Why Magnus Carlsen is so overrated?

Whats a chess prodigy? Is at all FM, IM and GM`s below 16 years? I guess that will be ca one in a million (population), or ca one in 1000 (fiderated chessplayers).

FM at 12 certainly isn't average, but I don't think I'd call them a prodigy. The "good" (obviously relative here) kids are GMs in their early teens. If you're "only" an FM then you're definitely not world class. Especially if you're already 16.

Back to the real world hehe... I think most 16 year olds (who had a coach at a younger age and put in the work) would be around 2000-2200. But I don't have any statistics to back that up or anything.

Yes, I'm saying "most" are the top 1 or 2 % but most don't start young, put in effort, and have a coach. Obviously the average person (who may not even have an official rating) would be much lower.

2300 at 12 years old is definitely a prodigy.

I have been told that this is the German "Wunderkind":

http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=12940690

Ok, well, I'll have to eat my words here. FM at 12 is pretty good lol :)

http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=1509268

Then my clubmate FM Johannes Haug is some kind of a borderline prodigy. He has worked hard for years, I guess 8 years , with high quality training and tutoring, and got silver in the cadet-class- Nordic Championship a couple of weeks ago. He is extremely talented, but still doesnt get the success for free.

Another borderline prodigy in my club is the younger Andreas Garberg Tryggestad that had a perfect score in Arendal Grand Prix, except for draw against two GM`s (including Jon Ludvig Hammer), he is an extremely experienced 13 year old kid, and the the top Norwegian kid at playing most rated games.

Those kids that combines huge talent with very strong training, to me they look like prodigies, but I really dont know the meaning of that word. IM Aryan Tari is another  one of them, he is 16 years and is fighting with Andreas each year about who has the most rated otb- games in Norway. Aryan is beeing appointed to GM at the next Fidemeeting in March and is reigning Norwegian champion (Hammer and Carlsen did not start).

http://turneringsservice.sjakklubb.no/standings.aspx?TID=ArendalGrandPrix2016-ArendalSjakkselskab

The way i read 0110001101101000 `s narrow definition of prodigy, Norway only had one, during all time, and his name is Magnus.

Jon Ludvig Hammer have crossed the 2700 line recently, but his way up was cirka as slow and hard as those superkids I wrote about here.

It just seems to me, most kids who start at 6 (and go to tournaments, read books, etc) are going to be titled by the time they're in their early teens... if most can do it, it doesn't seem like you should call them prodigies.

Prodigies compared to people who didn't start playing until they were 20? Sure, why not... but that's an odd comparison.

Remember that the best players are GMs in their early teens, not FMs.

BTW I don't mean kids who have tennis on tuesday, violin on wednesday, gymnastics on thursday, math tutor on friday, and chess tournament on saturday because their parents want to rob their children of a childhood.

But if you actually study chess from a young age (because you love it, or your parents are assholes) then you're going to be titled.

That goes for Carlsen, Kasparov, Anand,Giri,Rapport...

but not Hammer and Tari. Both Hammer and Tari might hit top ten in less than seven years from now. Hammer almost never loses, and is playing with more and more brilliance. He had an epic game in Rilton now cup against Krasenkow, which indicates that he is still taking steps up.

I see Hammer is #44 in the world in live rankings.

How many top 10 players (of any era) were #44 at age 25?

I don't know the answer, but my guess is zero.

I am close to agreeing. But I think a talent is necessary, maybe beeing among the most talented 20% in the world. Below 30% I guess is not enough. All the kids that competes with the adults in my club has FM potential, but those kids I guess is among the top 10% of talent. Kids that is less talented usually choose other sports than chess, or they drop out when failing to improve enough.

I am not sure if what I write is true, but it is based on my limited observations.

Maybe Hammer will be the first then? He is definitively still improving, and is ready for playing up there at this moment. Eating the ratingpoints is very difficult, because everytime he draws a superkid, even with perfect play, he loses rating.

That's the main difficulty as I see it. If you froze everyone in place, then maybe he will improve up to the top 10.

But every day professional players work. And every year here comes the new batch of 2600 teenagers.

It looks like Anand, Kramnik and Kasparov is slowing down a bit, while Carlsen and Giri still improves more visibly. The gap between 2650 and 2800 playingstrenght isnt enormous. Hou Yifan , rated below Hammer, only lacked some endgameskills to play on top ten level in Tata Steel. Hammer was playing at top ten level in several games in Norway chess.

Going back a ways, Blackburne was an adult learner of chess. But I still don't believe him. He told tall tales about himself quite a bit. I wouldn't be surprised if he really learned to play as a child but acted like a neophyte

I would bet money that Hammer will never break the top 10 in classic time controls. He's good, but he's playing at a lower level of understanding than the top 20 are. He might break the top 20 at some point, but breaking the top 10 is too much to ask. Still, being in the top 50 in the world is very impressive!

How much do you really wanna bet?

From my point of view he understands at toplevel, but my viewpoint is to low to see those things clear.

Very few Super GM´s improves at the speed of Hammer these days. 

he's not. lol

Hou's TPR in that large tourney (13 games) was 2666, and she lost rating points. I assume you're thinking of her game vs Carlsen... the boring petroff where they just trade down in a nearly symmetric structure. This is not a test for 2800 lol :)

And in the end she lost anyway.

I myself have played some very good games against masters... if you just ignore the last dozen or so moves where it becomes aparent that things are going wrong then my record is extremely good