Carlsen himself has stated in interviews that his dad is more intelligent than he is, and that he just has a talent for chess, and certainly isn't some sort of genius. Anyway, the suggestion that Carlsen should find the cure for cancer instead of playing chess could just as well be made to Topalov, Kramnik and Anand, but I don't think they are fit for such a task either :-)

Do you think Magnus Carlsen will break the 4000 barrier

Can Magnus break the gagillion bagillion barrier??

This is where your argument falls down.  There's no special relationship between IQ and chess.  There's a more general relationship between high IQ and pretty much all professions, but playing chess well does not mean you are automatically an Einstein or a great brain surgeon.

Chess enjoys a cultural position in society because of its long history and complexity as a game, but it's no better an indicator of being "smart" than any number of other games.  Players like to think that there's this magic quality that makes a chess player superior in intellect over any other gaming endeavor.  You don't see anyone calling for brilliant Sudoku players to "stop wasting their time and cure cancer".

People end up doing what they gravitate towards, if they can.  Heck, there's a teacher in this very thread that spells "falter" incorrectly ;). 

As for the 3000 rating question...people just don't seem to realize that Carlsen's rating is completely dependent on the other players around him.  If all his competition sits at 2750-2800, he cannot reach 3000 rating.  Period.  Rating's inflation will occur over time, but not fast enough for Carlsen to ever reach 3000 unless FIDE alters the rating system.  It took 40+ years for the ratings to inflate 100-ish points from Fischer's 2780 to Carlsen's 2870...

So, can Carlsen break 2900?  Yes, he could.  Getting from 2900 to 3000 rating is an order of magnitude harder (or maybe two orders of magnitude ;)...).

You guys should go to the USCF website, go to Player/ Ratings, do rating look up, and type in Carlsen. HE'S 3002!

We are talking about FIDE ratings. 

I think he's actually below his rating as his performance against Anand was great even for a 2870 At 2870 Anand should have had more wins and draws but ultimately still lose whereas the match was so one sided Carlsen may as well be rated 3000.  The thing is, he can't achieve 3000 simply because he doesn't have the competition to get him that high rating wise. 

>he could've been so much more than what he is today<

Again, rank elitism. The belief that certain professions have more merit than others. I mentioned car salesman and I was serious...it's not *what* you do in this life, but *who* you are. 

Bigbirdbrain also is a determinist...you go to high school, you will be more successful than if you don't. Perhaps. But Magnus Carlsen could have gone through a PhD program in moleculary biology and ended up a banker. Brian May of Queen has a PhD in astrophysics...he plays guitar for a living. And I for one would MUCH rather have the music of Queen in our lives than one more research scientist. 

i agree

Magnus rarely loses. But he draws a LOT.

I don't think he can break 3000, for that reason.

Seems other talented chess players have careers in the stock market and pro poker. Michael Kearney (high IQ plus Phd) plays pro poker. Interesting thread.

It is a matter of time before he breaks the 2900 barrier, but 3000!? That is not realistic. He have played 2 or 3 tournaments with a prestation of 3002 or 3003.

alexdyer wrote:

I really doubt it. The next highest rated player in the world, Aronian, is only at 2812, which means as Magnus approaches 3000 there would be almost a 200 point difference between him and #2. This would mean he would have to win almost all the games he plays against super-GMs, because a tie would significantly lower his rating.

If a few other players managed to reach the high 2800s, it might be possible, however.

With 200 rating differens mr. ELOs rating expect a 75% score.

100 %

That's a reasonable argument, however you need to consider how fast ratings inflate in the elite (2600-2800 fraction of percentile members get to play against themselves often) . On that basis, many players are likely to reach 2800 even if they don't get to play better. So that i supose maybe in 10 years that would be possible, although that implies him not having any important fall in rating over the next 5 to 7 years (having a draw/win ratio that makes him at least inflate at the yearly average rate)

3000 is of course totally impossible.

Carlsen breaking 3000 is possible. All he needs to do play many rated games scoring at least 75%. If he plays  as many games as Ivanchuk, Carlen can reach the 3000 milestone within 3 years.

The players in the top 100 with the highest percentage in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s did none of them reach 70%. Even Carlsen's +7 -0 =6 (77%) in Tata 2013 "only" gave him a TPR of 2930. His by far highest TPR was 3002, and he won't repeat that more than at most once or twice in his career. On the last dozen rating lists Carlsen has been very stable on 2862-2872 and staying around there would be good enough.

fabelhaft wrote:

Carlsen himself has stated in interviews that his dad is more intelligent than he is, and that he just has a talent for chess, and certainly isn't some sort of genius. Anyway, the suggestion that Carlsen should find the cure for cancer instead of playing chess could just as well be made to Topalov, Kramnik and Anand, but I don't think they are fit for such a task either :-)