"I don't have a very good model of this but being good at sports is probably - mostly body type and then maybe things like reaction time that seem pretty generically good? Whereas being good at chess might involve - being really interested in chess, and thinking several moves ahead, and being particularly good at assessing the strategic situation from a board position, and stuff like that, which isn't bad, but it might be near things that you wouldn't want to change, like if you were, hm, normally mindful about the present moment or prone to picking out aesthetic patterns rather than strategic ones in stuff you looked at or if chess crowded out your other interests, and it seems to me like mental stuff is interdependent enough that it might be harder than physical stuff to put back how you want it afterwards, especially if you had an unpopular trait and your other traits directly related to that somehow."