Is There a Gender Gap in Chess? || Magnus Carlsen vs Judit Polgar

Read professor Wei Ji Ma's article here
Follow me on Instagram and Twitter for extra content and notifications agadmator

Magnus Carlsen vs Judit Polgar
Cuadrangular UNAM (2012) (rapid), Mexico City MEX, rd 2, Nov-25
King's Indian Defense: Normal Variation. Rare Defenses (E90)
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. d4 O-O 6. h3 e5 7. d5 Na6 8. Be3 Qe8 9. g4 Nc5 10. Nd2 a5 11. Be2 c6 12. Rg1 Kh8 13. h4 Ng8 14. Qc2 Bd7 15. O-O-O cd5 16. Nd5 Ne6 17. h5 g5 18. Kb1 Ba4 19. b3 Bc6 20. Nb6 Rd8 21. Qc3 Nf4 22. Bf1 h6 23. Qa5 f5 24. gf5 Qh5 25. Re1 Nf6 26. Nd5 Ra8 27. Qb4 Rfd8 28. f3 Qh4 29. Rc1 Bd5 30. cd5 N4d5 31. Bg5 Qg5 32. Rg5 Nb4 33. Rg2 d5 34. ed5 Nfd5 35. Ne4 Ne3 36. f6 Bf8 37. Rh2 Rac8 38. Bc4 Nc4 39. bc4 Kg8 40. Rb2 Rc7 41. c5 Nd3 42. Rd2 Rcd7 43. c6 bc6 44. Rc6 Kf7 45. Rb6 Nc5 46. Rd7 Rd7 47. Nf2 h5 48. Rc6 Rd2 49. Nh3 Ne6 50. a4 Rh2
Read more about this tournament here
Check out agadmator's merch here
Mailbox where you can send stuff:
Antonio Radić
Franje Tuđmana 12
48260 Križevci
p.s. this is not my home address :)
Contact me: or
Download agadmator chess clock for iOS here
Download agadmator chess clock for Android here
Support fishnet here
Video created by OBS
If you realllly enjoy my content, you're welcome to support me and my channel with a small donation via PayPal or Crypto.
Link to PayPal donation
NEW: You can now become a MEMBER of agadmator's Chess Channel
Crypto handle @agadmator
BTC address 3J7WigeEa95mNtZ8yJ26BBYexNz4r7XAUH
BCH address qzx5tu8uelq7s4tavsnk628f2t2s3g8gdvvnvcrvuq
LTC address MDrZdNjZm7btVkuLRdtrge9rwZn5TtjppM
ETH address 0x7a80bD0BF9c8e4B98afd43954fd9Df8e4a600245
Nano nano_383y7ofu5wsyfr9o8rh93aqaq8aixpdcbaud5iubydukz5moiadsirmuzgoq
Check out some of the books I enjoy
Check out ALL my videos here
Facebook: agadmatoryoutube
Twitter: agadmator
Instagram: agadmator
Lichess: agadmator
League of Legends: agadmator (EUNE, my friend is using my EUWE account for a couple of years now)
Blizzard: agadmator #2992
Join our Discord Server here
p.s. if you work in Twitter or Instagram, help me get Verified :)


  1. blondewoman1

    blondewoman1Πριν ημέρα

    and it's after this video that agadmator was resigned from youtube.

  2. james McDonald

    james McDonaldΠριν ημέρα

    Thanks goodness they did not start emasculating our chess at least (instead of white there must be pink and knights have to become unicorns 🤣)

  3. Jesusandbible

    JesusandbibleΠριν 2 ημέρες

    Have you covered the game when Kasparov played Deep Blue and Deep Blue cheated? This is pivotal. Now we seem to accept Engines can crush most people, but when did reality take over and the cheating finish? To me whoever cheated it was like the person betrayed humanity.

  4. Mike Holop

    Mike HolopΠριν 2 ημέρες

    agad: Today most popular move is knight to h5 but not in those days. me: wtf what year this game from? me: 2012 me: Am I old in chess years? smh

  5. betaneptune

    betaneptuneΠριν 3 ημέρες

    What are the country abbreviations FIND and THEIR? Is there a secret code table for these somewhere online?

  6. Georgi Temelkov

    Georgi TemelkovΠριν 4 ημέρες

    The dog knows more about the chess than me for 110 % !

  7. Ben Coggins

    Ben CogginsΠριν 4 ημέρες

    Apparently a lot of these super-intelligent chess man-people on this thread can’t read, or else lack basic reading comprehension skills, so here is the argument agadmator is referencing, spelled out for you: Women represent approx 5% of chess players, and men 95%. If we removed gender labels, and skill, and just called them groups A and B, then assigned both groups randomly generated lottery tickets, statistically we would expect 19 times more winning tickets in group B than group A. It would be 19 times less likely that someone from group A would win a prize than someone from group B, including the grand prize. Upon knowing the results of the lottery (that group B won the vast majority of prizes, including the grand prize) we should not be surprised. It is to be completely expected due to participation rates. Why is it so hard to get this when applied to gender in chess? (Hint: it’s due to the prevalence of sexist presuppositions in the chess world and in society more generally, ironically which also underlie and reinforce women’s statistical lack of participation in the game).

  8. Demetrios M. Papadakis

    Demetrios M. PapadakisΠριν 5 ημέρες

    There's an age gap more than a gender gap in this game. Carlsen is still a child or young adult, and Judit was an experienced adult, no?

  9. Demetrios M. Papadakis

    Demetrios M. PapadakisΠριν 5 ημέρες

    Agad had a heart valve surgery? Did i hear this correctly? At this age?

  10. igorz

    igorzΠριν 5 ημέρες

    probably slav diet cheeky breeky

  11. Nature Law

    Nature LawΠριν 5 ημέρες

    By the way i respect u man but the article u suggested is a total failure. Science doesn't work like that. The writer of the article can be a professor but his points are invalid in many ways. Please dont shape ur point of views based on this article.

  12. Eric Smoove

    Eric SmooveΠριν 10 ημέρες

    That article is nonsensical.

  13. User 2389

    User 2389Πριν 10 ημέρες

    What do you mean is there 😂😂 polgar is the only female player that can play with men.

  14. Will To Win

    Will To WinΠριν 11 ημέρες

    Yes there's a gender gap... This is not arguable.

  15. Bernard

    BernardΠριν 12 ημέρες

    Why isn't Judit Polgar verified on Instagram and in Twitter? Anna Rudolf and Susan is. Can anyone see the magnitude at which this is at?

  16. Thomas A. Anderson

    Thomas A. AndersonΠριν 14 ημέρες

    the article is really lame, the whole point he is trying to make is that there is a lot of female chess genius are out there that they chose not to play chess so they created this "imaginary" gender gap... what kind of logic is that?!

  17. Jimserac

    JimseracΠριν 14 ημέρες

    Ad from Disney that appeared before this video: "FOR OVER A THOUSAND GENERATIONS THE JEDI HAVE BEEN THE GUARDIANS OF PEACE AND JUSTICE IN THE GALAXY"... ya, until Disney came along and RUINED IT !!! Nice work, go see what other things you can ruin with your politicized, nonsensical plot GARBAGE !!!

  18. None of your business

    None of your businessΠριν 14 ημέρες

    Name one femal player worth anything. Hard mode no polgar

  19. mike craig

    mike craigΠριν 15 ημέρες

    What's the point of separating people out by their gender and comparing the chess skills of the two (or more) groups of people? Also, who cares which group is better at chess?

  20. Will Lauzon

    Will LauzonΠριν 15 ημέρες

    We are sexually dimorphic. Men have better spatial reasoning and long term thinking. There are a few women out there who can mentally perform better than thr male norm but they are a very small percent of the population.

  21. Mathieu Poulin

    Mathieu PoulinΠριν 16 ημέρες

    Is there a racial gap? Only 3 black GM in the whole world.

  22. Ron Wolf

    Ron WolfΠριν 18 ημέρες

    I hope your surgery went okay

  23. Peter Vukovics

    Peter VukovicsΠριν 18 ημέρες

    Did anyone notice Reti opening was a compliment from Magnus to Judit as both Réti and Ms Polgár are Hungarians? BTW greetings from Hungary!

  24. Wickerless

    WickerlessΠριν 18 ημέρες

    What is 'THEIR' as in the country of Judit Polgar instead of 'HUN'?

  25. Divided_And_Conquered

    Divided_And_ConqueredΠριν 19 ημέρες

    Of course there’s a gender gap! Otherwise there would be only ONE REQUIREMENT to become a grandmaster instead of TWO. What they did was lower the standard, then call it “women’s master” just so they could have more female masters. If I was female, I’d be insulted, honestly. I think everyone else should be pissed too if they were clear thinking...

  26. Vandana Rajan

    Vandana RajanΠριν 17 ημέρες

    Completely agree. For physical games, yes, it makes sense to have the division, but not for games like chess.

  27. Fadge

    FadgeΠριν 21 ημέρα

    Why and dont more women play? No encouragement.

  28. innertubez

    innertubezΠριν 21 ημέρα

    There may be a gender gap in chess, but Judit Polgar beat Carlsen and Kasparov. That is pretty bad-ass.

  29. Melaine White

    Melaine WhiteΠριν 22 ημέρες

    Ma could use his scam to prove that people under 5'5" have -comparable- better basketball ability than people over 7'. Corrected for participation in the NBA, players under 5'5" (all 2 that I'm aware of) have a higher average achievement measure than NBA players over 7'. Ma would also no doubt cite it is an anti-short bias rather than less ability keeping short people from revealing their basketball superiority.

  30. Voltroy

    VoltroyΠριν 23 ημέρες

    The article is more feminist pandering, read the comment section you'll get a better idea of how statistics can be manipulated to yield the desired result. Female vs male in chess is a dumb debate to start with. Male ego is a problem as well to be sure.

  31. None of your business

    None of your businessΠριν 14 ημέρες

    Yeah man ego is the problem right... They're the one pulling questionable stats put of their a*s to prove "wonen can do everything but in heels" bs. If anything men have no pride left

  32. hume1234561

    hume1234561Πριν 26 ημέρες

    The article from Wei Ji Ma is logically correct, but he overreaches in demanding the reader think and draw conclusions he would assign to us. In order to cement the idea Judit is a great player she's shown beating a future World Champion. Surely a great player is a great player regardless of who they play and independently seen as such.

  33. BlueSpyUSA

    BlueSpyUSAΠριν 26 ημέρες

    Statistically the average human has less than 2 legs.............Some people have 0, 1 or 2 legs and none have 3...

  34. Kerem Balkır

    Kerem BalkırΠριν 28 ημέρες

    Wei Ji Ma's article is borderline nonsense, here's a more rational explanation:

  35. GM Beth Harmon

    GM Beth HarmonΠριν 28 ημέρες

    That article on Chessbase is excellent, especially the thought experiment section.

  36. Chance1957

    Chance1957Πριν 28 ημέρες

    Wei Ji Ma, needs to do a statistical study of why women are underrepresented in chess. His article is extremely flawed. What he is saying is, if we had as many women playing American football as we do men, they would be equally as good. Maybe there is a reason more women don’t play chess, like there is a reason why more women don’t play American Football. Could that reason be they are not as good as men? Do a study on this Wei Ji Ma.

  37. None of your business

    None of your businessΠριν 14 ημέρες

    Modern day (social) science is mostly just statistical correlation masked as causation with slight of hand. The sad thing is when these crooks influence public policies

  38. André Mendonça

    André MendonçaΠριν μήνα

    “Magnus is like Neo” accurate.

  39. philfrei1

    philfrei1Πριν μήνα

    The article's stats and logic are sound, as far as I can tell. To confirm this, perhaps compare the stats of men with the stats of some arbitrary subset of men that gives us a similar ratio of men to women. For example, compare the ratings of men who's last names begin with the letter P or some other letter or pair of letters if need be to get the same ratio. Or given a list of all men, randomly pick out 6%, and compare THAT to women's ratings. I am not clear where the idea that women don't have killer instincts came from. From literature (Lady Macbeth?) to the top female sports participants (e.g., pro tennis) we have some great counter-examples.

  40. Johnny Eaton

    Johnny EatonΠριν μήνα

    I love reading an article that debunks bullshit with stats. :) Thanks for sharing that, Antonio. :)

  41. Robert Cone

    Robert ConeΠριν μήνα

    Appreciate the article link - great comments section

  42. András Peisch

    András PeischΠριν μήνα

    #suggestion: Polgár Judit saga :)

  43. surya heatz

    surya heatzΠριν μήνα

    for a fact, we all know that women had experienced stereotypes, but the data analysis in the article is a strong comeback pointing to make conclusions more inclusively rather than considering just the top cream.

  44. Marc Rover

    Marc RoverΠριν μήνα

    Wait, what? A blind-fold game? I REALLY hope they are at least TOLD the opponents moves.

  45. Gonzalo Gomez Martinez

    Gonzalo Gomez MartinezΠριν μήνα

    I think that it is not very clever to read very seriously an article that begins telling you that any dissent opinion "would be considered reactionary and repulsive", you can espect a huge dose of bias int it. On the other hand, i consider myself a mediocre to awfull player, and in my point of view, that does not make any abetter or worst person than for example magnus carlsen. He can be more clever than me, and for me that also is not a problem. I do not know if girls can play better chess than men, but i think that humankind in this moment is only able to accept one response to that question, so i will keep checking who wins tournaments and make my own opinion.

  46. Illarion Bykov

    Illarion BykovΠριν μήνα

    Going into this event (2nd Torneo Cuadrangular UNAM in Mexico, 2012) Judit Polgar was rated 2705, or only 30 points below her peak (2735 both official and "live" in 2005) while Magnus was rated 2848, or 34-41 points before his peak (2882 official in 2014, 2889 peak "live"). So they were both about equally close to their peak ratings, with Carlsen slightly MORE below his peak. When she played Carlsen a little later, at his peak, she said playing him "felt like drowning" because he always shut down every one of her ideas before she could execute it. Her only win against Carlsen was in rapid time control, just as her only win against Kasparov. She could never beat either man in classic time control, and lost the overwhelming majority of faster games against them. Finally, consider the fact that she was the product of the most longlasting and nurturing "chess hothouse" environment that any chess player ever had--her training in chess theory started at age 3, and she got personal tutoring from her psychology/chess expert father 4 hours a day every day, and also lived with 2 older sisters, both chess child prodigies ahead of her in their chess studies and chess ratings, and they helped her learn and could answer her questions whenever she was stumped and daddy was too busy to answer (until she surpassed them and got even better coaches). She lived and breathed nothing but high level chess her entire life. Magnus only started serious chess training at age 9 (when his rating was ~900), and took lots of time off from chess to play football, basketball, go skiing, etc. Chess was just one of his many hobbies. These differences prove the best women cannot match the best men, even if the women get better training for longer timespans. That's how things work in every competitive sport and mindsport. (And participation levels are no excuse, as women participate more than men in Scrabble and Bridge, but men still dominate the top ranks.) These differences also prove Laszlo Polgar's "Tabula Rasa" hypothesis wrong. You cannot turn "any healthy newborn" into a "Genius" through nothing but "education and training" as he proposed. What you can do is take newborns who inherited above-average intellects from their parents (like his daughters) and give them the best nurturing, education, and training for the longest time, and they will perform very well, but still not quite up to "Genius" levels. On the other hand, a Genius like Carlsen needs only standard, competent training to become the greatest of all time in his field. Genius can rise to the top in spite of less-than-best training. Finally, to answer the question "is there a gender gap in chess"--YES, because women are allowed to play in women's tournaments and win women's money & prizes AND women are allowed to play in men's tournaments and take prizes and money away from men if they feel like, but they are protected from men entering women's tournaments to take money and prizes from women. Women have twice the opportunies to succeed compared to men, yet men usually come out on top despite the handicap (the other gender gap--in distribution of natural talent) P.S. The linked article is full of outdated sloppy reasoning, disproven hypotheses, and ideological opinion with some vaguely related number-salad attached to give it the false appearance of being "scientific" Articles like that belong in the 20th century, not in the 21st. Scientistific research has already settled the matter. Only outdated ideologues pretend otherwise. Get with the times!

  47. Jurij Di Carlo

    Jurij Di CarloΠριν μήνα

    The linked article is completely wrong, doesn’t get the point 🙂 It’s described very well why in the comments section of the article itself

  48. Alain van der Velden

    Alain van der VeldenΠριν μήνα

    Wow that article is really easily refutable

  49. Alain van der Velden

    Alain van der VeldenΠριν μήνα

    @Michael The article's main deflection of previous arguments is given in the paragraph 'thought experiment'. I have two arguments against it. Let's start with a quote: "Group A has 10 people, group B has 2. Each of the 12 people gets randomly assigned a number between 1 and 100 (with replacement). Then I use the highest number in Group A as the score for Group A and the highest number in Group B as the score for Group B. On average, Group A will score 91.4 and Group B 67.2." This is purely because of the low numbers, causing an enormous standard deviation and is therefore mathematically incorrect. See, for example if you have 'Group A' of 10000 people and 'Group B' of 2000 (both x1000), you will find average highest scores of 99.9 for group A and 99.5 for group B. Also, all those numbers were given AT RANDOM, unlike chess ratings. Also you have to take into account that the very best female players will be just as dedicated to chess as the very best male players. For example, Hou Yifan will spend much more effort as womens world champion then just some 2650 rated man, who is competitive but not even neccesarilly a professional. The fact that even the most dedicated female players still rate 200 points below the highest rated men in my opinion that there is gender gap in chess. Also it has long been accepted by mainstream science that the male brain is (slightly) stronger at spatial awareness (which is awfully nice to be good at for a chess player) whereas the female brain of course has it's own area's of superiority (empathic capabilities for example).

  50. Michael

    MichaelΠριν μήνα

    But you won't say how 🤔

  51. Rawda Aljawhary

    Rawda AljawharyΠριν μήνα

    You were having heart surgery and still thinking about the gender gap in the world of chess?? You're a hero, Agad. We love ya.

  52. togi

    togiΠριν μήνα

    Starts at 1:38

  53. 5th Floor

    5th FloorΠριν μήνα

    There definitely seems to be a gender gap in analytical subjects like chess, and chess is a great example that implies this. I'm of the assumption that men can just achieve higher analytical/reasoning levels compared to women, I wouldn't say this is necessarily a good thing either as there are side effects to everything. Women clearly have better "emotional" intelligence, but I personally don't understand the usefulness of that intelligence type other than helping in social situations (which I guess could really help).

  54. 5th Floor

    5th FloorΠριν μήνα

    @Igor Capablanca Lol, exactly! Not to mention clothing/fashion designers, it's like one of the most observable facts that have nothing to do with any form of "systemic" misogynism. So, one can't simply write it off as patriarchy or the like.

  55. Igor Capablanca

    Igor CapablancaΠριν μήνα

    Why are the best and most awarded cuisine chefs cuisine are men?

  56. Ar Bur

    Ar BurΠριν μήνα

    The article is NOT a fair representation of the real picture. Because it would be honest thing to do to offer another article writer of which would be interested to push the opposite agenda with numbers backing Male domination idea. Why the writer focused on Indian chess federation numbers and not Russian or Georgian instead? Clearly he had a "dog" in this race... Also comparing Group A and B where the selection of numbers are based on pure lack to the performance based sport is not a good example! And a final nail in the coffin of egalitarians! In the entire history of chess, by the pure numbers logic, there would be at least ONE female at ONE point in time who was equal or better than the best MALE player, in other words better even if we disregard Morphy-Lasker era, still Gaprindashvili Chiburdanidze or any of Polgar sisters were no match for the top male players of that time!

  57. Paul Paradise

    Paul ParadiseΠριν μήνα

    What's the inside joke about him reaching under the desk around 1:45? I've seen him do this in many of his videos...

  58. Space Cat

    Space CatΠριν μήνα

    He's fixing the audio with no audio difference and it a nice running gag in the channel

  59. Jim Morris

    Jim MorrisΠριν μήνα

    Did he let her win just to be nice?

  60. Alexander Bush

    Alexander BushΠριν μήνα

    Back in the dark days where 1 BTC was worth 10K. F for my present self

  61. Contrapunctus XV

    Contrapunctus XVΠριν μήνα

    I agree with Take-away 1 and 2. But 3 is just redundant, no place can escape from post-modern social constructivism...

  62. MS2K

    MS2KΠριν μήνα

    Does anyone know why Hungary is abbreviated as “THEIR” in the rankings at 18:30?

  63. L1ama

    L1amaΠριν μήνα

    If you google the title of the page and go to the FIDE site it's HUN now, so no idea. Maybe his browser tried to auto-translate or something, a few of the other countries are messed up too

  64. Nikita Todt

    Nikita TodtΠριν μήνα

    Lol that top mystery donator of 1 btc really did u a solid

  65. taxatollah

    taxatollahΠριν μήνα

    Wei Ji Ma's article is extremely misleading. What it shows is that men are not better than women in chess in the same way that men are physically stronger or faster than women. But I don't think many who have ever played chess ever believed differently. Larry Summers, in the context of mathematics, proposed the most likely explanation for a gender gap at the highest levels of performance (and of course he was crucified for even offering the proposition). Which is that, although the average ability and dedication of men and women in certain non-physical areas of competition are equal, men have a higher standard deviation. So the outliers (on either side of the distribution) will predominantly be men. It doesn't take a very large difference in standard deviation to make an enormous difference out in the tails. A male super-GM (>2700 FIDE) is probably 5 standard deviations above the mean for men, which corresponds to better than 1 in 3,500,000 men. If women have the same chess strength as men, on average, but a standard deviation which is, say, 16.7% lower, then a female super-GM would need to be 6 standard deviations above the mean. The difference in rate is enormous, since a 6 standard deviation outlier corresponds to 1 in 1 billion for women versus the 5 standard deviation outlier being 1 in 3.5 million for men. So you would expect to see 1 female super-GM for every 300 male super-GMs. Feels about right: Judit Polgar vs. all of the men who have hit 2700 FIDE over the years.

  66. pranav kombe

    pranav kombeΠριν μήνα


  67. Mit Cap

    Mit CapΠριν μήνα

    wtf is this title

  68. Bill Billson

    Bill BillsonΠριν μήνα

    Really cool. I was wondering earlier why there are separate chess divisions, and why feminists aren't complaining? Thanks for the upload!

  69. Bill Billson

    Bill BillsonΠριν μήνα

    @Stout Lager thank you for clarifying!

  70. Stout Lager

    Stout LagerΠριν μήνα

    There is women's division and there is open. No men's only division (some countries may still have this, I'm not sure). The main avenue of critique against the linked article are the vagueries of terms like "systemic disadvantages" and "stereotype threat" which the author does not bother to define. I think it's fair to argue, in current era, that female players are strongly encouraged and outstanding examples receive considerable attention. Argument about statistical distribution is fine in so far as it is a study using India as sole sample group.

  71. aces2in2000

    aces2in2000Πριν μήνα

    what is "sorry about that in almost every videos"?

  72. superdog797 sup

    superdog797 supΠριν μήνα

    How rich is agadmator

  73. Mars2016

    Mars2016Πριν μήνα

    Are women not so good at chess because there are fewer of them playing chess or are fewer women playing chess because they are not so good at it?

  74. Mars2016

    Mars2016Πριν 22 ημέρες

    @Geoff Hart Agreed on all counts! It would be like me complaining that as a 5’ 11” person, i’m not in the NBA because of “vicious heightism” in the industry and not because height is itself a pivotal factor for success. I find that one of the most obvious pieces of evidence corroborating and aligning perfectly with what we see in chess is the visual IQ disparity between men and women. Men outscore women in the visual rotation section of the test by almost a full SD which is roughly what we see in chess(a full SD difference). Chess is in essence a game of visual rotation.

  75. Geoff Hart

    Geoff HartΠριν μήνα

    I think it's clear, that unless there's other barriers, people generally like to do, and will even pursue things, which they are good at - this is universal among any sports, as well as any hobby or career. Also, it's difficult to become great at *anything*, unless you love doing it - that is a fundamental component. No one claims: "Well, in my heart, I'm just as good at Chess as Magnus is, I just don't like playing it enough to develop my skill". Considering an entire population, if women enjoyed and were good at chess, they would play it (just like Judit). Chess is an easily accessible game for anyone (certainly no gender barriers). Any person can play online, without even displaying their gender. Wei Ji Ma's argument disregards this obvious self-selection characteristic and makes the presumption that people randomly decide to play chess and dedicate their life to it - *regardless* of their inherent aptitude for it. Completely naive. This does not mean there won't be a woman world champion, there certainly could be - it just means that, statistically speaking, the bell curve for men's chess proficiency is shifted a tiny bit compared to women (a small shift means huge discrepancies at the very edges of the curve - and here we are talking the top 0.000001% of chess players on earth).

  76. Nischal Ganatra

    Nischal GanatraΠριν μήνα

    Judit Polgar is a beast ✌️. Jai Shri Krishna 🙏

  77. Joseph Kushner

    Joseph KushnerΠριν μήνα

    I just unsubscribed bc he said “sorry about that” one too many times for me today. 😂

  78. Jobo

    JoboΠριν μήνα

    You aren’t funny and nobody cares

  79. SocratesAth

    SocratesAthΠριν μήνα

    "Feel free to pause the video and win this game for Judit" So this is Judit Polgar outsmarting Magnus Carlsen, and you expect _me_ to figure it out?

  80. LetsPlayCrazy

    LetsPlayCrazyΠριν μήνα

    At 5:53 Couldnt you simply take the G5 pawn? If knight takes you can fork trading a rook and a pawn for a knight and a bishop. Especially as it comes with tempo...

  81. alejandro ojeda

    alejandro ojedaΠριν μήνα

    Huh, the article is great and really simple once you know the very basics of probability. I'm gonna share It with a few Friends, crazy how something that basic has been behind the supposedly systemic "underperformance" of women.

  82. Dr. Tarantula

    Dr. TarantulaΠριν μήνα

    No the article is ignorant of the basic fact that as one scales up the ranks of intelligence, men outnumber women at a higher and higher ratio

  83. Reject Cultural Marxism

    Reject Cultural MarxismΠριν μήνα

    "...Is There a Gender Gap in Chess?...." Cultural Marxism has destroyed comedy, history, arts, fashion, academia and now it's coming to Chess.

  84. Stats Guy

    Stats GuyΠριν μήνα

    Chess Ranking by year 1970-2020

  85. JumpingTomato

    JumpingTomatoΠριν μήνα

    Even though Judit is past her prime, I love her attacking style!

  86. Dana Barakat

    Dana BarakatΠριν μήνα

    Read the article and also read the comments, and they were split 50/50. In my opinion, both men and women can be great at chess and gender alone does not cause one to be better than the other. More men seem to play chess and more men are interested in chess, that does not equate to men being better just because they are men. Women have not dominated chess, yet! We don't know, maybe in the next 50 years or even 20 years things may change. I'm a women and although I am a novice at chess I find the game beautiful and if I had started earlier and really dedicated myself, I'm sure I would have been a great competitor, and me not being a man wouldn't have had anything to do with that. Chess is about strategic thinking, calculation, being able to think five to ten moves ahead, imagination (envisioning certain moves without playing them), and most of all dedication, practice, and hard work, NOT whether or not you are a MALE or a FEMALE. Thank you for the article in the description, I recommend that others read that and the comments as well.

  87. James E. Ivory, III

    James E. Ivory, IIIΠριν μήνα

    Magnus v. Bobby, if possible?

  88. oriondx72

    oriondx72Πριν μήνα

    I miss the days when we got to see people get checked mated everyone resigns i think people's ego are to big and cant take it lol. When i used to play at school when i lost i got checkmated i didnt say i resign.

  89. The Law

    The LawΠριν μήνα

    It should be obvious that you need to take account of the participation gap. If the likelihood of any player being 2800 is .000001% than by sheer numbers men would have vastly more people in and around that rank than women. My problem with the article is most visible when you look at the final take away where he states we should first look for systematic baises in the chess world that negatively impact women. This is true, but misses the point. In any study you must isolate the variable as much as possible to determine whether it impacts the experiment or not. The correct phrasing isn't to look for a subset of environmental factors, but to control for the totality of factors that aren't inherent differences between men and women that make women less capable in chess. The economic phrase (All Else Equal) should be applied here. This bias is an issue in the discussion, because it gives people cause to disbelieve any evidence presented disproving inherent disadvantages as it leads one to worry statisticians examining this subject will try to conduct a study that will be favorable to their desired outcome.

  90. Mars2016

    Mars2016Πριν μήνα

    @The Law I only care about the facts and the truth. Not my truth, not your truth and not anyone's "lived experience" i care about THE truth which can only be reached with good faith, methodical, diligent, robust and honest scientific inquiry.

  91. The Law

    The LawΠριν μήνα

    @Mars2016 I don't really care either way. But I do care about whether someone is honest about their research or not and saying things that are aimed at one view undermines it's validity in the public view.

  92. Mars2016

    Mars2016Πριν μήνα

    That is some pretty shoddy math and overall analysis there which i won't bother to go into other than to say that he fails to consider the possibility that FIDE participation is not the entire female chess pool and as such it may well be that fewer women try their hand at taking chess more seriously because they simply don't fare well enough at it to give them the confidence to join the competitive circuit and gain a FIDE ranking. The ones that do are the ones with real talent so there is a strong possibility that the women that make it to the top are actually very close to the best the female chess world has to offer. I say very close because the Chess gap is probably similar to the visual IQ gap between men and women which is just under 1 standard deviation(women do better in the verbal section and in the end the two genders do not differ by much in overall IQs). This implies that the true chess gap is probably in the neighborhood of around 180 ELO points. Another irrefutable fact that kind of reinforces the chess gap is the SAT math gap between boys and girls which is also close to 1 SD. I simply don't understand this obsession with making everyone in the world equal especially males and females. We clearly have our differences and men have their strengths while women have theirs(it appears they fare better in the verbal section of the SAT than men do and good for them). There is no rule that says we must all be equal and nature proves this reality about life to us every day, yet when it comes to human gender it is a cardinal sin to even entertain the possibility that we aren't. Utter lunacy!

  93. Jannie Schlüter

    Jannie SchlüterΠριν μήνα

    Judit looks like a man with a wig on the Thumbnail. Poor picture choice maybe?

  94. Dennis Berceles

    Dennis BercelesΠριν 2 μήνες

    It took so many minutes before you start, lessen your talkies will you!

  95. As Vet

    As VetΠριν 2 μήνες


  96. astro-Tbo

    astro-TboΠριν 2 μήνες

    But wasn't the "participation gap" theory of Bilalic or Ma rebuked by the article by Howard in 2014?

  97. astro-Tbo

    astro-TboΠριν 2 μήνες

    @Vincent van Mierlo Well, there *is* statistics in Howard's paper (see his Figs.2 & 3). And, no, Ma's article does *not* refute Howard's, because it does not mention Howard's main argument against the "participation hypothesis", i.e., that the ELO difference between top women and top men appears to *increase* in countries with *decreasing* participation gaps (his Fig.3). Also, Ma does not address another possible caveat of his "participation hypothesis" that Howard mentions, which is the fact that there could be a hidden parameter *causing* the participation gap (see Howard's example with boxing). Don't get me wrong, I am not at all saying that there is an innate difference between men and women's chess skills (I tend to think that there isn't!), but, as a scientist myself, I think that Howard's arguments have to be taken into account.

  98. Vincent van Mierlo

    Vincent van MierloΠριν 2 μήνες

    There’s no statistics in this article... also Ma’s article is written in 2020, and specifically refutes the articles like this

  99. crimsonninja6995

    crimsonninja6995Πριν 2 μήνες

    12:28 why does knight to D3 not work?

  100. Neil L

    Neil LΠριν 2 μήνες


  101. Ramon Bannister

    Ramon BannisterΠριν 2 μήνες

    Agadmator: "Magnus is the greatest chess player who ever lived." ME: Why do I have the feeling Fischer could've beaten him if Fischer were still alive today?

  102. Illarion Bykov

    Illarion BykovΠριν μήνα

    We know how much Fischer could learn from computers: nothing. He played computers in the 70's and 80's and 90's and his rating got worse by the time of his rematch with Spassky in '92. He played against Spassky like a 2800+ in 1972, but only like a 2650 in 1992. Fischer hated computers with a passion, and invented Fischer Random Chess specifically to foil computer preparation.

  103. Horacio Barrios

    Horacio BarriosΠριν 2 μήνες

    @John Cena don't be so sure about that, it would be a crazy match for sure

  104. John Cena

    John CenaΠριν 2 μήνες

    @BP97 Fisher is no match to carlsen

  105. BP97

    BP97Πριν 2 μήνες

    It's so hard to compare players from different eras, but it would be interesting to see how much Fischer could scale with the help of the modern computers.

  106. Fr0gSplashh

    Fr0gSplashhΠριν 2 μήνες

    There is a gap. But it's entirely due to the way people are raised. Boys are pushed to excel at games when girls are pushed away from even trying. The Polgars are a good example of that. If you raise your young girls to excel, well, they do.

  107. Andre Felix

    Andre FelixΠριν 2 μήνες

    wtf..... that attack from judit was insane. one of the best 'pause the video' moves i've seen on this channel wow

  108. Scott Aaron

    Scott AaronΠριν 2 μήνες

    Magnus resigned, but Knight-G5 is a playable move.

  109. REYteo

    REYteoΠριν 2 μήνες

    12:29 why in that position you dont go for the fork with the knight, an trade rook for knight?

  110. REYteo

    REYteoΠριν 2 μήνες

    Ahh i just saw it

  111. Dieu Tran

    Dieu TranΠριν 2 μήνες

    Wonder why black didn't take the white Nd5 at 8:35 ?

  112. Captain Deadpool

    Captain DeadpoolΠριν 2 μήνες

    You cant say Magnus is the best player to ever play the game. He is the best in his time line. The fact that Fischer and players like him did not have such strong dependency on computer and well developed theory and solid analysis is the reason why he looks so good and taking that away I still think Fischer played like a monster. So please don't make such statements like Magnus is the best that ever played the game. He is the best of his time, obviously because he has talent and the learning aspect of chess is a lot better due to technology which was not available for other before him.

  113. Josh S

    Josh SΠριν 2 μήνες

    Relax, it's clearly just his opinion, and he's allowed to have an opinion. There's no way to prove who is the best, short of an unprecedented skill gap.

  114. Muhammad Khalid

    Muhammad KhalidΠριν 2 μήνες

    Well the "GOAT" thing is mostly subjective and depends on each person to think who it is. Magnus could be the strongest player because there are people who already have their legacy in chess, maybe in 20 years from now there will be someone who will be stronger than him. The same could be said in other sports like swimming and basketball, phelps and le bron could be the strongest player up till now, but we won't know if it still true in 20 years. And "if" magnus is born in fischer's era, maybe he will lose to fischer or maybe fischer will be the one who lost. But then it's all just an "if", and we shouldn't make it an objective statement. There is also "GOAT" based on the influence they give. In that sense even though anand and kasparov capabilities is below magnus, they are more influential than him. They can even be said to be more influential than fischer depending on who you ask. I think it's fine to think who other's/majority said to be "GOAT" isn't your "GOAT" because it can be just subjective matter

  115. Nick

    NickΠριν 2 μήνες

    Funny seeing the arguments about celebrating judit because she is a woman. She should absolutely be celebrated for reaching such a level as a woman. Not because of any biological reason but because of the cultural barriers that mean she has succeeded in a male dominated sport. It takes much more than talent to do that, it takes guts and bravery and confidence.

  116. Snow Walker

    Snow WalkerΠριν 2 μήνες

    Regarding the article.... Does it matter? And what will we debate next, if there is a race gap, or a sexual orientation gap in chess? It's a really bad idea to indulge these woke debates, which are essentially irrelevant, because in any area of life some categories will perform better than others. This leftist obsession with deconstructing society and placing people in different identity groups is so ridiculous and very harmful.

  117. Bouncy Nightcore

    Bouncy NightcoreΠριν 2 μήνες

    you mostly cover games where magnus lost

  118. Aaron Holmgren

    Aaron HolmgrenΠριν μήνα

    to prove that he is not invincible I guess...

  119. Tony Zaayter

    Tony ZaayterΠριν 2 μήνες

    Does anyone know Carlsen vs Polgar records?

  120. Traqn Dimitrov

    Traqn DimitrovΠριν 2 μήνες

    Magnus just much better than everybody in history.... I m glad to live in his era.... just insane

  121. Mark Anthony

    Mark AnthonyΠριν 2 μήνες

    Really? Wait until i study enough chess

  122. Levente Paizs

    Levente PaizsΠριν 2 μήνες

    Kudos for saying their names correctly.

  123. Dani

    DaniΠριν 2 μήνες

    what about his "sorry about that" thing agad does in EVERY video... somo kind of thing that stucked or what? anyone?

  124. Anthony Collins

    Anthony CollinsΠριν 2 μήνες

    Well played Judit!

  125. Marbles

    MarblesΠριν 2 μήνες

    I don't understand the article. Why isn't it fair to look at the best players? Say you have a nation of 10 states. Each state has the same population and the same amount of people playing chess. Now the chance that the best player in the country will come from any particular state is much smaller than that it will come from one of the other 9 states, but certainly, each state will have 10% of the top 100 players, on average? If not, where do all the top players come from? Now, if 10% of the people in our nation were women, and they all lived in the same state without any men, would it be unreasonable to expect that they had 10% of the top 100 chess players, like all the other states do? If the average rating of the genders is the same, but there are far more male champions, then that seems to indicate that the female players are from the right tail of the female chess talent bell curve? Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe the stereotype this article went furthest in killing is: Asians are good at math.

  126. Marbles

    MarblesΠριν 2 μήνες

    ​@Josh S We are discussing whether the performance gap in chess is due to nurture or nature, and your condition for having the debate is that I admit that you are right before we even get started? You're right, that _is_ pointless. How does participation explain half the performance gap? You keep saying that, but you will not elaborate. If women are 10% of chess players, why are they not 10% of grandmasters? What does Wei Ji Ma's analysis bring to the table? I am not jumping to definitive conclusions. Jumping to conclusions would be saying women are worse at chess because they are being subjugated, as you do. I am saying women _could_ be worse at chess for genetic reasons, that the current research supports that hypothesis, and that we should do more specific research on gender and chess prowess.

  127. Josh S

    Josh SΠριν 2 μήνες

    @Marbles There's no further point to this conversation if you're ignorant to the vast implications that sexism has on the modern world. Participation can account for half of the performance gap, and then socio-cultural factors can likely explain much of the rest of it. There's zero reason to jump to definitive conclusions about comparative intelligence when other factors are so pervasive, and not easily quantifiable. As I said earlier, it's not about sexism in chess, specifically, it's about a general view of the world, and the world is still very much sexist.

  128. Marbles

    MarblesΠριν 2 μήνες

    @Josh S No, I do not understand how sexism could cause the gender performance gap in chess, and I do not see much sexism in chess. If anything, I see women being favored in a sport that is desperate to have more of them, for various reasons. And all research indicates that there _is_ a significant gap between men and women in spatial intelligence. The research also shows larger standard deviations in general intelligence among men, so why is it surprising that men would reign in chess for meritocratic reasons? Why don't we just do the research?

  129. Josh S

    Josh SΠριν 2 μήνες

    @Marbles Call it whatever you like, but you would have to understand the social implications to realize that it's a far more reasonable outcome than any significant intelligence gap between the sexes. Can you even comprehend the impacts of sexism on the current development of women's chess?

  130. Marbles

    MarblesΠριν 2 μήνες

    ​@Josh S You are backpedaling now. If women are 10% of chess players, why aren't they 10% of grandmasters? How could underrepresentation at intermediate levels of chess cause far more underrepresentation at elite levels? My best explanation for the data is that female chess players are recruited from the most talented women, while male chess players are more averagely talented for their gender. Due to the nature of normal distributions, that would explain what we are seeing, at least at the resolution we are currently examining it at. I wonder if you would find the same pattern among runners; the average white runner being as good as the black one, but the top runners being predominantly black.

  131. Chrizzie 78

    Chrizzie 78Πριν 2 μήνες

    If there isn't a gap why is there a seperate female competition and seperate female titles?

  132. Matthew Stewart

    Matthew StewartΠριν 2 μήνες

    Can you expand on the Kb1 move? You mentioned you never know what may be lurking behind the corner but isn't this a waste of white's momentum?

  133. Ian Crane

    Ian CraneΠριν 2 μήνες

    Without doing a deep dive into stats, Wei Ji Ma is 100% correct. Look at is this way, becoming a GM is a very difficult thing to do, so it's extremely rare. When you have a participation gap between genders that is as massive as the one in chess, you're going to have fewer of the rare types of players that ultimately become GM level players, which makes women's ability seem inferior. Crank the participation numbers all the way up for women, wait a decade or two, and suddenly the top players would be of a roughly equal gender mix

  134. eschelar

    eschelarΠριν 2 μήνες

    I wrote two response comments here and both were deleted in seconds. Very suspicious! I was not disrespectful at all in either comment, but I was factual. I do not believe agadmator deleted the content. Far more likely that it was YT, since the deleted comments were gone faster than they could be read by a human eye.

  135. EinSofQuester

    EinSofQuesterΠριν 2 μήνες

    Of course men chess players are better than women chess players. I'm saying this based on who keeps winning the world championship