the thing is, dont most other top GMS play like computers..or does carlsen just play better moves most the time then others
what is this whole "carlsen plays like a computer" nonsense
Sort:
Strange_Idiom wrote:
The_Heat_Miser wrote:
JohnClairlively wrote:
I think he may be autistic.
Try again o' troll extraordinaire...
Here is an excellent case in point about people (or in this case a troll) parroting what they've heard with absolutely zero evidence to back them up.
I understand listening is becoming a lost art, but give it a try. With Carlsen it would be fantasy to hear anything other than a thoughtful, well-spoken, intelligent young man. Autistic? Because he plays chess well? LOL.
I can't speak for whether anyone is or isn't a troll, but in interviews, I think claims of autism or at least borderline autism/Asperger's may have sound footing. Carlsen clearly isn't a guy very good at communicating feelings or ideas, yet is freakishly capable of executing nonhuman logic over the 64.
I say the idea has credence, at least. I'd like to hear what those who speak Norwegian and have heard him interviewed in it say. Might just be a language barrier, but he's certainly not conversant in English.
This is a very interesting thought. I'm Danish, so I understand Norwegian, and until I heard him speak Norwegian I also had the impression of autism. He seems much less autistic when interviewed in Norwegian than in English.
I think what makes Carlsen's play seem computer-like is that he plays these weird maneuvering moves and other quiet moves that no one else would go for.
And he doesn't play a single double-edged move. Compare this approach to, say, Nakamura or Shirov who constantly play for complications with moves they know may be punished. Also Carlsen probably makes fewer outright mistakes than any other player in the world. When's the last time Carlsen blundered a pawn or something?
mkrist wrote:
Strange_Idiom wrote:
The_Heat_Miser wrote:
JohnClairlively wrote:
I think he may be autistic.
Try again o' troll extraordinaire...
Here is an excellent case in point about people (or in this case a troll) parroting what they've heard with absolutely zero evidence to back them up.
I understand listening is becoming a lost art, but give it a try. With Carlsen it would be fantasy to hear anything other than a thoughtful, well-spoken, intelligent young man. Autistic? Because he plays chess well? LOL.
I can't speak for whether anyone is or isn't a troll, but in interviews, I think claims of autism or at least borderline autism/Asperger's may have sound footing. Carlsen clearly isn't a guy very good at communicating feelings or ideas, yet is freakishly capable of executing nonhuman logic over the 64.
I say the idea has credence, at least. I'd like to hear what those who speak Norwegian and have heard him interviewed in it say. Might just be a language barrier, but he's certainly not conversant in English.
This is a very interesting thought. I'm Danish, so I understand Norwegian, and until I heard him speak Norwegian I also had the impression of autism. He seems much less autistic when interviewed in Norwegian than in English.
This makes sense. Even though English is sort of a common denominator language throughout Scandinavia, it's still not quite native, and I can't imagine Magnus has had all that well-rounded an education.
Seems like a nice kid, but I irrationally think that about all Norwegians.
chessmicky wrote:
Pretending you can "estimate" the IQ of people you have never met and whose test scores you have never seen is the second stupidest thing I can think of. Believing that "He's extremely talented so that would be in line with autistic abilities since his visualization and memory are off the charts." seems to be number one on the Stupidity hit parade.
How is it stupid? Have you ever heard of Rain Man? Many autistics are ultra-talented in a specific field such as playing the piano. He may or may not be autistic, but if he were I wouldn't be surprised.
If people within a certain IQ range demonstrate certain traits that are consistent with one another (like a coach who says "judging from your comments and other factors I'd say you are 1700") and you watch for that sort of thing then certain estimations become reasonable. Language used is certainly a factor, but so are knowledge, accuracy, and practicality of ideas.
I haven't heard Carlsen speak, so I only have his accomplishments and games to go by. He was the highest rated player in history when he was only 20 and the flexibility and strength of his moves shows a deep understanding of chess, which in turn translates to high spatial intelligence. To me at least it seems reasonable that his IQ is at least 170, autistic or not. He could have easily been a top physicist on Einstein or Kaku's level if he wanted to since he obviously thinks correctly and knows how to accurately interpret information he sees.
Strange_Idiom wrote:
mkrist wrote:
This is a very interesting thought. I'm Danish, so I understand Norwegian, and until I heard him speak Norwegian I also had the impression of autism. He seems much less autistic when interviewed in Norwegian than in English.
This makes sense. Even though English is sort of a common denominator language throughout Scandinavia, it's still not quite native, and I can't imagine Magnus has had all that well-rounded an education.
Seems like a nice kid, but I irrationally think that about all Norwegians.
It does make sense that he's more fluent in Norwegian than English, but I would expect a Norwegian guy his age and and of his apparent intellect to speak English more fluently than is the case. Especially considering how much he's travelling, etc. I think he will get there though.
Inspired by Kim Peek though.
Autism is just a way fur normal peoples to pathologize the giftedness of gifted peoples, methinks. So they can day, 'maybe I'm not a master mathematician/physicist/chessplayer, but hey at least I'm not diseased!' Perhaps if he IS autistic, he doesn't want people to know because then they will think he is diseased/disordered and patronize him and force him into social behavioral therapy or something like... Like those people that used to visit mommy...
So he IS fancy? #HeartsBurstingOutOfTheMagicalFancyKitty
Dec 5, 2013
0
#71
TheGreatOogieBoogie wrote:
chessmicky wrote:
Pretending you can "estimate" the IQ of people you have never met and whose test scores you have never seen is the second stupidest thing I can think of. Believing that "He's extremely talented so that would be in line with autistic abilities since his visualization and memory are off the charts." seems to be number one on the Stupidity hit parade.
How is it stupid? Have you ever heard of Rain Man? Many autistics are ultra-talented in a specific field such as playing the piano. He may or may not be autistic, but if he were I wouldn't be surprised.
If people within a certain IQ range demonstrate certain traits that are consistent with one another (like a coach who says "judging from your comments and other factors I'd say you are 1700") and you watch for that sort of thing then certain estimations become reasonable. Language used is certainly a factor, but so are knowledge, accuracy, and practicality of ideas.
I haven't heard Carlsen speak, so I only have his accomplishments and games to go by. He was the highest rated player in history when he was only 20 and the flexibility and strength of his moves shows a deep understanding of chess, which in turn translates to high spatial intelligence. To me at least it seems reasonable that his IQ is at least 170, autistic or not. He could have easily been a top physicist on Einstein or Kaku's level if he wanted to since he obviously thinks correctly and knows how to accurately interpret information he sees.
I don´t know if physics rate Kaku so high, but right now, he is just trying to appear as an expert even in fields that are not their own expertise area.
Mrrrm lemme ask Mommy.... She says Kaku is just a TV pop tart scientante who isn't currently doing much real science, like Jack Andraka. Mrrrrrm...
Kaku cannot be trusted to seperate speculation from known science.
Scottrf wrote:
It would to me, but I'm always amazed at some of the sarcasm/irony people take literally on the forum, so perhaps my irony detector is better than average.
Are you being sarcastic?
Oh and autistics often do have a very good sense of irony and humor and can be very sarcastic but their sense of humor can be very offbeat. For example my mommy thinks it's funny when I rave about how FANCY I am but she doesn't think what most of her friends think is funny.
WeisseSchachlade wrote:
Oh and autistics often do have a very good sense of irony and humor and can be very sarcastic but their sense of humor can be very offbeat. For example my mommy thinks it's funny when I rave about how FANCY I am but she doesn't think what most of her friends think is funny.
That sentence needs one more "is funny" at the end of it to work :
"For example my mommy thinks it's funny when I rave about how FANCY I am but she doesn't think what most of her friends think is funny is funny."
Actually, I think the sentence "For example my mommy thinks it's funny when I rave about how FANCY I am but she doesn't think what most of her friends think is funny is funny" is funny.
She does feed me real tunas but at least you don't get locked in a girly pink cage at night. And yes I KNOW I has bad grrrammar and mommy is always correcting me fur it. But she's still not fancy enough fur my liking!
Gravity and Special Relativity were once speculation. What makes his brilliance apparent is how his speculation seems very plausible.
i just want to know if it is a negative attack or positive attack
Is there something like a "positive attack"?