How does Magnus survive without opening prep???

My goal as white is often the same as Carlsen's, but not for the same reason.

I am thinking that ignorance can sometimes be a good thing. It lets you see beyond the confines of exisiting knowledge. Had Capablanca spent his childhood with plenty of chess books and chess tutors who were knowledgeable in the doctrines of Steinitz/Tarrasch as well as up-to-date opening theories, Capablanca wouldn't be a legend that he was and is. He might become another Nimzovitsch, but he wouldn't be a Capablanca. 

When people tells you there is nothing beyond this road, you may turn back and never find out what lies ahead. However, when you have no such knowledge, you will continue following the road and discover things that people would never find.

"Ignorance can sometimes be a good thing" is quite the opposite of "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

Remember that for every undiscovered epiphany ignorance leads you to, there will be fifty or a hundred time scrambles which could have been avoided by having the knowledge about certain positions.

My point is that knowledge gives you a certain framework to work with. It tells you what to do and what not to do. This is fine if the knowledge itself is perfect, in that there is nothing further can be added to it and it cannot be improved further. However, at least in chess, the existing knowledge is not perfect. It is flawed. It does not produce an accurate model to approach chess. This is shown by the inconsistency in which the knowledge is applied. A game can be won in a number of different ways. In fact, in Tal's games for instance, a game is won despite being theoretically inferior. In addition, the modern chess engines have shown that there is so much we still do not know about in chess. They often show moves that go beyond our comprehension (and we can't even defeat the bloody machine to prove them wrong). This goes to show that our existing chess knowledge is not complete, and it is possible that parts of it may in fact be wrong.

Being content with an incomplete mental model is bad enough. Working with a flawed model is even worse. Being ignorant or at least being oblivious to certain aspects of existing knowledge can break this mould and lead to discoveries that may improve existing knowledge. Yes, there will be failures. All progress carries within themselves a certain risk. Given this argument, it isn't a surprise to see that people like Thomas Edison, Einstein, etc. who were not good learners while in school discovered things that revolutionized the world.

he's too good for opening preperation.

Carlsen's opening repertoire as Black is very precise. He tends to prefer main lines as Black.  That's how he survives.  As White, he thrives by reaching rich, playable positions that haven't been studied in depth by his opponents.

ntah

It's what Keres said (who am I to argue with Paul the Second?).   And after all, 10-15 years isn't 40 or 50.

I've always hated it.

But Keres was writing pre Chessbase and before engines. The resources available nowadays could well enable a GM to accelerate his development.

Oh, I didn't realize he said it :p

I guess I have no idea what 40 years of pro experience would afford.  I wonder if it's one of those "I've forgotten more about chess than you remember" heh.

Tedious is exactly how I'd describe it anyway.

I find long complicated lines tedious to study i.e any mainstream openings these days like the ruy lopez and sicilian.

If however the lines are short and I can get into a rich position neither my opponent or I (maybe i will a little) know then I think they can be fun to study. The only lines in my repertoire i dislike learning are benko mainlines. 

Carlsen plays main line openings as Black, including the Spanish and long lines of the Sicilian! He has no problem studying and memorizing critical lines. 

He has made a conscious decision as white to play positions that offer chances to complicate even if they do not offer an advantage. He still studies those openings before he plays them. 

It seems that some people here are suggesting that he doesn't study openings. As Ivanchuk once said, playing non-standard openings against 2700+ opponents requires more work, not less!

Carlsen is lazy.

Magnus is a pro's pro...a true role-model for us. I have decided to stop caring about the advantage in the opening in my games really as white and just like to play chess, reach playable middlegames. I can really focus on chess without much learning of opening theory these days. As for black, against people around my strength, i must know my stuff...

How does Magnus survive without opening prep???

By his deep and precise calculating abilities.

And Karpov.

Win or lose, it appeaers that Carlsen has always "lived" to fight another day...

the magnus rarely loses