|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-29-08 | | Riverbeast: One thing I've learned...never play the main line Dragon against kids! Even ten year olds know how to play it. Most of the play is so tactical and so forced, it plays itself. Not that Radjabov's much older, but a mature adult would not have played this line...He would have gone for one of the more strategic lines, playing for an early Nd5 or something |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | dexterious: The press conference was so funny, seeing Radjabov's reaction sitting there. First he pretended to read some papers while Carslen was presenting, then sat there squinting his eyes. Felt like a lost puppy... |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | whiteshark: Random observation of time usage:
14...Re8; 1h 35m - 1h 50m
16.h5; 1h 16m - 1h 37m
19.Qxh5; 48m - 1h 11m
24.Qh5; 9m 44s - 25m
25.Rf1; 4m 29s - 17m
30.Qg4; 59sec - ???
|
|
| Apr-29-08 | | slomarko: Radjabov behaved like a bad loser. he should look at the press of Inarkiev/Navara today they both analysed the game in friendly spirit.
btw 
click for larger viewhis error was to play Nf5? this move is bad correct is of of course Qg4 (then e5? is not possible because of Bf7!). |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | Whitehat1963: <Radjabov behaved like a bad loser.> Hate to say it, but isn't that part of being a "great champion"? Think Kasparov, Fischer, Capablanca. Losing is just something that never fit in the minds of such egos. |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | Ezzy: Also I don't think it is a good idea to have someone go through a game for 15 minutes whilst your opponent sits in a chair not being part of it. Game analysis should be done seperate from the press conference. |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | slomarko: i don't agree. he could have joined Carlsen same as Navara did today with Inarkiev or Radjabov himself did with Mamedyarov. |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | Ezzy: <he could have joined Carlsen same as Navara did today with Inarkiev or Radjabov himself did with Mamedyarov> Yes He could of joined in, but I think you should have the choice. If you don't want to be part of a demonstration board lecture, you shouldn't have to. |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | zoren: probably just thinking over / analyzing his loss seeing- although from a professional standpoint he should have joined carlsen in the analysis |
|
| Apr-29-08 | | slomarko: <Yes He could of joined in, but I think you should have the choice. If you don't want to be part of a demonstration board lecture, you shouldn't have to.> i don't have a problem with him not joining the demonstration but the thing is he was making stupid expressions it just looked a bit arrogant IMO. he should learn some style from Inarkiev who is very gracious both in victory and in defeat. |
|
| Apr-30-08 | | percyblakeney: Sosonko thinks that he played better than Carlsen in J Sampouw vs Sosonko, 1982 when discussing the variation at Chesspro but maybe it was Sampouw playing worse than Radjabov: http://chesspro.ru/_events/2008/bak... |
|
| Apr-30-08 | | Atking: <but maybe it was Sampouw playing worse than Radjabov:> :) Obviously |
|
| Apr-30-08 | | percyblakeney: <:) Obviously>
It turns out that Sampouw scored -17 in that tournament and finished last with a huge margin. |
|
| May-02-08 | | Hesam7: <slomarko: Radjabov behaved like a bad loser.> I watched the entire press conference after seeing your comment, where did he behave like a bad loser? He was quite when Carlsen was commenting and then spoke briefly confirming what Carlsen had said about his opening choice. Now Kasparov was a bad loser, for example see his behavior in the closing ceremony of Linares 2003. |
|
| May-02-08 | | slomarko: look the expressions he makes when Carlsen showed the game. |
|
| May-03-08 | | rogge: I think Radja looked bored during the press conference. And p____ off after losing. Quite understandable. As someone said <show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser>. |
|
| May-03-08 | | Augalv: I think Teimour felt pretty uncomfortable with Magnus right behind him explaining everybody how he beat him. |
|
| May-08-08 | | Ruslan82: hello i'm a newbie in chessgames but i'm confuse why did'nt white queen take the knight on 20.f4.If he take the opportunity he should easily mate the black king |
|
| May-08-08 | | slomarko: well mr.newbie if white takes the knight 
click for larger view
black plays e6!
click for larger view
and white is toasted because Qh5
click for larger view
is forced and then black plays Rg5 and its all over.
click for larger view |
|
| May-08-08 | | hitman84: <Ruslan82>Welcome to CG.com! If white plays 20.Qxg6 e6 21.Qh5 Rxg5 22.Qh4 g3
and black is clearly better.
|
|
| Nov-01-08 | | Tom Bird: Anyone looked at 36.Nxe2? |
|
| Nov-01-08 | | slomarko: 36.Ne2 losses easily 36...Qf7 37.gf7 g2
click for larger view
black will pick the f-pawn with the king and then play Bh6-Be3 |
|
| Jan-15-09 | | Mulyahnto: <black will pick the f-pawn with the king and then play Bh6-Be3> or maybe straight up Bd4 (if c3 isn't played by then) |
|
| Oct-30-09 | | MasterOfChaos: i accidentally analyzed the game with an engine just now...did anybody see the easy draw chance Radja missed on 32 move he played Qf3+ with Qd7! its a dead draw... |
|
| Nov-11-09 | | mrriddler: <MasterOfChaos> Think the live commentators even saw that as it was played. Radjabov was horrendously down on time though. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 20...Rxg5