so magnus is only good because of psychology

  • #1

    so when i made my thread about magnus being king of endgames

     

    many people were saying how magnus is only good because of the psychology around him, and not because his skill.... literally

    and that he is the only the number 1 chess player in the world because people are intimitated by him

  • #2

    And people are only intimidated by him.... Because he's number one in the world.

  • #3
    TheGrobe wrote:

    And people are only intimidated by him.... Because he's number one in the world.

     no its all psychology, it has nothing to do with his skill (sarcasm)

  • #4

    He doesn't even use psychology until the endgame, that's when he zaps 'em! He's got bunches of psychology.

  • #5

    Very good superking, different thread. Go get em'. But don't you really think Emory Tate is better? Come on, think about it. Would Magnus even have a chance in a match?

  • #6

    It's very well known, as evidenced by the fine writings of some extremely smart chess players, many of whose ratings even break into the realm of 4 digits, that every game Magnus Carlsen has ever won was by one of:

    1. Endgame tricks
    2. Cheap tricks
    3. Psychology
    4. Boring his opponents to death
  • #7

    Carlsen is a very good player, like others top players, a super GM, but he isn't the powerful machine many people think. Kasparov won many tournaments crushing his opponents.

  • #8

    Lasker's chess was criticized by his contemporaries as merely psychological.

    Fast forward to the advent of computers.And his moves were in truth, very strong,just not understood by his opponents.

    Perhaps,that is what is happening to Carlsen now.

    Watch the Norway tourney in Chessbomb.The viewers  are easily swung by Houdini evaluations.Now the Houdini there is limited and engines are not particularly known to be good in evaluating them.You will see Houdini giving 0.00 evaluations for a sequence of moves in the endgame and then voila,suddenly Carlsen has gained a 0.32 advantage.

  • #9

    so you guys honestly believe magnus carlsen is all psychology seriously

     

    worlds number 1 player is just good because of psychology

  • #10

    Well have you ever owned your opponent no matter how bad you played you still found a way to beat them. Even when they thought they had you they still did not have you in a game. And when you were playing good they just wanted the game to end and save face.

    I think Magnus has gotten to this point with many of his opponents. They show up in the flesh but not the mind. They tried everything and still manages to get the job done against them. He advances and they are left as spectators like the rest of us.

    See mentally 2 parties meet that have a history playing against each other. One is the Dominant and the other just the Whippin Post. In every relationshiop their is a Giver and Taker! Which one are you of the 2?

  • #11

    The Buffalo Bills went to the Super Bowl for 4 consecutive years and came up short.

    How many times did Jordan just hurt other teams in the playoffs to become the NBA champions. Every year they know that had to beat Jordan and the Bulls to win it all and that was before the season started.

     Psychology yes! Fear is a weapon that can crush the best. So you may say Magnus is good .... Magnus wins because his opponent fear him?

  • #12

    I don't understand the video selection for this thread?

  • #13

    I don't understand the video selections for any thread anymore...

  • #14

    It reminds me of electricpawn videos which appear out of nowhereLaughing

  • #15

    Obligatory comment about Fischer and a related quote, followed by irrelevant picture of spiderman. Another comment why one should resign when down in material, ending with a comment about the relative strength of Fiascher, Carlsen, and Kasparov.

  • #16
    trysts wrote:

    He doesn't even use psychology until the endgame, that's when he zaps 'em! He's got bunches of psychology.

    "Bunches of psychology"

    Lol'd.

  • #17

    @ conejiux..... you say he's no Kasparov....??  He played him to a draw when he was only 13 yrs old.   gimme a break.  He's unnaturally good.

  • #18

    This is actually funny. I'm starting to think there are mental issues with superking500. Because if this: HE personally is the very one who made these claims. Such as Carlsens just lucky because his opponents blunder and crazy junk like that. Bizarre threads taking away from Carlsens talent and THEN saying the exact opposite like he's defending his great talent. Strange. This is the same OP who was claiming a 2300 player was really the same level and maybe even better than both Kasparov AND Carlsen. Stunning.......

Top
or Join

Online Now