Jason but do you have any clue how big the factor luck is, im not saying Magnus skill is not better. But luck could also involve other factors chess is also a game of luck. Maybe its not the case with Magnus but probably for 99,99% of the players
Our brains dont work always the same, maybe someone lost his wife, or is depressed, or lost money or has no time to study... or for whatever reason his brain function is a little bit decreased. There is something called the butterfly affect?
Jason and maybe in chess its different, but in many areas of life it is not the most skilled who wins but the most determined.
I personally believe there are many instances were genius failed and stubbornness won. It might not fit on Carlsen but it could be the case for 99,99 per cent of other people.
I'm thinking it might be that MC plays so far ahead of anyone else that there are about 5 people in the world who, maybe, on a good day, are capable of gaining even a slight understanding of what his strategy is.
And gambler's fallacy does not refer to the 1,000 times the coin comes up heads, it refers to the fallacy of a typical gambler who thinks, based on past events, that he is "due", not understanding that on the 1,001 flip the odds of heads are still 50%.
The fallacy on this page is the people who seem to think that because someone has to be #1, it is possible that someone could "luck" their way into the slot. Not true in a closed system where individual talent and skill give one person an advantage over another. I would agree that luck plays a role, but only in the sense that George F. Will described it in his seminal baseball work "Men at Work". Opportunities for luck occur all the time, but more skilled players are better able to turn those opportunities to their advantage, effectively making them "luckier" than their lesser skilled teammates.
MC is the luckiest chess player on earth.