< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 14 OF 14 ·
|May-19-12|| ||suenteus po 147: Pretty impressive performance by Nakamura. Not only did he finish first, undefeated with six wins, but he had two games over 100 moves, and only one draw under 40 moves. That's the kind of champion many American chess fans want: a fighter and a winner.|
|May-19-12|| ||Jim Bartle: "two games over 100 moves"
Just to be picky, one of those was because he was just goofing around toward the end instead of taking the draw several moves earlier.
|May-19-12|| ||BlackSheep: Congrats Naka noone was even near you the wins against Kamsky and Seirawan were great games of accuracy and style .|
|May-19-12|| ||Atking: Yes it was great! Thanks and congratulations to Naka for his fighting spirit and his wonderful result. (No lost! And I keep the impression the one with Lenderman was to Nakamura's advantage. In brief not a 11/0 but still a Fischer like performance).|
|May-19-12|| ||solskytz: <Suenteus> Agreed!!|
Although he would have to overcome his nemesis Carlsen before he can actually reach that height.
well yes - but that's already a point of style. A little bit like sleeping with a teddy bear at 25... but still cute
only did 11:0 in ONE US championship - now in each one of the eight he played and won.
|May-19-12|| ||ooda: Congrats to Naka, this was a thoroughly enjoyable tournament.|
Nakamura has had a great run for the past 18 months or so and I think he is showing more and more that he has the potential to become a WC challenger and perhaps even champ.
|May-19-12|| ||paulalbert: Congratulations, Hikaru. This victory certainly reinforces your position as #1 in the U.S. and also a world class contender. Chess fans certainly appreciate your fighting style.|
|May-19-12|| ||parmetd: Congrats to Hikaru.
My final score was 28/66
|May-20-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: "Nak" played fighting chess all the way. He has all my kudo's and I have nothing negative to say ... CONGRATS!!!!!|
Let us hope - in a year or two - that he will be on the stage in Moscow (or where-ever that it is to be held) ... playing for the World Championships.
|May-20-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: Six wins ... versus only five draws ... that's just whacked.|
|May-20-12|| ||PinnedPiece: In a 3-0-1 scoring system, the final results are somewhat changed:|
Nakamura _ _ _ 23
Kamsky _ _ _ _ 21
Onischuk _ _ _ 16
Akobian _ _ _ _16
Lenderman _ _ 14
Robson _ _ _ _ 14
Shulman _ _ _ _13
Lee _ _ _ _ _ _ 13
Kaidanov _ _ _ _10
Stripunsky _ _ _ 9
Seirawan _ _ _ _ 9
|May-20-12|| ||parmetd: No one cares about 3-1-0. Yury tied for 4th. Live with it.|
|May-20-12|| ||dx9293: Amen, <parmetd>!
I have long said that 3-1-0 is an abomination and a crime against chess.
|May-20-12|| ||parmetd: so what was everyone's favorite games?
Mine was 1. Lenderman-Robson 2. Kamsky-Seirawan
|May-20-12|| ||dx9293: <parmetd> Seirawan simply was caught, so I'll go with my man Alex L!|
|May-21-12|| ||Riverbeast: <I have long said that 3-1-0 is an abomination and a crime against chess>|
Beg to disagree
I think it may be the greatest antidote to 'draw death' in chess, to come around in the last 100 years
Since Capablanca was complaining about it...
But throughout history, revolutionary ideas have always met resistance from the 'purists'
|May-21-12|| ||dx9293: <Riverbeast> I am most definitely a purist when it comes to the scoring system in chess!|
3-1-0 is just for people who hate draws.
|May-21-12|| ||Fusilli: <Riverbeast> <I think it may be the greatest antidote to 'draw death' in chess, to come around in the last 100 years>|
Is there statistically significant evidence that the +3 =1 -0 system does really lead to fewer draws than the classical +1 =0.5 -0 system?
I mean, some systematic comparison between tournaments with the new system and tournaments of equal strength played at around the same time using the old system...
By now, enough tournaments have been played with the alternative system for a comparable statistical record to exist, right?
|May-21-12|| ||MORPHYEUS: No, the greatest antidote will be my "punt" system. |
It also uses the 3 1 0. That is 3 points for classical win, 1 point for the armageddon blitz "punt" win, and 0 for the loss. This is incorporated in the London Rule, that is no agreed draw till move 40.
|May-21-12|| ||Illogic: <RiverBeast> What has been revolutionary about it? Plenty of tournaments have used it now.|
|May-22-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...|
|May-22-12|| ||apple scruffs: <parmetd> my favorites were Nakamura-Robson and Lenderman-Kamsky.|
|May-22-12|| ||diceman: When do they announce “Best Game” prizes?|
|May-22-12|| ||paavoh: <But throughout history, revolutionary ideas have always met resistance from the 'purists'> |
Ditto for stupid ideas ;-)
|May-22-12|| ||Riverbeast: <By now, enough tournaments have been played with the alternative system for a comparable statistical record to exist, right?>|
I think the 3-1 scoring system is still relatively new
I first saw it used in the London Chess Classic several years ago
But it does seem to lead to a lot of decisive games
More importantly, it makes players play out positions as long as there's any play left...I think it works better than Sofia rules, because the entire risk/reward calculation is drastically altered
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 14 OF 14 ·