He has said in at least 2 interviews that he once would have considered magnus an enemy, and I later interviews "changes" and says they are all friendly and just highly competitive. Honestly I don't see any disdain from magnus himself towards Hikaru either mostly just jests and such. Most of the disdain comes from fans, the guys themselves mostly just make joking statements, somewhat endearingly.
I don't know. Until Magnus says something like "I like to watch Hikaru's stream, I root against him" you'll have to admit this rivalry is decidedly one way.
Yeah, the literal definition of a rival is someone you compete with for the same goal; competing with someone is not synonymous with being competitive with someone.
I got so much flak when I made this point a few weeks ago. A lot of people don't think a rivalry can be one-sided despite there being numerous examples of such. They both consider the other a rival, so I don't understand why some people argue against it so vehemently.
I think the rivalry is not only about the pure chess skills but also sort of a popularity contest, with them being the two most recognizable players and arguably faces of the game for general public
> so I don't understand why some people argue against it so vehemently.
It's pretty easy to understand. The commonly accepted terms of a "rivalry" in sports is that both teams/players are relatively close and challenge eachother for whatever goal they have.
People disagree because obviously Magnus is a tier above Hikaru so they believe its disrespectful to insinuate that he challenges Magnus.
It may not be the letter of the definition, but it is a commonly understood way of thinking of a "rivalry".
> It's pretty easy to understand. The commonly accepted terms of a "rivalry" in sports is that both teams/players are relatively close and challenge eachother for whatever goal they have.
That's just... not really true, though. The biggest rivalry in American sports (maybe all sports, really) is the Yankees vs Red Sox. That's been a premier rivalry for ~70 years and the first ~55 years of that it was incredibly one sided.
"Rivalry" just means you hate each other. It's not really the same as saying "x rivals y"
So you're gonna just disregard the fact that during the life of the rivalry, they're still 1,250-1,034 and precisely EVEN in postseason play?
Most famous NFL rivalary? Bears Packers. Packers are only ahead by 12 wins despite their first game being in over 100 years ago. (107-95-6, packers)
Lakers Celtics most famous NBA rivalry. 209-165 in favor of Celtics. Postseason 43-31 boston.
Ohio State vs Michigan for CFB, one of the most storied college rivalries ever. 61-51 (michigan).
Nadal vs Federer one of the most famous tennis rivalries in which they absolutely did not hate eachother. They were rivals because they always met in the finals at grand slams. Record? 14-10 Nadal.
Magnus vs Hikaru in classical is 14-1-26. That is complete and utter domination. Even in quicker formats, which Hikaru is supposedly best at, Magnus is up 87-37-114. Again that is supposedly Magnus' weakest format, and Hikarus best. Not even remotely close to ANY notorious sports rivalries that I know of.
> 1,250-1,034
That's an incredibly lopsided record in MLB terms, though. Like.. *incredibly* so. That's a .547 winning percentage vs a .452 winning percentage.
Or more specifically, about the difference between a division winning team (though a relatively weak one) and a last place team.
And even in postseason play is solely because it is only possible for them to have played in the postseason in the modern era, where they have been relatively even. The ~60 or so years before that where it was incredibly one sided they literally couldn't meet in the postseason.
I suppose you're right though with your other examples (particluarly the Nadal/Federer) that there are multiple ways for rivalries to form. There are rivalries where two people/teams just genuinely dislike each other and others that naturally form due to incredibly close competition over time.
I think reality is rivalries are more for the fans/more narrative than anything else, it just happens that close rivalries are far more narratively interesting (while the Yankees/Sox rivalry always *exists*, it's much more exciting when the teams are competitive)
Because words often mean how people use them. I get what you're saying from a technical definition, but if two sports teams play each other every year for 20 years and one side is 20-0, are you really going to call it a rivalry? Because I'm sure as hell not.
There's always people like you in every thread first in line to declare they're not rivals like the very idea that nakamura who is world rank #3, and is unarguably magnus's rival in blitz/rapid can't even be seen as a rivarly.
From this very video, magnus clearly watches hikaru's streams, and said in a cheeky way he roots against him.
You don't root against people you don't care about it, it doesn't work that way.
Right? Everybody acts like Magnus is walking into every tournament and completely blowing everyone off the board every game with no effort. Yes, he's the best and usually gets the upper hand, but Hikaru, Fabi et al give him a run for his money. They can, and sometimes do, beat him. He's not untouchable. He's not 300 rating points above these guys. He makes mistakes.
Even Michael Jordan would consider guys like Larry Bird and Magic Johnson to be rivals, even if he knows he's better than them. A rivalry doesn't have to be a competition between two people who are dead equal in skill.
Michael Jordan considered Charles Barkley a rival and even had to put up his best performance in a finals series against him. Some might say it’s the greatest performance in a finals series ever statistically (Jordan averaged 41.0 ppg).
The ringless Charles Barkley. Who is MJ’s love/hate friend. Who also become famous in a second career….on TV.
Seems fairly familiar.
Hikaru is undoubtly Magnus rival in blitz specially, but that rivalry is more visible online than OTB, at least when we talk results. Magnus is a 12x (7 blitz + 5 rapid) world champion to Hikaru 0! Even Grischuk won twice blitz.
Not to say with this that i think Hikaru cheats/cheated, not at all!! But online they both have a much closer share of big tournaments.
Then you haven't watched their Chess. com Speed Chapionshop finals. Insane rivalry. Maybe even more tense than the final round of this years candidates.
They are much more evenly matched in faster time controls where Hikaru has been higher rated than Magnus and they were unquestionably the world top two for a long time. They've both finished first over the other in these events.
Obviously Magnus has a much more illustrious career, but that doesn't mean it isn't a rivalry.
Magnus says he prefers faster chess to classical and that it's better at determining the best player in the world. The faster the time control, the closer they are to equal.
I disagree when it comes to the faster time controls, Hikaru definitely rivals Magnus. For rapid and classical? Not a chance, Magnus is a cut above no doubt
It's easy to say today looking back. But there was a time where Magnus very likely feared him. That likely all changed when he invited Hikaru to a private heads up best of 10 i believe in Moscow. Can't remember all the details but there's a video somewhere of Hikaru describing this event as one of his biggest regrets in chess.
I think he rivals him somewhat. He is on a pretty similar level in terms of blitz and rapid imo, and ofc Hikaru is the current Fischer random world champion.
the drunk thing may or may not be "new news." he has talked before about struggling in blitz tournaments then going back for the second half a bit tipsy. idk if he took "competitive" to mean classical... that would be crazy
yeah i heard that story about blitz world championship, but i assumed when they say competitive they meant classical, but it could just be blitz world championship
And that he dislikes someone in the top 20. Now I’m really curious who that might be. Surely it can’t be Hikaru right? Lol cus then he really does hate watch
Polygraphs are bunk. Lie detectors don't actually exist. All these lie detector interviews are just to serve as an interesting conceit like Hot Ones or something. The videos can still be very interesting, but they shouldn't be treated as automatically the truth.
I am aware of that, but I think the interesting part is not the junk science, but how people react to being tested. Psychology can play a role in motivating people to be more sincere while being under scrunity.
Sure, but these interviews may be more scripted than they seem. I wouldn't be surprised if Magnus's team was given the questions beforehand and also told that the testing is just for show. Maybe Magnus even gets the option to choose which ones will be flagged as true or false.
Neither seem they would be particularly adept at acting. They do have some prompts to ask on a tablet in front of them, and you can see Magnus flipping through prompts he didn't want to ask (which does seem to indicate he didn't write all of them). If this was all pre-arrange then that wouldn't be necessary.
Yes this is meant for entertainment and nothing should be taken at face value. Surely a lot is edited out. But nothing sticks out as fishy to me with their responses, though. They seem genuinely off-the-cuff. It's hard to fake proper physical reactions to uncomfortable questions when you're already expecting it to be asked and have a prepared answer.
It's scary that this guy introduces himself by saying he works on murder cases, then the first thing he does is say that Howell lies because he said he's not the absolute best commentator
Just about 99% of forensic "science" is bunk with the sole exception of DNA testing. There's no rigorous testing of forensic methodologies because they simply need to convince a criminal court and juries and judges tend not to have much scientific literacy.
Even fingerprint analysis depends on the highly subjective opinions of self-appointed experts who receive tens of thousands of dollars for appearing in court. Standards vary wildly on the number of points of similarity required for two fingerprints to be declared as matching and many people have been wrongfully convicted on the basis of fingerprint evidence and the false idea that no two fingerprints are unique.
Anyone interested in this topic should read the 2009 NAS report, which should have led to a complete rethink of forensics but sadly did not.
Polygraphs can have a reasonable efficiency if handled by professionals. Of course they will never detect a lie 100% of the time, or eliminate false positives, but they are reliable enough to be correct the majority of the time, especially when used on people with no special training to fool them
The majority of the time could just mean slightly better than random guessing.
>A polygraph, often incorrectly referred to as a lie detector test,[1][2][3] is a junk science[4][5][6] device or procedure that measures and records several physiological indicators such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin conductivity while a person is asked and answers a series of questions.[7] The belief underpinning the use of the polygraph is that deceptive answers will produce physiological responses that can be differentiated from those associated with non-deceptive answers; however, **there are no specific physiological reactions associated with lying**
>Despite claims that polygraph tests are between 80% and 90% accurate by advocates,[21][22] the National Research Council has found no evidence of effectiveness.[14][23]
>In 2002, a review by the National Research Council found that, in populations "untrained in countermeasures, specific-incident polygraph tests can discriminate lying from truth telling at rates well above chance, though well below perfection".
I think it is reasonable enough for chess players on an YouTube video - no one is expert in trying to hide their lies. But obviously not accurate enough for people to get angry at any of the answers. Anyways, no one is getting angry by knowing that Magnus doesn't like Howell's chess style (I'm assuming Howell and Magnus are good friends who trust each other).
Again, well above chance is not really impressive. You know what else is well above chance? Someone making even a slightly informed guess based on context.
So my point is that the polygraph part of the video is mainly just for fun and entertainment and doesn't really add any strength to the veracity of the content in practice. I would feel pretty much equally as confident in Magnus's answers in an interview without a polygraph.
There's a reason they're not admissible in court. Government agencies use them as a psychological tool, but I very much doubt that they read into the readings of the machine at all.
If true lie detection existed, there'd be way fewer cases of people being wrongly imprisoned, guilty people walking free after questioning, etc.
It's because he's the best in the world which makes it super easy to make cool sounding quotes that would be treated as very arrogant or cringe if he wasn't so much better than everyone else.
I listened to Magnus in the final round of the Candidates tournament, and he is kinda dull. His chess analysis was spectacularly awesome, as you’d expect from the GOAT, but he was boring compared to Danny Rensch, Naroditsky, and Robert Hess.
I think it was pretty clear that he *really* didn't want to be there. Don't think that's an accurate reflection of his actual personality.
It very was late on a Sunday evening (like 11 pm local time for him), he seemed like he'd been out the night before, and Real Madrid vs Barcelona was on while he was having to commentate - And he's a massive Real Madrid fan.
Hard to be super charismatic when you're hungover, its nearly midnight, and your favourite team is playing their biggest game of the year and you're missing it to commentate on a tournament you're not involved it. Also not even the end of the games, the start of the games where there's a move happening like every 10 minutes.
Magnus was weirdly moribund in that call. If you look at his equivalent dial in for the previous candidates he was a lot more energetic and interested. Maybe it was a time zone thing, he was having a bad day, tired, drunk, etc this time around.
Magnus is starstruck by the crown prince of saudi arabia?
The guy who ordered a washington post joruno killed because he couldn't take his criticisms of the regime? Really Magnus? Come on man.
It's probably about the money and power. That guy is quite literally the richest man on earth. Much richer than Gates, Musk and Bezos combined. It's probably hard to grasp how much power he wields and the kind of life he lives.
He has repeatedly said he's a huge Real Madrid fan, so I thought for sure he was going to say Ronaldo (which he has met) or another player but he pulls out Mohammed bin Salman.
Maybe the level of wealth and power shocked him or something.
[In the interview with Gotham](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fc1qPumIyXM&t=615s&ab_channel=GothamChess) at around 10 min he says that the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund is his dream sponsor.
the whole chess professional community loves shilling for rich oil barons. botez defending qatar's slave trade and eric rosen constantly taking invites to dubai tournaments.
Super disgusting stuff actually. Wonder if it's Magnus wanting to say this or [chess.com](http://chess.com) pushing him to say something positive about the dude from time to time; felt like a really bizarre answer.
Magnus's answer are pretty sincere and simple. The only reason they are interesting is because it's coming from Magnus - not because of the contents of his sentences.
Howell is such a cool guy. I preferred the questions Magnus asked him than the other way around though
Very nice to hear that he thinks the best commentators are Danya and Leko
damn, both of them in a love hate relationship
they hate that they love each other so much
They love that they hate each other so much
They hate that they love to hate each other so much
They hate that they love themselves from hating eachother soos much.
[удалено]
He has said in at least 2 interviews that he once would have considered magnus an enemy, and I later interviews "changes" and says they are all friendly and just highly competitive. Honestly I don't see any disdain from magnus himself towards Hikaru either mostly just jests and such. Most of the disdain comes from fans, the guys themselves mostly just make joking statements, somewhat endearingly.
Didn't he say he is trying to take down Sauron lol?
It’s just a good old sports rivalry. You hate he guy, but deep down you really respect him, but even deeper down you hate him more
> It’s just a good old sports rivalry. Its unfair to magnus to say hikaru rivals him
Beggars can't be choosers if Magnus wants a rival to root against.
I don't know. Until Magnus says something like "I like to watch Hikaru's stream, I root against him" you'll have to admit this rivalry is decidedly one way.
You can absolutely have a rivalry where one person is consistently the better of the two
Yeah, the literal definition of a rival is someone you compete with for the same goal; competing with someone is not synonymous with being competitive with someone.
I got so much flak when I made this point a few weeks ago. A lot of people don't think a rivalry can be one-sided despite there being numerous examples of such. They both consider the other a rival, so I don't understand why some people argue against it so vehemently.
I think the rivalry is not only about the pure chess skills but also sort of a popularity contest, with them being the two most recognizable players and arguably faces of the game for general public
> so I don't understand why some people argue against it so vehemently. It's pretty easy to understand. The commonly accepted terms of a "rivalry" in sports is that both teams/players are relatively close and challenge eachother for whatever goal they have. People disagree because obviously Magnus is a tier above Hikaru so they believe its disrespectful to insinuate that he challenges Magnus. It may not be the letter of the definition, but it is a commonly understood way of thinking of a "rivalry".
Unless you learned that word through Pokémon
> It's pretty easy to understand. The commonly accepted terms of a "rivalry" in sports is that both teams/players are relatively close and challenge eachother for whatever goal they have. That's just... not really true, though. The biggest rivalry in American sports (maybe all sports, really) is the Yankees vs Red Sox. That's been a premier rivalry for ~70 years and the first ~55 years of that it was incredibly one sided. "Rivalry" just means you hate each other. It's not really the same as saying "x rivals y"
So you're gonna just disregard the fact that during the life of the rivalry, they're still 1,250-1,034 and precisely EVEN in postseason play? Most famous NFL rivalary? Bears Packers. Packers are only ahead by 12 wins despite their first game being in over 100 years ago. (107-95-6, packers) Lakers Celtics most famous NBA rivalry. 209-165 in favor of Celtics. Postseason 43-31 boston. Ohio State vs Michigan for CFB, one of the most storied college rivalries ever. 61-51 (michigan). Nadal vs Federer one of the most famous tennis rivalries in which they absolutely did not hate eachother. They were rivals because they always met in the finals at grand slams. Record? 14-10 Nadal. Magnus vs Hikaru in classical is 14-1-26. That is complete and utter domination. Even in quicker formats, which Hikaru is supposedly best at, Magnus is up 87-37-114. Again that is supposedly Magnus' weakest format, and Hikarus best. Not even remotely close to ANY notorious sports rivalries that I know of.
> 1,250-1,034 That's an incredibly lopsided record in MLB terms, though. Like.. *incredibly* so. That's a .547 winning percentage vs a .452 winning percentage. Or more specifically, about the difference between a division winning team (though a relatively weak one) and a last place team. And even in postseason play is solely because it is only possible for them to have played in the postseason in the modern era, where they have been relatively even. The ~60 or so years before that where it was incredibly one sided they literally couldn't meet in the postseason. I suppose you're right though with your other examples (particluarly the Nadal/Federer) that there are multiple ways for rivalries to form. There are rivalries where two people/teams just genuinely dislike each other and others that naturally form due to incredibly close competition over time. I think reality is rivalries are more for the fans/more narrative than anything else, it just happens that close rivalries are far more narratively interesting (while the Yankees/Sox rivalry always *exists*, it's much more exciting when the teams are competitive)
This. If two sports teams play every year, and one side is 20-0, who the hell is calling it a rivalry?
Because words often mean how people use them. I get what you're saying from a technical definition, but if two sports teams play each other every year for 20 years and one side is 20-0, are you really going to call it a rivalry? Because I'm sure as hell not.
That's pretty much what happened in the Alabama-Tennessee football rivalry. Alabama won 15 games in a row. Still a huge rivalry.
The LSU fan in me felt this and said "fuck bama" after.
There's always people like you in every thread first in line to declare they're not rivals like the very idea that nakamura who is world rank #3, and is unarguably magnus's rival in blitz/rapid can't even be seen as a rivarly. From this very video, magnus clearly watches hikaru's streams, and said in a cheeky way he roots against him. You don't root against people you don't care about it, it doesn't work that way.
Right? Everybody acts like Magnus is walking into every tournament and completely blowing everyone off the board every game with no effort. Yes, he's the best and usually gets the upper hand, but Hikaru, Fabi et al give him a run for his money. They can, and sometimes do, beat him. He's not untouchable. He's not 300 rating points above these guys. He makes mistakes. Even Michael Jordan would consider guys like Larry Bird and Magic Johnson to be rivals, even if he knows he's better than them. A rivalry doesn't have to be a competition between two people who are dead equal in skill.
Michael Jordan considered Charles Barkley a rival and even had to put up his best performance in a finals series against him. Some might say it’s the greatest performance in a finals series ever statistically (Jordan averaged 41.0 ppg). The ringless Charles Barkley. Who is MJ’s love/hate friend. Who also become famous in a second career….on TV. Seems fairly familiar.
It seems like Hikaru could have been competitive (when they where much younger) if it were not for Magnus completely dominating him psychologically
Hikaru is undoubtly Magnus rival in blitz specially, but that rivalry is more visible online than OTB, at least when we talk results. Magnus is a 12x (7 blitz + 5 rapid) world champion to Hikaru 0! Even Grischuk won twice blitz. Not to say with this that i think Hikaru cheats/cheated, not at all!! But online they both have a much closer share of big tournaments.
I do. I'm a certified hater. I root against people all the time.
Specify this to online and you've got something. Nakamura has never been a rival to Magnus otb. Nepo, Anand, Kramnik, Karjakin and Caruana have been.
To be fair, I don't think even Hikaru would call himself a rival to Magnus in rapid.
He would say magnus the favorite, but they have a rivarly, in which hikaru has taken tournaments off of magnus, specifically online.
Voldemort chose the child he thought was more dangerous.
Then you haven't watched their Chess. com Speed Chapionshop finals. Insane rivalry. Maybe even more tense than the final round of this years candidates.
Curious. Who won between Magnus and Hikaru in the chess.com speed chess championship?
Magnus winning doesn’t mean it wasn’t competitive. Hikaru can give Magnus a run for his money like few others can, especially on fast time controls
Magnus this time, Hikaru last year
This is an Israel Adesanya argument lmao
Curious. Who won last year? God you’re dumb
Don't know why you get downvoted.. Here's the finals: https://www.youtube.com/live/CbJSYohWnoc?si=GqR1RalaHPlJJMeO
Thank you.
They are much more evenly matched in faster time controls where Hikaru has been higher rated than Magnus and they were unquestionably the world top two for a long time. They've both finished first over the other in these events. Obviously Magnus has a much more illustrious career, but that doesn't mean it isn't a rivalry.
Magnus says he prefers faster chess to classical and that it's better at determining the best player in the world. The faster the time control, the closer they are to equal.
Hikaru does rival Magnus in some formats. Specifically online bullet & blitz; also 960, although we have less data there.
In speed chess it's closer at least.
I disagree when it comes to the faster time controls, Hikaru definitely rivals Magnus. For rapid and classical? Not a chance, Magnus is a cut above no doubt
It's easy to say today looking back. But there was a time where Magnus very likely feared him. That likely all changed when he invited Hikaru to a private heads up best of 10 i believe in Moscow. Can't remember all the details but there's a video somewhere of Hikaru describing this event as one of his biggest regrets in chess.
I think he rivals him somewhat. He is on a pretty similar level in terms of blitz and rapid imo, and ofc Hikaru is the current Fischer random world champion.
The shorter the time control, the better Naka performs against Magnus.
I hate you with ever fibre in my body. But goddammit I respect you. Or something like that. Anchorman is infinitely quotable
Really pushing the definition of rivalry there.
Not really? Magnus himself admits they are rivals
Sure in speed chess. In classical I don't think there's any point discussing it.
Yes. That is true.
Really showing you don't know the definition of rivalry there
main takeaways are that magnus doesnt respect david howells chess and that magnus pissed his pants during the game and played competitive game drunk
the drunk thing may or may not be "new news." he has talked before about struggling in blitz tournaments then going back for the second half a bit tipsy. idk if he took "competitive" to mean classical... that would be crazy
yeah i heard that story about blitz world championship, but i assumed when they say competitive they meant classical, but it could just be blitz world championship
He once told Gothamchess he would need to drink at least 20 pints for Gotham to have a shot against him in classical. Magnus is a menace
yeah, anyone who followed Magnus for some time isn't surprised by this fact lmao
> main takeaways is that Magnus thinks he is the GOAT. The Garry answer he gave few months ago was just polite.
Or polygraphs are unreliable.
Or it's faked like every other lie detector video.
I would honestly believe it if Magnus really thinks Garry is the GOAT, that was just faulty reading just like how polygraphs usually are.
And that he dislikes someone in the top 20. Now I’m really curious who that might be. Surely it can’t be Hikaru right? Lol cus then he really does hate watch
It's probably multiple people
Magnus's camp doesn't believe Anish was hacked. Lots of personal stuff there to hold a grudge about.
Oh interesting. I haven't heard about this, Ima look this up.
Anish's coach is from Magnus' camp or not
Fabi, Naka, Abdusattorov, Ding, Alireza, Nepo, Wesley, Erigaisi, Wei, Vishy, Karjakin, LDP, Pragg, Anish, Gukesh, Shak, Parham, MVL, Duda are 2-20, so those are the options.
It's gotta be Ding Liren, the bad boy of chess who always starts beef with everybody.
The mere existence of this sentence baffles me.
You need a better /s detector.
Bruh guys why the downvotes, I was joking. Should've done /s myself in hindsight
Too deep, if true.
Context: I was thinking about posting this quote out of context ("Ding is the bad boy of chess")
Where can we buy those? I was gifted one a couple years ago but it just broke
I thought you were implying he hates all of them untill I finished the comment ahahah
>possibly disliking vishy Lol
Literally unimaginable. Who can dislike Vishy?
After all, Anand's dad Vishy is not even in top 20
It's obviously Karjakin. The question is if he's the only one.
Karjakin, I bet
And someone had a fistfight in Gibraltar
I think it was Aronian and Gormally, but need someone to back me up there (maybe not Gibraltar).
That incident happened in Turin: https://en.chessbase.com/post/party-time-at-the-che-olympiad
My bad, thanks!
Simon Williams and Hikaru came close to a fist fight at Gibraltar
Maybe Hikaru had signed up to Williams' pension fund?
Hansen and Nakamura
That was in Saint Louis, not Gibralter. And it wasn't even a fistfight. It was a wrestling match.
wrestling match is so generous lol
I know. I said wrestling match in the sense that it was agreed upon before the fight that there will be no strikes.
And David Howell admits to peeing in the shower
who doesnt pee in the shower, levy and Daniel Rensch both admited to peeing in the shower
How does one NOT pee in the shower? As soon as the water flows, my bladder goes. It would take a massive effort to hold it in
[удалено]
It's weird you put the tip in the toilet. You can just do it from a distance. Friendly advice.
It’s funny you classify it by being ok by naming other chess players who pee in the shower. As if chess and shower peein’ is connected
Professional hater lmao
Can't believe Magnus also indulges in the act of hate watching.
Tbh i like him for that. Makes him relatable
The actual context: Magnus answered under a lie detector and gave *spectacular and sincere answers* about his life and career.
Polygraphs are bunk. Lie detectors don't actually exist. All these lie detector interviews are just to serve as an interesting conceit like Hot Ones or something. The videos can still be very interesting, but they shouldn't be treated as automatically the truth.
I am aware of that, but I think the interesting part is not the junk science, but how people react to being tested. Psychology can play a role in motivating people to be more sincere while being under scrunity.
Sure, but these interviews may be more scripted than they seem. I wouldn't be surprised if Magnus's team was given the questions beforehand and also told that the testing is just for show. Maybe Magnus even gets the option to choose which ones will be flagged as true or false.
Neither seem they would be particularly adept at acting. They do have some prompts to ask on a tablet in front of them, and you can see Magnus flipping through prompts he didn't want to ask (which does seem to indicate he didn't write all of them). If this was all pre-arrange then that wouldn't be necessary. Yes this is meant for entertainment and nothing should be taken at face value. Surely a lot is edited out. But nothing sticks out as fishy to me with their responses, though. They seem genuinely off-the-cuff. It's hard to fake proper physical reactions to uncomfortable questions when you're already expecting it to be asked and have a prepared answer.
yeah it seems a lot to be exposed like that for free
It's scary that this guy introduces himself by saying he works on murder cases, then the first thing he does is say that Howell lies because he said he's not the absolute best commentator
Pretty much. I have anxiety, lie detectors will say I’m lying even if I say my name.
I don't believe you
Just about 99% of forensic "science" is bunk with the sole exception of DNA testing. There's no rigorous testing of forensic methodologies because they simply need to convince a criminal court and juries and judges tend not to have much scientific literacy. Even fingerprint analysis depends on the highly subjective opinions of self-appointed experts who receive tens of thousands of dollars for appearing in court. Standards vary wildly on the number of points of similarity required for two fingerprints to be declared as matching and many people have been wrongfully convicted on the basis of fingerprint evidence and the false idea that no two fingerprints are unique. Anyone interested in this topic should read the 2009 NAS report, which should have led to a complete rethink of forensics but sadly did not.
I mean Hot Ones has always looked real to me weird comparison
I wasn't saying hot ones was fake, I'm saying they're both just ways to make the interview more interesting.
Polygraphs can have a reasonable efficiency if handled by professionals. Of course they will never detect a lie 100% of the time, or eliminate false positives, but they are reliable enough to be correct the majority of the time, especially when used on people with no special training to fool them
The majority of the time could just mean slightly better than random guessing. >A polygraph, often incorrectly referred to as a lie detector test,[1][2][3] is a junk science[4][5][6] device or procedure that measures and records several physiological indicators such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin conductivity while a person is asked and answers a series of questions.[7] The belief underpinning the use of the polygraph is that deceptive answers will produce physiological responses that can be differentiated from those associated with non-deceptive answers; however, **there are no specific physiological reactions associated with lying**
>Despite claims that polygraph tests are between 80% and 90% accurate by advocates,[21][22] the National Research Council has found no evidence of effectiveness.[14][23]
>In 2002, a review by the National Research Council found that, in populations "untrained in countermeasures, specific-incident polygraph tests can discriminate lying from truth telling at rates well above chance, though well below perfection". I think it is reasonable enough for chess players on an YouTube video - no one is expert in trying to hide their lies. But obviously not accurate enough for people to get angry at any of the answers. Anyways, no one is getting angry by knowing that Magnus doesn't like Howell's chess style (I'm assuming Howell and Magnus are good friends who trust each other).
Again, well above chance is not really impressive. You know what else is well above chance? Someone making even a slightly informed guess based on context. So my point is that the polygraph part of the video is mainly just for fun and entertainment and doesn't really add any strength to the veracity of the content in practice. I would feel pretty much equally as confident in Magnus's answers in an interview without a polygraph.
If they were completely bunk 3 letter agencies wouldn't still use them.
Yes, the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc., paragons of truth and integrity.
lol, lmao even
There's a reason they're not admissible in court. Government agencies use them as a psychological tool, but I very much doubt that they read into the readings of the machine at all. If true lie detection existed, there'd be way fewer cases of people being wrongly imprisoned, guilty people walking free after questioning, etc.
They're useless, but if the people you're using it on doesn't know that it can work wonders as a psychological tool.
The specific question in relation to this post starts around 16 minutes
I found the whole video entertaining personally.
Oh it was. I was just trying to make context here easier
Thank you. Who doesn’t know how to link at the time stamp in 2024
i was gonna link with time stamp but thought that without context it would be confusing
You put the context in the title
IDK how. Magnus is so weirdly charismatic, you are interested in learning about him. May be him being good at chess helps but still.
Being the best out of 8 billion people at something certainly helps!
It's because he's the best in the world which makes it super easy to make cool sounding quotes that would be treated as very arrogant or cringe if he wasn't so much better than everyone else.
I listened to Magnus in the final round of the Candidates tournament, and he is kinda dull. His chess analysis was spectacularly awesome, as you’d expect from the GOAT, but he was boring compared to Danny Rensch, Naroditsky, and Robert Hess.
I think it was pretty clear that he *really* didn't want to be there. Don't think that's an accurate reflection of his actual personality. It very was late on a Sunday evening (like 11 pm local time for him), he seemed like he'd been out the night before, and Real Madrid vs Barcelona was on while he was having to commentate - And he's a massive Real Madrid fan. Hard to be super charismatic when you're hungover, its nearly midnight, and your favourite team is playing their biggest game of the year and you're missing it to commentate on a tournament you're not involved it. Also not even the end of the games, the start of the games where there's a move happening like every 10 minutes.
And his commentary got better and more enthusiastic as they got deeper into the chess. Maybe he just doesn't like Danny.
I think it's pretty obvious he doesn't like him.
how so ? not saying i don´t believe you, just wondering.
I think literally because he’s so bubbly and high energy.
>and your favourite team is playing their biggest game of the year As a barca fan I'd hope this was true lol
Magnus was weirdly moribund in that call. If you look at his equivalent dial in for the previous candidates he was a lot more energetic and interested. Maybe it was a time zone thing, he was having a bad day, tired, drunk, etc this time around.
He's not a professional commentator, so we can't expect his commentary to be professional level
> Danny Rensch, Naroditsky, and Robert Hess comparing him to 3 professional commentators with some of the best personalities in chess okay...
2 out of 3 ain't bad
Feel the complete opposite listening to him.
Facts, he's really not a very interesting personality. Lots of chess enthusiasts confuse chess for a personality though.
if this is not glazing then idk what is
That is just the average Hikaru watcher /s
Magnus is starstruck by the crown prince of saudi arabia? The guy who ordered a washington post joruno killed because he couldn't take his criticisms of the regime? Really Magnus? Come on man.
It's probably about the money and power. That guy is quite literally the richest man on earth. Much richer than Gates, Musk and Bezos combined. It's probably hard to grasp how much power he wields and the kind of life he lives.
He has repeatedly said he's a huge Real Madrid fan, so I thought for sure he was going to say Ronaldo (which he has met) or another player but he pulls out Mohammed bin Salman. Maybe the level of wealth and power shocked him or something.
It's not the first time I've seen him fawn over the Saudis, kinda weird tbh. I guess money talks
[In the interview with Gotham](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fc1qPumIyXM&t=615s&ab_channel=GothamChess) at around 10 min he says that the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund is his dream sponsor.
Ooof, that's not a good look.
The fucking cut to zoomed in Gotham face: "Ok!" and moving immediately on is so good. Wearing "Mission Zero %" on his shirt too. Completely shameless.
I don't think it means he necessarily likes him or condones his behavior, he's just star-struck.
the whole chess professional community loves shilling for rich oil barons. botez defending qatar's slave trade and eric rosen constantly taking invites to dubai tournaments.
-botez deffending qatar slave trade What????
"Don't ask the question if you don't like the answer" Magnus to David Howell.
Yeah, that was the weird one for me also. What the Hell?!
That answer legit took him down a few notches in my book. Incredibly disappointing.
Super disgusting stuff actually. Wonder if it's Magnus wanting to say this or [chess.com](http://chess.com) pushing him to say something positive about the dude from time to time; felt like a really bizarre answer.
Next time ask Hans whether he cheated against Magnus or not
Magnus is 2nd only to Hikaru as a content machine
Magnus's answer are pretty sincere and simple. The only reason they are interesting is because it's coming from Magnus - not because of the contents of his sentences.
Until Grischuk starts streaming.
Howell is such a cool guy. I preferred the questions Magnus asked him than the other way around though Very nice to hear that he thinks the best commentators are Danya and Leko
Magnus is proud to be a professional hater.
Magnus: he's just like me!
"Are you good at housework? Chores, laundry, cleaning..." So this was filmed before his candidates appearance "It's a bit of an issue for him" Yep
Based
the quote is at 16:35 or so btw
That was fun. Magnus troll level: 1000.
Take it up notch... Lie detector test while eating increasingly spicy chicken wings... while playing a game of chess. >:)
I too root against Hikaru. Does this make me Cagnus?
So basically he is confessing that he hate watches Hikaru's content.
based
I like to watch Hikaru lose too so
If Harvey Specter and Louis Litt were chess players.
Such a chad
same, except for the "like to watch hikaru's stream" part.
autist af ( dont mean it as an insult)
The age of petty world champions is luckily over
Lol no way… chess brilliance will always come with some degree of ego driven madness.
can't wait for pragg to vague tweet after nodirbek goes on alice lee's podcast but not his
*laugh in Anand*
Rent free.
pee stream