
The grandmaster diet: How to lose weight while barely moving - chris_overseas
https://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/27593253/why-grandmasters-magnus-carlsen-fabiano-caruana-lose-weight-playing-chess
======
brandonmenc
> Robert Sapolsky, who studies stress in primates at Stanford University, says
> a chess player can burn up to 6,000 calories a day while playing in a
> tournament

Citation, please.

I see him making this claim in a number of articles and talks, but am having
trouble finding an experiment verifying this.

~~~
lancesells
I would love to see this as well. That's more than 2x what most people burn
running a marathon. Hard to believe but would be really interesting if that's
true.

~~~
jfengel
I also doubt it, though it's not quite 2x. The number they cite is "6,000
calories a day", which presumably includes the ~2,000 calories one burns just
by staying alive. A marathon runner burns ~2,600 calories on the race itself,
totalling ~4,600 for the day. So it's about 1.3x rather than 2x.

The numbers all have very wide error bars, so it puts 1.3 in the range closer
to 1 than to 2. Still hard to believe, but I'd consider "comparable to a
marathon" far more likely than "twice as much".

~~~
zaroth
If you’re going to be pedantic, you subtract out the baseline, and the alleged
caloric burn from chess would be 1.5x the measured burn from running a
marathon.

But in any case it still astounds me the human body can run that far on just
2,000 calories (2.3kWh).

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
Something you learn when you're trying to lose a lot of weight: The human body
is disgustingly energy efficient.

~~~
ijpoijpoihpiuoh
It's more about how light the body is than how efficient it is. Consider: the
Tesla Model 3 has a range of 350 km, and a battery capacity of 50 kWh. That's
a little more than seven km per kWh. So, less efficient than the human body,
right?

Well don't forget that its curb weight is 1,611 kg. If we assume that the
marathoning human weighs 100 kg, then the Tesla weighs 16x as much. So to
compare the performance pound for pound, we need to imagine the energy use of
sixteen human runners (36kWh for 42km, or just a little more than 1kWh per
km). Also, it would be travelling that range at a much higher velocity. Of
course, its coefficient of drag is probably lower than that of sixteen human
runners, but considering the humans are running at 15 km/h or so, and the
Tesla would be travelling at closer to 100kmh, the velocity factor of the drag
calculation would be 40x higher for the Tesla than the humans. So, even if you
factor in the unfairness of having skin and hair and clothes, the humans are
actually a good deal less energy efficient than the car.

I just found this analysis interesting. Our machines are after all quite a bit
more efficient than our bodies (for certain tasks, of course). But that
doesn't detract from your point that the body is definitely more efficient
than you want it to be when it comes to losing weight!

------
RobertRoberts
I did tests for weight loss. I found that you don't lose weight until you
sleep. (stay up all night and weigh your self repeatedly, in the morning, no
loss, but after you sleep and wake, your weight goes back to "morning weight")

I found that if you don't sleep well, you don't lose as much. If you eat too
late before going to bed, you don't lose as much.

If you adjust your diet (however you want is my experience) to always be
hungry for around an hour before every meal, you will lose weight. (no
exercise at all)

What these guys are doing seems to be actual "work", I don't think stress
alone makes you lose weight. With the anecdotal data I have observed over the
years "stress eating" is more common that "stress based weight loss".

Maybe the activity that causes the stress directly relates to it's effect? And
not all stress is equal in this way? (tournament stress vs paying the bills
stress)

~~~
scarface74
I hate to be blunt. But this is as much pseudoscience as the anti vaxers.
Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics. There is also a big
difference between losing weight based on water weight and losing real body
mass.

I sweat like a pig anytime I work out. I use to teach two hour fitness classes
and even now after the end of a workout, I’ve “lost 5 pounds” but that’s pure
water weight. I’m burning around 1000-1200 calories during that time. If I
rehydrate and drink lots of water afterwards, I’ll “gain” 3 pounds.

If you are “losing weight” by being hungry or by limiting when you eat, you
are losing weight because you are consuming less calories.

The same was cited in the article. The chess players are forgetting to eat.

~~~
EGreg
I never understood this point of view. It’s like people who didn’t believe in
washing hands until bacteria were discovered.

Yes sure calories in calories out. But metabolism has so many variables. It
can be revved up and burn a lot of calories. It can become quiescent when you
are in starvation mode. What causes it to start using the fat reserves is
definitely more than a univariate analysis. If there is a catalyst that starts
breaking down fats faster it won’t matter that you are eating more.

Some people are naturally skinny and others put on weight quickly. This is
already well known and shows that there are complex genetic inputs as well as
other ones. We have to discover what those are. So saying it’s just calories
in/out, stupid... nope!

~~~
scarface74
It is still just calories in and calories out. Some people naturally have a
higher metabolism and a higher basal metabolic rate. It still doesn’t change
the equation.

Yes, it’s a well known fact that if you eat too few calories, that your
metabolism slows down - and you burn less calories. That doesn’t make anything
that the original poster said scientifically valid.

I saw all sorts of crazy crap that people believed would help them lose weight
and tone when I was a part time fitness instructor like excercises that would
help them spot reduce (no such thing) to people who tried to come into my
classes wearing those plastic bags because they thought it would help them
lose weight. They reported me to management plenty of times for not allowing
them to come to my class like that and I would budge.

~~~
verbatim
> It is still just calories in and calories out.

The problem with this line of thinking is the "just".

Sure, physics says it's calories in and out, and we all agree that mostly
makes sense.

But -- how do you measure how many calories are going out? Sleep is known to
have an impact on weight. How does one translate their sleep quality or sleep
issues into a better "out" measure? How do you know how many calories are
going out during all of the other things you do during the day? What about the
thousands of assorted complex processes going on in your body that you aren't
really aware of?

For the "in"... ok, so you studiously track everything you eat. What's the
efficiency that your body absorbs all of the calories from the food you ate?
How many of those calories pass through and aren't actually consumed? Is
eating 1000 calories of lettuce really the same thing as eating 1000 calories
of pork?

If fixing this for people was just about "the equation", weight loss would be
a lot easier to solve.

"Calories in, calories out" is one of those things that sounds great, but is
not nearly as practical for people to actually implement as people like to
imagine.

~~~
scarface74
Sleep only has a second order effect on weight. Almost all of the reasons that
lack of sleep affect weight loss is due to overeating (calories in) and lack
of exercise (calories in).

[https://www.topfitnessmag.com/lifestyle/sleep-important-
weig...](https://www.topfitnessmag.com/lifestyle/sleep-important-weight-loss)

This is just like all of the studies showing diet soda causes weight gain.Diet
soda doesn’t actually cause weight gain. Diet soda gives people the license to
overeat and it may cause some people to crave real sugar more. I’m sure we’ve
all seen people order a Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese, a large fry and a
Diet Coke.

------
castlecrasher2
Eat less, lose weight. I read long ago that if you want to maintain weight,
eat until you're a little bit hungry. If you want to lose weight, eat until
you're still pretty hungry.

I've been following the latter on and off over the years, and have been doing
it again for the past 8 weeks and have lost a pound a week. I've found it to
be much easier than calculating BMR/caloric rate then calculating calories and
setting up portion sizes, etc.

~~~
Touche
I've found that to be true as well. One thing I do is I eat before dinner
(especially when going out for dinner). If I'm really hungry I'll order the
largest thing on the menu and overeat. If I have a banana before going out
I'll make a wiser choice.

Losing weight is all about hunger management. Eat free foods like fruits and
vegetables when you're hungry. Eat 3 balanced meals a day. That's it, that's
all it takes.

If you turn losing weight into a job by counting calories and doing meal
planning and whatnot you'll quit because you already have a job. So just use
some basic common sense judgments and make sure you're never too hungry
because that's when you'll make mistakes.

~~~
drKarl
Fruits are not free food in terms of dieting, as they have a lot of sugar
(fructose). Bananas in particular are very rich in sugar so are best avoided
when on a diet.

------
aluminussoma
I track my vital metrics religiously. Last week, I interviewed at three
companies who have intensive technical interviews (Dropbox, Google, Apple).

The morning after the second interview, at Google which was intensive, I was
my lowest weight ever in several years (dropped three to four pounds from five
days before)

I gained the weight back after a week. But it was interesting to observe the
physiological effects from interviewing. I'm not surprised to read about such
physiological effects from long, mentally intensive activities.

(I thought I did well enough in my interviews but I didn't make it past the
hiring committee at Google, or Dropbox)

~~~
half-pixel-off
I was going to ask: actual weight or water weight? Because I do tend to
dehydrate myself in new/unfamiliar places, especially when forced to do things
to someone else's schedule and without my favorite things to drink on hand.

But a week seems too long to gain it back unless you weren't measuring very
often.

I'd love to track blood pressure, pulse, and weight religiously but it's hard
to remember to do any more than highly irregularly, and the app I use for bp
and weight can't track pulse.

~~~
aluminussoma
This included water weight. My body's water weight during that time, if my
scale is to be trusted, was between 52.0-53.0% during that week of interviews.
It is consistent with levels before my interviews.

I was wearing a HRM tracker for two of the interviews, but I didn't turn it on
any activities to track frequent metrics. Heart rate was elevated for the
entire interview, like I was briskly walking. In my hardest Google interview,
my heart rate was at its peak.

------
cheald
Most people don't realize that a huge amount of their basal metabolism goes
into operating the brain. Just "keeping the lights on" in the average person
accounts for around 20% of your total daily energy expenditure! 6k cals/day is
highly suspect, but anyone who has spent all day thinking hard can attest to
how tiring it can be. That big brain of ours eats a lot of calories.

The other thing is that stress causes the body to produce cortisol - the
catabolic hormone which makes it easier for your body to break down tissue
into energy. Naturally, this causes our body to respond with an instinct to
take in energy. In many folks, this prompts overeating, which is why stress is
often blamed for increases in fat, but if you don't adjust your diet at all,
it can accelerate energy expenditure.

------
hoschicz
I first wrote this as a reply in this thread and now I'm looking at it, I
think it's relevant to the article as a whole -- sugar, insulin, calorie
reduction, stress, fitness in general. I believe that the "diet" mentioned in
the article is in effect a calorie-restriction one.

> Losing weight and gaining weight is simple physics. > you are losing weight
> because you are consuming less calories.

This is only true in the first up to 6 months of a calorie-restriction diet.
Then, body adjusts its metabolism (lower body temperature, making you feel
more lethargic to keep you from exercising, etc) and your weight begins to
slowly climb back up, sans any further calorie restriction. At this point,
it's easy for a dieter to blame himself of lacking willpower: "it worked, and
it stopped working now, I must've been not strict enough!".

The same thing happens if you force someone to overeat even if they're not
hungry. They will gain weight -- for up to 6 months. Then, the body increases
its base metabolic rate and adjusts to the new food intake level.

As Dr. Jason Fung meticulously explains in his book Obesity Code, there seems
to be a weight set point. He then argues that the root cause of obesity, and
the body's set weight point, is insulin resistance.

The books hails your grandma's advice: "Cut back sugars and starchy foods. No
snacking."

This is from the last part (The Solution):

1\. Reduce your consumption of added sugars. 2. Reduce your consumption of
refined grains. 3. Moderate your protein intake. 4. Increase your consumption
of natural fats. 5. Increase your consumption of fiber and vinegar.

The author also stresses the importance of fasting.

Everything the book asserts seems to be pretty well backed by science, go
check for yourself.

Source: Obesity Code by Dr. Jason Fung. Read it, it's not only a brilliant
weight loss book, but also a wonderful book about how the wrong incentives for
companies have led to the obesity epidemic in the US.

~~~
dpark
> _This is only true in the first up to 6 months of a calorie-restriction
> diet. Then, body adjusts its metabolism (lower body temperature, making you
> feel more lethargic to keep you from exercising, etc) and your weight begins
> to slowly climb back up, sans any further calorie restriction. At this
> point, it 's easy for a dieter to blame himself of lacking willpower: "it
> worked, and it stopped working now, I must've been not strict enough!"._

> _The same thing happens if you force someone to overeat even if they 're not
> hungry. They will gain weight -- for up to 6 months. Then, the body
> increases its base metabolic rate and adjusts to the new food intake level._

This is pseudoscientific garbage. There is some amount of adaptation that the
body experiences in response to a caloric deficit or surplus. It varies by
person but is generally not a _major_ effect. A few hundred calories is
typical and is largely attributable to changes in NEAT.

This is also not an unbounded effect. It won’t prevent continued weight loss
if the starting deficit is greater than the adaptation nor will it prevent
continued weight gain if the surplus exceeds the adaptation. The many obese
people in the world are proof that the “natural set point” does not place a
cap on weight gain.

There is also definitely nothing magic that happens at the 6 month mark and
the absurdity of this should be enough to make it clear that this is garbage.

~~~
cco
>It varies by person but is generally not a major effect. A few hundred
calories is typical and is largely attributable to changes in NEAT.

A few hundred calories is ~10-16% of the daily necessary caloric intake of
many people, I daresay most? It is most certainly a major effect and
considering that people become obese most often by consuming a small daily
surplus, a few hundred calories extra, over many years, a swing of 100-300
calories can easily make the gaining weight much easier or much harder.

~~~
dpark
I wouldn’t consider 200ish calories “major”, in part because the typical
weight loss plan includes a deficit of at least 500 calories/day, but mostly
because it’s straightforward to turn a 500 calorie deficit into a 700 calorie
deficit to accommodate the adaptation. Adaptation isn’t meaningless but it’s
also not offsetting large deficits the way many people think it is.

As for obesity happening due to 100-300 extra calories per day, yes, but also
not really. If a person’s intake is 300 calories per day over what’s necessary
to maintain a healthy weight, then they will put on weight until TDEE (which
increases with body mass) catches up with their intake and they land somewhere
above their healthy weight. It’s not an unbounded growth unless caloric intake
is also growing continuously. I would imagine it’s quite common to see obese
people eating 300 calories over their current TDEE but also to be 1300
calories over their healthy-weight TDEE.

Also don’t forget that the 300 extra calories is _after_ the metabolic
adaptation from eating a surplus. So if an individual will increase TDEE by
200 calories in response to a surplus, then they’ll need to eat 500 calories
above “real” TDEE to see a 300 calorie effective weight gain.

All this is to say that obese people are generally eating quite a bit more
than just 100-300 calories too much per day.

------
achenatx
I was 175 and have been trying to lose 5 pounds for 8 years. In the last 2
months Ive lost 10 pounds. I hit as high as 180

I started doing brazilian jiu jitsu about 7 hours/week. My body was sore for
the first 1 month. I also did a low carb diet (moderate adherence)

Keto generally reduces my hunger so I would skip dinner because the exercise
would kill my appetite. I would then not be hungry until lunch the next day.
This ended up turning into intermittent fasting.

I hit 170 after about 1.5 months which was a huge milestone. The intermittent
fasting was really easy (which was strange) to the point where I am only
eating 0 or once every 24 hours. This last week I started losing about .4-.5
pounds/day and so I lost another 4 pounds in the last week.

I believe it was the keto which kills hunger spikes, the massive exercise in
the evening which killed nighttime eating which transitioned me into fasting.

If you had asked me if a year ago if I could easily not eat for two days I
would have said no way. Once your body is burning fat, then it is easy.

~~~
tvanantwerp
After letting myself go a bit last year, I've been (with the exception of a
vacation or two) strictly keto and time-restricted (at least 18:6) feeding
daily. Currently 20 pounds down from my peak, and I got as far as 25 down
before I spent two weeks in Europe mostly visiting biergartens. All that with
not much exercise, though I'm starting to incorporate resistance training.

------
papito
After 30, one should seriously evaluate breakfast. Three meals per day becomes
just too many calories to burn. Two meals for an adult is plenty. Coffee in
the morning suppresses hunger, so one can go until 12-12:30 before getting
woozy.

At some point I noticed that I was force-feeding myself lunch if I ate
breakfast. Hunger is a normal feeling - embrace it.

~~~
Touche
Change what you eat, not how often you eat. A yogurt and some fruit is fine
for breakfast.

~~~
bluthru
Not if you want to limit your eating window, which is a great way to make your
body burn its fat reserves.

~~~
Touche
If you have the willpower to ignore your body telling you its hungry, then
yeah fasting will work for you. Most people can do this for only a little
while though, and then revert to what they used to do.

~~~
papito
Diets fail because people view them as "temporary struggles". Something to get
through and then it's over. It's obvious why that doesn't work. It has to be a
way of life.

~~~
Touche
All I'm saying is fasting doesn't work if you make up the calories during non
fasting hours.

~~~
bluthru
If you control for calories, when you eat does actually have an impact:
[https://www.uab.edu/shp/nutrition/news/168-time-
restricted-e...](https://www.uab.edu/shp/nutrition/news/168-time-restricted-
eating-can-help)

------
keiferski
I was a competitive chess player as a kid/teenager, and distinctly remember
being _exhausted_ , both physically and mentally, after the games.

It was the sort of full exhaustion that I’ve only experienced in sports where
rapid strategy-making is deeply important; in hockey, for example. I’ve never
gotten the same feeling from a more endurance or strength-based workout, like
running or biking. I haven’t done much rock climbing but I imagine it’s akin
to chess.

------
maliker
I experienced this "diet" when I was having a tough time at work. Turned out
for me that stress eating calories added up to way more than what the insomnia
and nervous thinking burned. Your results may vary.

------
arh68
I went to a lot of chess tournaments as a kid, and I never noticed this
phenomenon. I can only name a few GMs that were on the fat side, though.

Not eating is, I think, part of it. Usually a tournament with 40/2+1 time
control spaces rounds 6.5 hours apart, and a single round could take close to
6 hours. A full 6-hour game is unusual, but 4 hours of only staring at the
board, drinking water, and walking around looking at other games is normal.

I can't remember if food was even allowed at the table; I only remember one
time seeing food: at a scholastic tournament, my opponent ate a clementine
before the match. Technically, 40/2+1 gives you enough time to drive to Taco
Bell (even on your move), but I've never heard of anyone doing it.

If you ask my mom, she'll remember seeing kids from out-of-state wandering
between rounds: "have you eaten lunch?" "No...?" like they hadn't even been
thinking about it. Just total space cadet stuff, sometimes. (she drove the kid
to McD's, I think)

------
gfiorav
I lost 10kg in 90 days. I didn't follow any fancy diet. Just counted calories.

Yes, I know, I know it's flawed, but many of you are reasoning your way into
eating what you want and the problem is discipline.

I ate ice cream along the way. I too ate what I wanted, but I just tracked
everything (I used lose it) and never overate my budget.

The first diet that ever really worked. Nothing can replace discipline.

~~~
ectospheno
Diets fail because people make them something you do rather than something you
are. You can stop a diet. A life change is permanent.

I’m down 42 pounds from my max weight and am at a healthy bmi. I too eat
whatever I want I just eat less of it. It stuck when I stopped calling it a
diet. It is just how I live now. I feel tons better and my knees stopped
hating me.

------
aoro
I've never seen an overweight person who exercised regularly and ate decently
well. I'm not talking about hitting the gym 6 days a week but a healthy amount
of daily activity be it walking, running, surfing, hiking. It is not and never
has been complicated to lead a healthy lifestyle.

------
mindgam3
The "wealthy friend" referenced in the first sentence would have to be Rex
Sinquefield, aka the billionaire patron of American chess, based in Saint
Louis. I wonder why Sinquefield would want to remain anonymous for this
article. He goes out of his way to plaster his name on everything, not just
his chess championships ("Sinquefield Cup") but apparently professorships
("Sinquefield Professor of Economics") [0].

[0] [https://unewsonline.com/2018/09/06/sinquefield-donation-
caus...](https://unewsonline.com/2018/09/06/sinquefield-donation-causes-
controversy/)

------
Geee
Most comments so far seem to focus on the weight loss part, but I don't think
that's very interesting.

What's more interesting is how he is able to manage mental exhaustion and
performance with this regimen. I think everything here applies to other
mentally exhaustive work such as software engineering as well.

Maybe there's a need for more systematic approach for exercise and diet for
software engineering. Not for weight loss, but better sustained performance in
the job.

------
_raoulcousins
I used to play a lot of all day Magic: the Gathering tournaments where the
only option was overpriced convention junk food. 12 hours of stressful
competition was enough to keep off hunger and I lost weight from this.

------
tomcooks
The ESPN targeted ads provider requires "several minutes" to "process" the
opting out of tracking.

Blacklisted ESPN and Truste.com from my forum. Blah.

------
logfromblammo
So how long before it is possible to 3D-print a brain-sized, person-specific
artificial organ, composed primarily of brown adipose tissue, blood vessels,
and "skin", connect it to the blood supply with sterile tubing, and
refrigerate it in a portable plug-in cooler, to create a 6000 kcal/day energy
deficit?

Lose 100 pounds in 60 days without surgery. Some infection risk. Grid power
required.

------
pastor_elm
>Today's players have begun to incorporate strict food and fitness regimens to
increase oxygen supply to the brain during tournaments

Is there really such a possible variance when it comes to getting oxygen to
the brain? Why don't they just take hits of O2 then?

~~~
cheald
Absolutely. The difference in VO2 max (essentially, efficiency of oxygen
uptake) between trained and untrained individuals is stark and substantial.

Hits of pure O2 produce a euphoric high, which probably isn't what you want
during intense mental competition.

------
CarVac
This reminds me of the ordeals depicted in Sangatsu no Lion, a manga about
professional shogi.

------
marknadal
I lost 35 pounds in about 45 days without working out (coding all day) by
fasting for 3 to 5 days at a time.

I got a lot of keto flu tho, and would always eat after that, or try to
minimize it by drinking a ton of (no sugar) vitamin water and/or 1 egg.

------
babyslothzoo
To lose weight, eat fewer calories than you expend.

To gain weight, eat more calories than you expend.

It's that simple. This is basic physics, weight gain and loss is not
complicated.

------
Tycho
Your body needs fuel (nutrition) to sustain its activity.

If you take in more fuel than your activity requires, your body will convert
it into excess fat.

If you take in less fuel than your activity requires, your body will burn fat.

What else is there to discuss? I honestly do not understand how we have these
convoluted discussions. The only other thing worth considering is how you can
make it easier for yourself to cope with the feeling of hunger, so that you
don't give in and eat more than you need.

~~~
stronglikedan
> how you can make it easier for yourself to cope with the feeling of hunger,
> so that you don't give in and eat more than you need.

It took me about 6 months to learn the portion of food that will fill me up,
so that I can stop eating well before my stomach takes it's sweet-ass time
telling my brain it's full. Best thing I ever did for myself.

~~~
Tycho
Had a colleague who went from near-obese to slim in about 6 months. One tip
was to eat small amounts throughout the day, and stuff like bread that fills
you up, not stuff like salad that will leave you feeling empty.

From my own experience I think being well attuned to your own appetite
patterns is helpful, like you say. That's going to be hard if you have a
volatile and busy lifestyle.

------
ece
How to get a high metabolism as a kid, a theory: play chess.

------
s2557376
what's the purpose of not moving to lose weight?

------
wruza
At 7:30 the next morning, he pulls on gray Mizzou sweats and matching running
shorts, rubs the sleep from his eyes and TL;DRs to those who tired of a
journalismatic narrative:

Chess players have stress on tournaments and may lose 7+ kg per hard game. It
is not healthy for them.

------
olliej
Is it a long term coma?

------
rajacombinator
Sounds like amphetamine abuse to me. Presumably de rigeur in chess.

~~~
snazz
Did you read the article? It’s about diet, exercise, and the energy burnt
playing chess.

~~~
rajacombinator
Did you read between the lines? The article is indeed about those things, but
they’re almost certainly BS.

~~~
oarabbus_
Since we're on the topic of making things up not described in the article, I
think it's secret gastric bypass surgeries the competitors are undergoing, not
amphetamines.

~~~
wysifnwyg
While they were playing chess no less!

------
mudmanc4
The author is in my opinion and (whatever little it may be) experience spot
on. More people, have a starvation issue, they are eating carbohydrates, where
the body makes them on it's own. Before we had 'food' on every corner at each
gas station, we hunted, (being physical) until we scored that game. Not three
or six meals a day, not chemically processed 'food stuffs' that shock the
endocrine system and break the very nature of how our systems function. I say
starvation as in , when food is scarce, the body somehow knows, and stores
what is taken in, for future use. Yea, were all horders by nature.

