. Talent means, that certain things (in chess: pattern recognition, endurance, calculation, tactical awareness, ability to store knowledge and positions/entire games etc.) come naturally, as opposed to you putting much effort in it. Hard work may always be required, but in the case of a player with great talent, it functions as a multiplying factor: your strength increases faster, multiplied by the work you put into the game. Magnus is the perfect example of this metric. He doesn’t work hard like other players and is generally lazy, but he still is the best. This is not a subjective thing at all. It is unexplainable for outsiders, although insiders know: it‘s genious(gene, genetics).
Calculation Depth is a talent Visual-Spatial Awareness is a talent Spatial Reqsoning is a talent Tactical Awareness Memory Pattern Recognition All six are talents And of these six, Caruana's only weakness is Tactical Awareness-and that's when compared to other top players-not even the average Super GM To say that Fabiano Caruana is not one of the most gifted players of his generation, you would need to have a very subjective view of what the word "talent" means Which is exactly what he said In the mainstream discourse, talent is subjective You don't need to be Magnus to be recognized as a profoundly gifted chess player Beating GMs at 10 should be enough
@@melh937no these are not talents but skills that you no these are not talents but skills that you have or either don‘t have or either don‘t have. If you are talented by predisposition to get very good at them, then you are talented. I never said Fabi wasn‘t talented, but maybe he is more of a worker than Magnus, whereas Magnus is lazy and very talented. It is not subjective. It is genetic.
Where does people get this absurd thought that Magnus is a lazy guy who just wakes up and go play a top tournament and win like a breeze? Magnus has a team comprised of 4 or 5 guys constantly coming up with ideas for him and MAGNUS himself is the quality control of those ideas, he's the one to decide everything and work everything out on his own with his abilities, he's the one that decides if an idea brought up by some of his seconds is usable or not, that alone means he needs to put a lot of work to reach the level of knowledge necessary to play those ideas and not only that but figure out the plans of a super computer if necessary. Taking Magnus attitude and general lookism to say he's lazy("oohh but, but, he comes late to games", "ooh but, but he talks slowly and looks like he doesn't give a shit") is utterly stupid, this is a human being who as a 13 year old boy got to sit and analyze, study and dissect chess positions with KASPAROV(the hardest working chess player in history) surely that means Kasparov saw how much Magnus worked for everything he achieved even at the age of 13! Now about what Dubov said about Fabi is the most BS shit i've ever heard in my life, and I don't think I need to explain why... Again, you can definitely say that Fabi puts more work than Magnus in his preparations, I'm ok with that even though I do think It's debatable, because again we are measuring things based on personality and lookisms(Fabi looks like a super angular guy, with face features that makes you think he's strict and values his routines, whereas Magnus features feels more relaxed and less tense).
Nobody at his level is lazy. That's kind of the point faby is making: you can't point to talent as everyone works really hard. And even with kids I think talent is so difficult to isolate. Maybe you have one child who does his homework really well but doesn't care much and another child who never practices but he dreams about chess and thinks about it while he's playing soccer. Which one is more talented? Probably people will say the second child is talented, because they don't see him playing chess games in his head while he's looking out of the window during class ..
It makes perfect sense for someone who has a more analytical approach to feel that “talent” vs “work ethic” is a very nebulous comparison. As someone who moved through a lot of school (regular school, not chess) on raw talent more than hard work, I’ve always looked at the folks with both talent and grind and been impressed by them.
Take Michael Jordan as another example. Not born with the height normally needed, didn't make his varsity team...yet the rest is history. So Fabi is the Michael Jordan of chess.
@@FloydMaxwell Andre himself has said that in order to be the best at something in the world you have to have natural talent and you have to start working at a very young age. Your own example guy understands the fairly straightforward concept of "natural talent" for an activity. Like the class clown who becomes a top comedian. Like Paul Morphy. I think Dubov is more right than wrong in his observation.
Talent is the ability to hide how much work you've put into something or is an excuse to explain why your maximum potential hasn't been or will never be reached. Those with the greatest talent can give off the impression that they put in no work at all. When combined with a strong consistent and long-term work ethic, this can lead to greatness. But when mixed with laziness, a poor attitude or even just disinterest, that's the sole claim of credit that can remain. For kids, regarding them as a talent can be a tool of motivation, but it can also be a risk in that they end up not following through. For adults, you don't really want to be called talented, unless your goal is to achieve maximum gain (not to be confused with unlimited gain) with minimal work. But also, for adults who don't care, and only regard their sport of chess as a casual hobby, being labelled as talented also doesn't really matter. Where things get interesting are the top players who are not only both talented and hardworking, but also able to hide that they are talented or hard-working, or even both. Just like with anything in chess, it's possible to sandbag both one's subjective talent level, and one's subjective work ethic metric.
I wish I was as talentless as Fabi 😩
I remember when everyone used to say Fabiano was bad at blitz chess because he was #2 in the world in classical and "only" about #9 in the world in blitz.
You are as talentless as him! Only lazier 😏
You Are as talentless as him! Only lazier 😏
No one ever said that Fabiano is talentless.
LIFETIME RECORD:
Classical games: Fabiano Caruana beat Daniil Dubov 1 to 0, with 1 draw.
Including rapid/exhibition games: Fabiano Caruana beat Daniil Dubov 4 to 1, with 3 draws.
Only rapid/exhibition games: Fabiano Caruana beat Daniil Dubov 3 to 1, with 2 draws.
*The figures above are based only on games present in our database which may be incomplete.
I believe Dubov has his own distinct interpretation of 'naturally gifted,' placing greater emphasis on creativity and intuition rather than deep calculation and preparation. In his view, Dubov likely sees Fabi as akin to Batman-intellectual, methodical, and someone who triumphs through relentless hard work and unparalleled preparation, albeit without the billions of dollars. This contrasts with the idea of a Superman figure, who is seemingly born great but still vulnerable to defeat by mere mortals through cleverness and meticulous planning.
True, I wish this comment was farther up so Fabi can read it!
This is a great example!
Basically what he meant.
Yeah, using fictional characters as a analogy just doesn't work. It's pointless - Superman and Spiderman can do whatever the scriptwriter says they can do.
Chatgpt response
Fabi was so calm in his response. It was as if he had already done the opening prep work for such a question lol
Let's have a 1 hour podcast with dubov and clear things up 😄
Why not Invite Dubov and talk about other things.
I'm down!
No
It was a compliment: he actually meant Fabis moves are always understandable (at the highest level) meaning reproducible, which explains Fabis long term success. Talent and gift alone doesnt provide reliable success. Magnus is working his arse off, but maybe he loves chess the most (like Aljechin and Fischer).
And also ask him to rank top 25 players based on talent, that would be fun 🤣
Just a reminder, Kasparov said being able to work extremely hard; harder than the rest; is a talent. So Fabi may lack the intuition magnus and other intuitive players have, but he sure as hell works hard. Also, I disagree with Dubov. Carlsen already said that Fabi just "Calculates everything to a tee". So that's extreme talent.
I agree with this 100%. The ability to focus for long periods of time and grind is a tremendous talent that not everyone possesses. I do not have it, and I wish I did.
but what he calls work includes the work of their seconds and Kasparov happened to have the best of all because the Soviet Union was very dominant for a very long time.
@@paulgoogol2652Kasparov dominated his soviet colleges, who had access to the same seconds, funding, etc, if not more, as Kasparov was in a very tense relationship with the government and FIDE.
@@LasCosasDeBrunin so? I was talking about the work part. I didn't deny that Kasparov was somewhat talented. so what is your problem exactly?
@@LasCosasDeBrunin yes. that's why Soviet Union as a whole was very dominant. so how does Kasparov being better than the others contradict what I just said?
Fabi is the most naturally gifted thinker. He describes things beautifully.
I second this
That's such a true comment!
not even close
@@friendsfrenz1944 in this podcast it is, he is very precise in his words and the meaning he is atributing to them, not just spilling words without a clear definition like dubov does.
Yes this is his actual talent
Fabi is the most self-aware and mature sportsperson (not just chess player) that I have ever seen. Never change Fabi!
uhh chess is not a sport lol
@@sreekar47807 It has all the characteristics of a sport besides physicality
@@NeelSandellISAWESOME uhh sure thing pal whatever makes to happy
Yep i LOVE that he is a genius speaker n a very rational well spoken dude
It is always a pleasure to hear him talk.
We all know Fabi is in The Mafia. Basically a discrete don. So when he says he does not take it personally... Dubov should not go to a restaurant with him, especially in Tessio's territory.
Bring cake, Dubov😄
It's strictly business.
One of these days Dubov will wake up and find a knight in his bed.
@@ronald3836 haha, maybe one stolen by Giri....
@@ronald3836 good one
Let's just take a moment to appreciate how eloquently Fabi articulates his thoughts with such clarity and objectivity, never allowing emotion or offense to cloud his perspective.
Fabi's just so classy he's above getting offended.
Ok guys I just have to comment - I’m the same age as Gary Kasparov - for a brief time Leonard Barden even ranked me as the number two nine year old in the world behind Kasparov (or Gary Weinstein as he was known back then) - the good old days lol.
Anyway over the years I’ve had quite a few conversations with Gary and he said to me - Julian people say I’m very talented but you know what my greatest talent is? I replied no what Gary? He said my ability to work on chess incredibly hard - to out work all my competitors!!
Wow are you really Julian Hodgson?
@@vimalkarthik3461 If he were lying he would have said he is Bobby Fischer ;-)
😂😂@@ronald3836
@@vimalkarthik3461 yep)) - Mr Trompovsky himself lol
@@julianhodgson1961 we still miss you!
Fabi is so commendable for the way he handled Dubov's comments. So many would have taken it as a personal affront.
Ye I thought Dubov was a bit harsh there, Fabi was beating GMs at 10 yrs old so if that isn't natural talent I don't know what is lol
@@SteveMeek Dubov words here are meaningless,he saying nothing in many words, like a petersons disciple
_"So many would have taken it as a personal affront."_ It *IS* a personal affront. What do you think calling someone 'the least talented of the pack' is?
The lack of class of Dubov is showing. Fabi took it well because he is well above Dubov both at a personal level and at a chess talent level.
It's funny how you can start with a great reputation for working hard and consistently doing a lot of prep. Everyone will naturally assume you are talented but that you're outworking similarly talented people. After a long time of people saying these things about your prep consistently you'll start to get comments, even from high level grandmasters who should probably know better, claiming you never had much talent at all and all you are is a prep machine. Frankly, even if he was right, the ability to dedicate yourself more than anyone else is also a talent. It's one of the least common and most useful talents in my experience.
"... claiming you never had much talent at all"
Now you're claiming he claimed Fabi doesn't much talent at all, which he didn't. He's talking within the narrow context of the top 20. I'm sure he takes it as read that Fabi is more naturally talented at chess than most of the 8 billion people on earth. His argument, true or not, isn't that Fabi has no talent at all, bur that he relies more on hard graft than the other 19 players at the top of the game.
@@8964TS so you agree that in terms of natural talent fabi is not in top 20?
Lmao this is such a L take
And his statements on gukesh and arjun, that they're good only because they study 10 hrs a day, and he can be just as good if he only puts more work in.
This is just pure cope, convincing yourself that you are exceptional enough, just need to put the work in.
I didn’t say I agree. I corrected the OP’s misinterpretation and mischaracterization of Dubov’s comments. To argue against someone’s argument, you have to actually understand it first.
Off topic, but cool to see you in the wild! I’ll always remember your collab raps
@@sumanraj9394 he never said that “they’re good only because they study 10 hours a day”. He never said he is very exceptional and I don’t believe thinks that.
Fabi's calculation ability is natural talent. His winning mentality is natural talent. There are all qualitative skills which he possesses. There is no one size fits all natural gift - they're all talented and they're all hard working
I mean Fabi beat GM Wojtkevich when he was only 10. Was like yesterday I was watching
GM Wojtkiewicz was one of those unfortunate characters where the term "natural talent" makes the most sense.
Man, I really love how Fabi expresses himself. His thought process is so clear and structured, to me that is always a sign of high intellect, or excellent analytical skills at least
I agree with Fabi. Talent is a wishy washy concept. There is only winning and losing. The rest is storytelling.
To clarify, there are some exceptions. A 6'7" athlete has obvious natural advantages in most sports. Let's say IQ is a good metric for chess (it may or may not be, but just as an example) - someone with a 150 IQ has a natural advantage.
But that's not what people are generally talking about when they speak of talent. They're talking about something subjective and ultimately impossible to separate from the player's experience, work ethic, coaching, etc.
@@KevinHawkshaw IQ basically measures pattern recognition and education, right? I'm not so sure
I think talent is a simple concept. Say two people achieve the same results in some activity, the one who had to invest less time and effort can be viewed as having more natural talent for said activity.
@@prenticeanyonywrightiq measures human intelligence
Definitely not education, honestly iq might actually be a pretty decent metric for chess talent. But people can be good at chess but also dumb in everything else
@@ramanahveljeyaseelan5406 IQ measures performance on IQ tests
As someone who kept telling myself I had natural talent but simply don't work hard enough to reach top in my field, I ended up realizing that this is just cope. If you are the top in the world at anything, you have both hard work and natural talent. And its very hard to distinguish which one lead to it more.
Ageed, Dubov's comments came across as cope. Something u tell yourself to justify not making it to the top
I mean yeah if he said like fabi is not as talented as magnus and a few other players then maybe you can atleast make some sense of it
But to say that fabi is the least talented player in the top 20 is just copium deluxe
Both lead to it
@@Mikesco10 right, i meant which one lead to it more. Its all complete nonsense. You cant distinguish these things that well.
Ok...don't work at chess, don't study theory, have no coaches or engines and then see how far your natural talent gets you...not into the top 100
Very classy to show that you fully understand what someone is trying to say even as you disagree with them.
Fabi is absolutely brilliant, love the guy
Fabi is the greatest individual in Chess!
He is the clearest thinker and easily the most objective thinker among chess players.
We see under time pressure in shorter formats Fabi struggles, intuition can be a weakness here.... and thats why its so so impressive he is so incredible at classical and shows how much hard work he puts in. This is what Dubov means, it is definitely a compliment but I can see how some would see it as an insult. He is praising Fabis work ethic
It's just lack of practice and experience, speed chess hasn't been his focus. Correlation does not necessarily equate to causation.
But is this talent or skill what fabi lacks in speed chess he makes up for it in playing perfect classical chess (specially when he was in prime)
but someone like magnus has this insane moments like loosing to 2600s in qatar or to esipenko and others cause he has become a lazy calculator which inturn means blunders can happen if your intuition doesn't turn out to be right
To me it seems like playing with intuition and speed, and extreme calculation ability are just two seperate skills
Magnus possesses both (iguess thats what you need to be GOAT) but at this stage of his career he has just become a lazy calculator.
I think that's mainly due to exactly what he alluded to in this video, tactical awareness. A lot of time scrambles are decided by someone missing a tactic so the player who can spot them quicker always have an advantage. Fabi acknowledges this. In classical he has more time to spot the tactics so he's probably not going to miss it.
I totally agree, I blunder pieces left and right in bullet, but my longer time format rating is 2000 on lichess. I just don’t have the talent to blitz out my moves, I always need a several minutes think or I might sometimes forget a piece controls a square or miss some other detail
Except Fabi is 2766 FIDE in Rapid (world #4) and 2796 in Blitz (world #5). He's better in classical, but this idea that he's weak in faster time controls is completely bogus
Fabbi was an uncommonly talented prodigy who made it to the world championship. You can't make it to the world championship on hard work alone. Ask all those just below super GM's level who have been grinding it out all their lives.
Dubov never claimed Fabi wasn't talented, though.
@@fundhund62 Dubov: "He's arguably the least talented player of the top 20"
@@sorenzollamas Yes. Two completely different statements.
@@fundhund62 The statement suggests that any top 20 player could reach the world championship through sheer hard work. I disagree. I don't believe we'll see Hans Niemann there solely based on his effort and talent, no matter how impressive.
@@sorenzollamaswhat Dubov is primarily talking about are the moves that one makes on the chess board and how theh insinuate genius in regard to how rare it would be even for top level gms to find the moves. With Fabi he is saying that he doesnt really make any moves that particularly stand out to him, among the too 20, as bejng genius, but rather thag his hard work has allowed him to play the consistently best moves whereas Magnus can find brilliancies that are generally hard for even the top 20 to miss. Like a top 20 player might see Fabi make moves and be like “wow he continually makes the best move, and while the move isnt necessarily anything special like Magnus: its the best move and he consistently finds because he understands the principles on a deeper level because of hard work”. Those same players may have moments of brilliance but they arent as consistently technically sound as Fabi who likely relies on and executes the basics very well all the time.
What a class act Fabi is. This is not a "reaction" but a sincere, prudent and thoughtful response. Even if it were true that he's the least "talented" chesswise of the elite, he's certainly one of the most intelligent. My respects. If this was the first time I listened to Fabi, I would have become immediately his fan. But I'm already am :)
Such a high level talk. Listening to Fabi should be a course in school. Such clear thoughts. he actually talks like machine looking for logic and meaning in every sentence. Amazing.
Fabi is good man, good in explaining, good in going into detail. He has the gift to
Explain in a very detail
Way about many things. We are lucky to be able to listen Fabi in this podcast. always interesting
Maybe Dubov looks at talent by how much a player can navigate "weird/non-traditional" positions that dont fall into theory, and their fluidity in understanding those kinds of positions without having to spend much time brute calculating. And that his "compliment" is more aimed at the idea that though Dubov doesn't think Fabi excels in those kinds of positions, his willingness to still fight in them if it means the best chances of winning, along with his prep are what Dubov thinks are Fabi's main strength. Just my interpretation but could be wrong.
If that is the case, why isn't he better than everyone at chess 960 (Fischer Random Chess)?
@@TandemKnightswell he didn't say he is the most talented player 🤦
I thought I was just getting some chess gossip, but you tricked me into watching a remarkable game by fabi 👏👏👏
Well if we discuss talent in chess, it's also worth to look at the Polgar experiment.
Particular one interview of Judith Polgar's Dad saying, that Judith was the least talentet of his daughters. but the one who was working the hardest and therefore she was the most sucessful one.
If you look at this perspective: 'working hard' means a lot more than 'talent' (survival of the fittest - a very sowjet style of thinking), Dubov's saying really is meant as a compliment.
I think talent is simply the result of hard work.
As in, if you take 10 chess beginners who have exactly the same level and then these 10 beginners invest 100 hours of hard work each.
Then after these 100 hours of hard work, the most talented in chess is the one who has reached the highest level.
Same for Nakamura brothers. Hikaru said his older brother is more talented than him in term of learning chess.
However, he did/could not work hard enough when he stuck in 2000+ elo range.
Fabi telling all the details of the game, without looking the board! a sharp and complex game...
I teach a lot of beginners. And I understand concept of talent. It's especially visible when the kids starts to learn, some of them learn things faster than others, some of them catch the ideas if you tell them once, others struggle to remember how the bishop moves after 4 hours of active learning. But then sometimes I see super talented kids who get to quite decent results and others who get beaten all the time - they spent the same amount of time with chess. But at the end of the year some of these struggling kids work harder, just follow my basic advises, like try to play 1-2 games a day and try to implement what we were learning today, and analyze what you could do better... and they beat talented ones who believes that they're better so they don't need to train. I've seen that plenty of times.
Yeah, talent is how much time you need to put in to improve one "level of strength/understanding", so a more talented hard working person is unreachable, but talent needs hard work to shine and a dedicated "untalented" person, will with time overcome a "talented" lazy person.
I'm 100% sure Fabi is aware of every single thing you just said
@@skurrskurr2032 I think so... but this is how most of people will describe talent. I would add one more thing after reconsidering my experience. Some people can implement what they learn fast in their games... some of them will do well in training, but in games they follow old habits. But this is maybe not talent but psychological limitations, confidence, trust, etc..
@@peterfischer2039 Yep, that's why I am surprised that Fabi is not sure how to define it. Maybe he looks at this from 2800 perspective and 2600+ students :)
immediately thought of the messi vs ronaldo "discussion"
except that i think Ronaldo’s talent in football is better than Fabi’s talent in chess
But the thing is we got lukaku here claiming Ronaldo is the least talented in top 30 😅.
Ronaldinho was more talented than both, and still his career isnt even close. Talent is overrated
@@yuriscaramussa how do you define talent in football?. It's seem everyone have their own strength. In the end it was decided by the number of output they produce / G+A, achievement / trophies. In chess we call that rating and title.
@isaac7272 Dubov is like Rafael Leao who just plays for the love of the game and Fabi is more like Salah who is very hardworking and effective but not the best to watch. Salah and Fabi are way better but Leao and Dubov are more entertaining to watch.
Fabi is so thoughtful, very intelligent and stoic. Stays away from drama, which is smart when you’re famous public figure.
for example Wesley So without any major coach or big culture of chess in Phillipines grew up to be 2700s even 2nd in the world at some point. That's a talent
So is American
Watch the olimpiad lol
@@PhurngirathaanaSo was born in the Philippines. He moved to the US at age 19, 5 years after earning his GM title.
@@Phurngirathaana
Delete your comment
@@fredcurts9219
Just because Alekhine was born in Russia does not mean he gets credit for theory in the Petroff defence 👍
@@eightyoutube11
Delete your account
Fabi is Fabulous. Always has been big fan of him. Love from India.
thats why we like fabi he is factual not hiding behind words
Every time I hear Fabi speak it becomes even more apparent he is an extremely intelligent person, even beyond his chess skill
I think it’s pretty clear what dubov meant. Fabi is the kind of player who relies more on hard work, being well studied, strong opening preparation, and a good mindset rather than relying heavily on raw talent like magnus or ivanchuk do.
It’s like capablanca & alekine, capablanca studied a bit but he mostly relied on his pure genius while alekhine relied on working super hard both in studying, training, and calculating over the board, but both are still great players despite different styles.
A different example would be Kobe Bryant, since Kobe didn’t rely on his raw talent to be one of the best but rather he trained harder than anyone else in the NBA and he studied the rules of the game and his opponents playing style until he knew them better than anyone else & had greater technical skill. Fabi is like Kobe in that regard. Meanwhile Magnus would be like Larry bird who was great not because he was more physically fit or hard working but instead he just simply had an uncanny intuitive understanding of the game.
Dubov isn’t trying to be insulting, he’s literally complimenting fabi. Obviously dubov knows that fabi is undeniably one of the best players ever so dubov is literally using fabi as an example to say that hard work and a good mindset are just as effective as raw natural talent.
We also have to consider that dubov has never been in the top 20 yet he is known to be as talented as just about any top 10 player (even Magnus on a good day). So it’s fair to assume that dubov still considers “being less talented than the top 20 players” to not be a bad thing at all.
He’s not saying that it’s a bad thing at all, he’s actually saying that hard work and a strong mindset are just as effective and important as raw talent.
Bro when dubov gives you a compliment and he says it's a compliment, it's a compliment. Admittedly, he said that he aspires or would aspire to fabi's level, so immediately we already know that dubov is talking upward to fabi. That's all that needs to be understood
He's not saying Fabi isn't talented, it's specific to the top 20. I'm sure he recognizes that Fabi has real talent for chess, but that without the hard work maybe he'd be 21st in the world, not a former WC candidate. Clearly Fabi has a genuine gift for the game and his baseline level was miles ahead of 99% of us even before he studied.
why to use the language like "least talented" and shit bro. he could have said it in so many other ways.
@@SG-vh3ti "Least talented of the top 20". You have to listen to the whole sentence, not just pick out two words.
@@SG-vh3ti I mean he said least talented in top 20
@@8964TS how did he measure the talent of top 20 and ranked them and whats his metric of ranking them. nothing. he just blabbered something, pure opinion and feel, right? so, he is just being an asshole.
@@SG-vh3ti It's called an opinion. He's a pro chess player who knows all the players at the top. They all judge each other the same way. No big deal.
Dubov doesn't see talent in Fabi becouse they are good at the same thing: calculating deep. Magnus and Hikaru are better at evaluating than calculating (at least in terms of natural talent), which to Dubov seems amazing becouse it's a different talent.
No matter how much hard work you do - and Dubov is saying that Fabi is the hardest working man in Chess - you cannot possibly be in the top 5 for a dozen years without a massive dose of natural talent.
Fabi surely has his own special gift or talent. His feeling when and how play more aggressive, his middlegame technique, his capability to keep the concentration move by move, match by match through the competition... And this gift is gorgeous.
Anyone in the top 100 or 200 in something as competitive as professional chess is naturally talent. It would be an insult for the other hundred of thousands who try with maximum effort but will never get there
Fabi's lucidity and honesty never cease to impress.
Last time I was this early Morphy was still the best in the world.
He still is.
@@Patrick462 Love me some morphy !
imagine being too good at chess, nobody can defeat you, and the chess pros come to your workplace just want to defeat you in chess game.
Morphy is more talented than Fabi
Did someone say morphine 😂
I love how Fabi takes a calm and factual stance in matters that others would find provoking. If this was some other GM, we could have seen trash talk starting on Twitter and a drama ensuing out of it (which would also be fun to watch, I have to admit 🙂); but instead, we listened to Fabi's inspiring thoughts on what "talent" could be and how difficult it is to define that. Very mature and amazing response!
3rd highest rated chess player ever.
That’s the most backhanded compliment ever
"Talent" is the refuge of losers. Like Nick Kyrgios in tennis - if I just goof off and pretend I don't care, then I don't have to face my fear that no matter how much I tried, I could never be good enough.
how do they overcome this?
you get the right to speak about this topics when you actually achieve somthing, otherwise it's just based on your worldview
Talent exists, but it still has to be cultuvated. Magnus is talented. His memory as well as his self proclaimed ability to just know the best move proves this, but he spent time cultivating those skills with heavy practice
Says a random youtube commenter about a tennis player who very clearly had to work very hard to become good enough to play professionally at a very high level for over a decade, reaching the final of Wimbledon in 2022, earning millions and having a very successful career.
I think "talent" in Dubov's understanding means creativity. But I totally suck at chess.
Talent is a measure of how strong a player would be if they never had any chess training, or at least no higher level structured training.
If you look at people like Capablanca and Morphy, they got to GM level with no engines, very few chess books, and opposition that was club level at best.
The problem with judging talent of modern players is that they start getting structured training and using books and engines at such a young age that we don't really know what their natural talent level would be without those.
That's a fairly common perspective but maybe there are different types of talent and some types of talent require more training to be energised but when they do they are also more expandable. I study wood fires for fun and some wood fires require more ignition fuel (more smaller sticks and straw) and more fanning because the wood is denser, but when they light up you have an inferno.
Beware of convention. It moulds us to see things in narrow binary terms. Fabis answer touches on this.
I honestly think Dubov’s view is a legacy of the period when Fabi struggled at blitz relative to his classical form. Some people equate a strong ability at blitz to demonstrating ‘natural’ talent, and vice verca.
you spend 5000 hrs of your life getting skilled at something and someone comes up to you and says "you're so talented!"
They haven't seen the blood, sweat, and tears, so they chalk it up to talent.
Fabi is just very methodical so it's easier to understand why he does the moves he does and not just from a move to move basis but from like a concept perspective on how he plays a full game, and strategy.
Let's go, I was hoping there would be a response to this
Oh please stop craving for drama...these two can't wait to make some vapid response to anything they can.
@@user-vt4hd8hb4v Where was the drama? Just interesting insights lol
@@dinotje51 Maybe not to you but a lot of people want to see these endless ''responses'' just for the beef of it. And these guys have been milking the whole Hans thing into oblivion
Fabi never disappoints! One of the reasons I absolutely love listening to what he has to say!! A lesser player/human would've taken it as an insult. Loved how Fabi takes it neither as an insult nor a complement and gives his analysis as objectively as possible! I could absolutely learn from this!!
He plays chess like that too - he doesn't get emotional and analyzes calmly.
Fabi didn't take that comment personally. Neither should Dubov take it personally when his car explodes.
that is deep analysis my friend at least 1989 rated
What's also impressive is that it appears Fabi is going over this entire game with Keymer from memory, including multiple variations that weren't played.
If winners mentality is the key to getting to Fabiano's level, it's only a matter of time before Hans Niemann becomes WCC because he has that in spades.
has to be true and not an act though
Fabi's response is very very intelligent. I am impressed.
'Genius is 1% talent and 99% percent hard work...' - Albert Einstein
He didn’t say that
amazing insight in what is behind one move. in this case lots of preparation and then for some years not even using it.
very interesting to see this
Like Federer and Novak. federer is talented, and novak is hard working man. Surely Novak is talented as well, but compare to Federer, i think not as much. Novak has to work very hard to be in his position today. We dont really see that on Federer. I am sure Federer also training hard but we can really see that he is something else. At least in his prime.
Dubov said least talented not not talented. Compare to the 20 best. So still talented. But compare to Magnus. Then Magnus is somethjng else.
Yeah but he said fabi is one of the least talented players
Now you can speculate whether he means fabi is least talented in top10 or 20, but he clearly stated fabi is least talented,
this is such a L take I can't even put effort into justifying it
I mean if he said fabi is less talented than magnus and a few other players then ok i could see it being somewhat true
But to say fabi is the least talented, this just complete bs
Plus hearing his take on Arjun and gukesh that they are just good cause they study chess for 10 hrs every day
And he can be also at their level if only he puts more time in
My god its just cope at this point just telling yourself that yea im as good as world no 5 only if i bothered to work is all
true, Federer could win without producing a single drop of sweat
@@sumanraj9394 fabi mentioned something interesting, he said maybe it s language barrier. The way russians say things always to the point but it does not mean he belittled fabi. It s language thing.
yeah but novak has only less talent than Rafa and Roger,not other 30 people
Novak is honestly more talented than federer, his game doesn’t have any weakness. Federer got amazing finesse, but as all around player i think novak has amazing ability to grind points methodically. Something Feda dont have
Fabi analysing things the way he analyses things, with calm and depth. True gentleman!
working hard and being productive consistently IS a talent.
Yes please do more analysis! Would absolutely love a recurring series of looking at fabi's games!
What Dubov has done here is committed a type of logical fallacy. I'm not sure if there's an actual name for it but I see this happen a lot and I'll explain it.
Before I do, I just wanna say that I agree with Fabi. I think it's clear from Dubov's comments as well as the way in which they were said that Dubov clearly means this as a compliment. In fact, IMO you can see he has a great deal of admiration for Fabi.
But basically what Dubov has done is common psychological trick people can play on themselves. It can be very easy to do, even when trying to be conscious of biases, etc.
Fabi is IMO very different from most of the others chess players that you see compete in the top 1-50. He's highly articulate, but more than that he's particularly careful about how he speaks and you can tell he's very mentally disciplined. He's always 'serious' and I don't mean that in a bad way. He's always trying his best and not just in the matches, which is where that ends for most players. He takes media responsibilities very seriously and tries to give thoughtful answers to questions. He's also *incredibly* knowledgable.
He comes off as a very 'Book Smart' person, because he speaks very coherently, in complete sentences, little to no slang, very 'proper'.
Sometimes a reaction people will have to people like this is "Wow, that person is really smart"
But another type of reaction is some people assume that just because someone is highly knowledgeable that they are *only* book smart. In other words, there tends to be a type of cognitive bias against highly conscientious intelligent people. People tend to not see their intelligence/talent as 'genuine' because it's assumed they're only as knowledgeable as they are, or *appear* as talented as they are, because of their work ethic.
Someone like Hikaru, who is clearly highly intelligent/talented (like Fabi), gets seen as genuinely being intelligent/talented because he often times has a very blasé type of attitude in interviews, etc. There's nothing wrong with this of course, it's just personality differences, but he seems *less* invested and *less* of a try hard, even if those things aren't true. So there's this aura about him where people would assume he's much more talented because he's as good as he is despite not caring as much. (Again, I'm NOT saying he doesn't care. I'm just saying that his attitude gives off that impression.)
So Duvov essentially recognizes how committed to excellent Fabi is, but that very observation has also biased/blinded him a bit from realizing that their is a huge 'talent' component for Fabi as well. His intuition regarding the game is exceptional.
I also think Fabi's style of play could also contribute to this characterization by Dubov. I feel like many times when people assess Fabi's play, they tend to find it a bit sterile compared to some of the more flamboyant 'aggressive' top players. The irony is Fabi does tend to like to play with an aggressive edge, but it's highly based in calculation so it doesn't come off as aggressive as others.
People are again thinking that his play essentially seems 'booksmart'. That he sticks a bit too closely to popular lines, etc. Plays too conservatively, etc. However, what people don't realize is that when you're such a strong calculator that style of play is just simply advantageous to you. If you're just *better* than your opponent, then it suits you to *not* make the game messy and attempt to *control* the game, like Fabi does with calculated aggression. Play as sound a game as possible while trying to find low risk ways to apply pressure to your opponent, etc.
Last thing, in terms of "Winners Mentality" I think what is commonly meant by this word, and what Dubov means here, is that someone with a winner's mentality will do anything necessary to win that's not cheating/underhanded, etc.
Many players, evens some *really* fucking good players, are stubborn and tend to like to win, but only on their own terms. In other words, they're very stubborn about things like style, particular practice methods, etc. A player with 'Winner's mentality' is not only going to work the hardest they can, but they're going to be open to doing whatever it takes to win, no matter if they like the practice methods or have to change their tactics/style that they're fond of, etc. They'd truly do anything to win.
No, you are the one having fundamental misunderstanding that's about all there is. Dubov is completely right, fabi is only hard work, has no feeling for the game, no good intuitions.
@@golendorfjules1838 That's an insane thing to say.
At best, I would accept that his he's not 'as talented' as a very short list of specific players, but even here we're likely talking small margins.
You can't just will yourself to being the third highest rated player in history without having any feeling for the game/good intuitions.
Magnus has said on record that while overall, in terms of accomplishments, he is fairly peerless, especially in this generation, that his WC match with Fabi was *incredibly* close and that Fabi was *very* near his own level in that match.
That simply wouldn't be possible if he had no aptitude for the game at all, but beyond that just using the eye test you can clearly see the aptitude.
@@tox_ph0b0s80The other comment is obviously a troll comment. Anyone speaking in absolutes like that is either very young, very naive, or intentionally pushing people's buttons.
You made the fallacy of associating chess talent with high intelligence. I don't see why Fabi would be considered highly articulate, he's simply precise with his words.
I agree with you 100%
Fabi is completely right: Talent is really subjective and a core thing is awareness. Knowing and fast learning different concepts does not automatically translate into higher proficiency. You need to be able to see things in the moment. If you are talented in learning new concepts quickly, you'll still end up being a weaker player if you lack this awareness. But you can make up for it in being very disciplined and diligent in your calculations. Fabi is the type of person, who is talented in discipline & going through with his calculations as well as applying different kind of concepts of good chess play consistently and meaningfully across basically all of his game. He is more akin to a top-notch scientist of chess, rather than some "flashy wizard" like Vassily Ivanchuk is and was a lot in his games, thus amplifying his genius status. I personally lack that discipline and follow-through, which makes so many things in life much easier. And I admire it. For me, subjectively, that is a talent. Conclusion: IMO Fabi has a lot of talent.
@ 1:48 TYPICAL REACTION OF FABI. HE GETS RID OF THE EMOTION RIGHT AWAY AND STARTS ANALYZING. Is he ever angry or happy?
He is adult= can control/handle/put into perspective his feelings. It doesn't mean that emotions don't exist, not at all. Untypical in the latino/mediterrenean culture, much more common in (northern) Europe
Collected guy. Talented thinker.
@@Ari-PekkaKaipiainen Funny that a cool Finnish guy reacted positively ;-)
I love watching Fabi talk us through his own games. This one was quite a gem
Invite Dubov to the podcast
dubov is right, fabi gift was his chess tutor startting at youngest age than others
It's simple Dubov is saying Fabi doesn't feel the chess like magnus does. Magus can gut tells this is the best move and then he calculated whereas Fabi gut don't talk, he calculates everything that's why he does more hardwork than anyone.
Wait best analogy, FABI IS MIGHT GUY of Naruto and Magus is .. well MADARA obviously 😂
perfect!
intuition comes after handwork.
Nonsense. I clearly remember Fabi being an up & coming prodigy.
You don’t know what Fabi’s gut tells him so this is based in fantasy
@@sullystpatrick no its not *fantasy* , fabi is not a top 10 player in speed chess, why? cuz his intuition isnt the best in the world . But fabii is clearly the 2nd best chess player of last decade of top3 highest rated all time , why? cuz he has worked on his calculations to such extents
Natural Talent vs. Hard Work in Football : In football, Lionel Messi exemplifies natural talent. His ability to effortlessly dribble past opponents in training showcases a gift that many recognize, including his fellow players. Diego Maradona is another iconic example of natural talent in the sport. In contrast, Cristiano Ronaldo represents the power of hard work and discipline. His remarkable achievements highlight how dedication and perseverance can lead to success. It’s no surprise that my young son admires Ronaldo, as his journey is truly inspiring.
I completely agree with Dovov’s statements that this dynamic applies to nearly all sports.
Lots of Fabi love, deservingly so, yet Christian doesn’t get enough credit for what he brought into the chess world with this podcast. Bravo!👏
I like it very much keep doing it !! 👏🏻💪🏻
"Don't you know that hard work is a talent?" Garry Kastparov
I think there is a case to be made that the more you can attribute a player's success to factors outside of their pure understanding of and ability for the game of chess (intuitive understanding of a variety of different positions, creating plans, sensing good candidate moves, tactical awareness, speed and accuracy of calculation, etc etc), and instead can attribute it to other factors, the more you can say they don't owe their success to 'natural' talent, but are instead maximizing their talent. I'm thinking of factors like:
Work Ethic -- how much time they devote to chess and how efficiently they spend that time
Opening Preparation -- how thoroughly they know their openings; ability to surprise opponents
Pragmatic Play -- making practical decisions on the board and managing time effectively
Consistency -- avoiding unforced mistakes and excessive swings or slumps in performance
Professionalism -- maintaining discipline in terms diet, exercise, fitness, sleep and structured study
Not that the skills we associate with 'chess talent' aren't also improved through work and experience, but I think that if a player excels in some of the above categories, they can become a better and more successful chess player without necessarily being a more talented chess player.
Obviously that wasn't an insult to Fabi. You have a lot of people that are successful because of their drive and determination (not because of physical or born talent). Tom Brady, Steph Curry...effort and hard work can make up for lack of born talent (I'm convinced Magnus has a photographic memory).
I'm convinced Fabi has 200 IQ, doesn't mean shit, I don't know the guy, I've never talked to him personally nor saw his skills at face value in person, and yet, I'm convinced he has 200 IQ. Do you see how bizarre that thought is? Because that's exactly what you did...
@@saenstopie I'm also going by what other chess players have said about Magnus...they believe he has a photographic memory...but like you said...doesn't mean shit. I'm glad you're so passionate about a comment related to chess.
@@antoniotruong5647 All top players have 'photographic' visualization of the chess board.
I think with talent he means the amount of effort a player needs to put in to figure out a position. Especially in shorter time frames, your natural speed of thought and decision-making shines through.
If you accept there is something in what Dubov says, what does the reverse side of that coin say about Dubov? I sometimes think he is squandering his "natural talent". Granted, he has an aggressive style, but I think he sometimes attacks for the sake of attacking, without caring enough about whether that produces more wins. That seems a bit lazy to me.
I think the main reason Fabi has been ranked in the top 5 for all but about 10 months in the last 10 years is he ALWAYS gives absolutely all-out efforts in every game he plays.
But I feel dubov would admit that about himself. He never said it as an insult and realistically he was right (to a point in his premise, however superlatives aren’t accurate at this level)
@@albertwells8767 I agree with you. I expressed my opinions about Dubov more in sadness for what might have been than any kind of annoyance with him.
My view of talent and gift is really about how high potential you have that can be seen when you're young and also how intuitive/fast you are able to understand stuff.
Fabi destroyed Dubiv. Fabi’s elaboration on the notion of “talent” is in line with the modern scientific work (see the book “Talent is overrated”), while Dubov’s logic is at the level of a lost teenager. You may speculate it’s part of the reason why Dubov is not even remotely as successful as Fabi, you really have to figure out what it’s all about as Fabi did
Fabi has been underestimated all his professional life.
The cartoonist Scott Adams coined the term "Talent Stack" which accurately describes what Christian and Fabi are trying to say regarding 'what is talent'. It's the development of a variety of skills which combine to make someone a highly talented and sought after. This stack includes work ethic. In fact strong work ethic is the bedrock of the stack. Without it the stack would collapse.
Dubov is one of those guys at highest level of chess. He can have own opinion about collegues in sport. He didnt tell anything rude. And btw he is a world champion.
This reminds me of the people who insist that Larry Bird wasn't very athletic. Watch any highlight reel of Bird - the man had incredible body control, hand-eye coordination, and saw the game like he was living 2 seconds in the future. He was an all-time great in a sport full of elite athletes. So I don't know what people mean when they say he wasn't athletic - that he wouldn't win a 100m race against other ball players, or didn't have the vertical of some other player? It's just all in people's heads; by any objective measure, Bird is one of the top 20 athletes in the history of basketball, and Fabi is one of the top 20 most talented chess players in the history of chess.
Loved it! More analysis please! Also a video of fabi's work routine would be inspiring too!
I don‘t agree. Talent means, that certain things (in chess: pattern recognition, endurance, calculation, tactical awareness, ability to store knowledge and positions/entire games etc.) come naturally, as opposed to you putting much effort in it. Hard work may always be required, but in the case of a player with great talent, it functions as a multiplying factor: your strength increases faster, multiplied by the work you put into the game. Magnus is the perfect example of this metric. He doesn’t work hard like other players and is generally lazy, but he still is the best. This is not a subjective thing at all. It is unexplainable for outsiders, although insiders know: it‘s genious(gene, genetics).
Calculation Depth is a talent
Visual-Spatial Awareness is a talent
Spatial Reqsoning is a talent
Tactical Awareness
Memory
Pattern Recognition
All six are talents
And of these six, Caruana's only weakness is Tactical Awareness-and that's when compared to other top players-not even the average Super GM
To say that Fabiano Caruana is not one of the most gifted players of his generation, you would need to have a very subjective view of what the word "talent" means
Which is exactly what he said
In the mainstream discourse, talent is subjective
You don't need to be Magnus to be recognized as a profoundly gifted chess player
Beating GMs at 10 should be enough
@@melh937no these are not talents but skills that you no these are not talents but skills that you have or either don‘t have or either don‘t have. If you are talented by predisposition to get very good at them, then you are talented.
I never said Fabi wasn‘t talented, but maybe he is more of a worker than Magnus, whereas Magnus is lazy and very talented. It is not subjective. It is genetic.
Where does people get this absurd thought that Magnus is a lazy guy who just wakes up and go play a top tournament and win like a breeze? Magnus has a team comprised of 4 or 5 guys constantly coming up with ideas for him and MAGNUS himself is the quality control of those ideas, he's the one to decide everything and work everything out on his own with his abilities, he's the one that decides if an idea brought up by some of his seconds is usable or not, that alone means he needs to put a lot of work to reach the level of knowledge necessary to play those ideas and not only that but figure out the plans of a super computer if necessary. Taking Magnus attitude and general lookism to say he's lazy("oohh but, but, he comes late to games", "ooh but, but he talks slowly and looks like he doesn't give a shit") is utterly stupid, this is a human being who as a 13 year old boy got to sit and analyze, study and dissect chess positions with KASPAROV(the hardest working chess player in history) surely that means Kasparov saw how much Magnus worked for everything he achieved even at the age of 13! Now about what Dubov said about Fabi is the most BS shit i've ever heard in my life, and I don't think I need to explain why...
Again, you can definitely say that Fabi puts more work than Magnus in his preparations, I'm ok with that even though I do think It's debatable, because again we are measuring things based on personality and lookisms(Fabi looks like a super angular guy, with face features that makes you think he's strict and values his routines, whereas Magnus features feels more relaxed and less tense).
@@saenstopie i usually dont reply, but your comment was very good//eu geralmente não comento ou respondo, mas o seu comentário foi muito bom
Actually, another very good point:
Motivation, work ethic, staying organized, staying fascinated - these also constitute some form of talent
Isn't Fabi the youngest GM in USA history? At least of one the youngest.
Also he went toe to toe against Magnus in the world championship.
Talented.
he was when He became,now not anymore but still talented lol
Fabi is always chill, intellectual. Great personality.
If Dubov had worked hard he would have ended up like Erigaisi
But he is lazy and loves the creativity tag
Or he is just plain coping.
Another Kramnik in the making😢. What are they putting in the water at Russia??
He isn't as lazy as you think. He finds interesting ideas and has several interesting variations
Nobody at his level is lazy. That's kind of the point faby is making: you can't point to talent as everyone works really hard. And even with kids I think talent is so difficult to isolate. Maybe you have one child who does his homework really well but doesn't care much and another child who never practices but he dreams about chess and thinks about it while he's playing soccer. Which one is more talented? Probably people will say the second child is talented, because they don't see him playing chess games in his head while he's looking out of the window during class ..
@@GaaikeEuwema
If he isn't lazy then how can Fabi be called hard working or talentless?
You can't have it both ways🤣🤣🤣
@@GaaikeEuwema
If he isn't lazy
Fabi isn't hard working👍
It makes perfect sense for someone who has a more analytical approach to feel that “talent” vs “work ethic” is a very nebulous comparison.
As someone who moved through a lot of school (regular school, not chess) on raw talent more than hard work, I’ve always looked at the folks with both talent and grind and been impressed by them.
Even Magnus himself, said Fabi is the strongest player he's ever played in classical chess, nearing Magnus himself - Dubov talking out of his ass
Strength =/ talent...
His answer was a complete analysis 😀
Take Michael Jordan as another example. Not born with the height normally needed, didn't make his varsity team...yet the rest is history. So Fabi is the Michael Jordan of chess.
One more example: Andre Agassi. Announcers called him "workmanlike" and it was absolutely a compliment.
your conclusion is risible
Kobe is a better analogy
@@MadaxeMunkeee agree.
@@FloydMaxwell Andre himself has said that in order to be the best at something in the world you have to have natural talent and you have to start working at a very young age. Your own example guy understands the fairly straightforward concept of "natural talent" for an activity. Like the class clown who becomes a top comedian. Like Paul Morphy. I think Dubov is more right than wrong in his observation.
Talent is the ability to hide how much work you've put into something or is an excuse to explain why your maximum potential hasn't been or will never be reached.
Those with the greatest talent can give off the impression that they put in no work at all. When combined with a strong consistent and long-term work ethic, this can lead to greatness. But when mixed with laziness, a poor attitude or even just disinterest, that's the sole claim of credit that can remain.
For kids, regarding them as a talent can be a tool of motivation, but it can also be a risk in that they end up not following through. For adults, you don't really want to be called talented, unless your goal is to achieve maximum gain (not to be confused with unlimited gain) with minimal work.
But also, for adults who don't care, and only regard their sport of chess as a casual hobby, being labelled as talented also doesn't really matter.
Where things get interesting are the top players who are not only both talented and hardworking, but also able to hide that they are talented or hard-working, or even both. Just like with anything in chess, it's possible to sandbag both one's subjective talent level, and one's subjective work ethic metric.
Saying the #2 best player in the WORLD doesn’t have natural talent is a hilarious concept.
That’s not what Dubov said. He said less talent than other players in the top 20.
@@fredcurts9219 Do you realize how big is the gap between no 2 with no 20?.
@@fredcurts9219 What method did he use to work that out?
@@Crashawsome The pulled out of his ass method
"Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration " - some great philosopher