Indeed. I'm willing to believe Magnus is one of the best at this (posted this link because I'm a huge fan!), but it's his job and has been since he was a boy, it's not really magic. And it's just demonstrably not the case that he goes into every game knowing every topical line, not does he really need to.

I'm a big Carlsen fan, he's currently the best chess player in the world, but not all grandmasters think Carlsen or the other top 10 are the best in history.

I can't make an informed opinion myself, but I can retell the arguments I've heard used.

In the past, players like Bobby Fischer dominated their peers, winning tournaments by 5 games or more. Today, super grandmasters play 20 moves of prep from memory and agree to a draw. When they get out of prep they don't play as skillfully as players of the past, pre chess engine era. Today super grandmasters put all their attention into opening theory. (I'm retelling the arguments I've heard, these aren't my own opinions)

I will say I much prefer to watch a super grandmaster blitz or rapid game over a classical game. Not that I watch them live, but I see the occasional video of a grandmaster analysing them in a 10-30 minute video.

I don’t think it’s true that studies show players play less skilfully. At the very least papers like this exist:

https://content.iospress.com/articles/icga-journal/icg0012

But I also think that in a metagame with less equality out of the opening and more blunders, skill was more rewarded in the past - so just look at Magnus’s blitz rating to compare. Either way, the fact is this year Magnus _did_ regularly dominate his peers, despite them all having big teams with thousands of CPU/GPU hours of prep behind them. I know Ben Finegold is never going to be convinced but whatever.