< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 13 OF 15 ·
|Jun-12-11|| ||fab4: Ofcourse Qg6 ect.. I underestimated just how bad Naka's position was lol.|
|Jun-12-11|| ||WiseWizard: Btw, Imo any move that gives your opponent a strong initiative/kingside attack merits a full ?.|
|Jun-19-11|| ||Richard Taylor: What defines the Petrosian variation in the QGD?|
|Jun-19-11|| ||Richard Taylor: This is a great game by Carlsen.|
|Jun-19-11|| ||DrMAL: Thanx Kingscrusher for a nice analysis. I had thought 18...Nd5 was overly ambitious and Rybka 4.1 confirmed it to be the first key mistake (instead of 18...Ng4). Naka needs more prudence with players such as Carlsen.|
White on the other hand was a bit overly cautious with 21.Bc1 instead of 21.e6 to push on. Here black put the wrong knight on b6, 21...N5b6 allows Qd5 and N on d7 keeps c5 covered.
26...Re2 was also imprudent, better was 26...Rf5 to keep the pawn on g5 and help defend the king. At this point white was already winning but 28...Rf8 (instead of Re5 back!) sealed it.
|Jun-21-11|| ||Goofy: That Carson is a good player in my book and will go further than this in the near future.|
|Jun-21-11|| ||kappertjes: DrMAL; regarding the according to you overly cautious 21.Bc1. Consider the possibility that Carlsen sees/senses more than you and Rybka. The bishop turns out to be placed perfectly at c1 some 20 moves down the line supporting the attack on blacks KS and at the same time defending against attack at the Qs pawn and against any back-rank action. Just maybe it was worth keeping after all, who is to say?|
|Jun-21-11|| ||DrMAL: Rybka does/did not see anything; I have been a master at chess for decades. Carlsen plays even better than I do, but it is impossible here to anticipate 20 moves later, the game may not even last that long. His moves are not always infallible.|
You point out the obvious that is not in question, yes Carlsen wanted to preserve his bishop and it turned out to function nicely later on. The move was primarily defensive and unnecessary that way. In chess there is such as thing as initiative, and 21.e6 keeps the initiative whereas 21.Bc1 does not, simple as that.
After 21.e6 gxf4 22.exd7 Red8 23.Qxc6 white is up a pawn and knight for bishop but more importantly black is already in big trouble. 21.e6 was better but 21...N7b6 was also a mistake.
|Jun-21-11|| ||kellmano: <Shams: I wish this rivalry were a rivalry.> I second that. I'm a Naka fan, and a couple of years ago I thought he could be Magnus's nemesis. I am yet to be proved right, and events suggest I will not be.|
|Jun-21-11|| ||kappertjes: There is nothing impossible about seeing that the black squares are weak and that after pushing h4-h5 and attack the bishop might turn out useful in attack and defense. |
There is no need to state your credentials, I was not trying to insult you by mentioning Rybka. I did not know what you based your analysis on and usually people criticise GMs with reams of ply 15 analysis. It was btw also not necessary to say that Magnus is 'even better' than you.
In chess there is initiative yes. Also there is debate about how to best use the initiative to better your position/game. In other words there are plans, ideas and ways forward and opinions about which is best. Check Carlsen's discussion of the game at the Bazna site. His plan was to play h4 and attack that way. He did not like e6 as much with the remark that 'it is important here not to rush' or words to that effect and a few lines as to why he did not like it. You disagree with him and say he loses the initiative and e6 is better. That is fine and it is your right to have a different opinion. You, however, are a master in chess (for decades, apparently) and he is the highest rated GM in the world. Because of that just saying you are right will not get you anywhere.
Mind you, my engine agrees with your assessment, but again Magnus may have preferred the clear attack he chose in the game, with the bishop intact for both defence and offence, over the complications he would get for grabbing the pawn. Of course, you would say I am stating the obvious here.
|Jun-21-11|| ||DrMAL: <kellmano:> I think it's a matter of maturity. Naka's style has become much less wild and they are now well matched.|
|Jun-21-11|| ||DrMAL: <kappertjes:> Yes I had already knew of Carlsen's discussion. I don't think he had analyzed the game carefully when remarking that, the quote is from Kasparov originally advice to him from Spassky for his candidates match against Petrosian.|
Whatever, I am not interested in "getting anywhere" by kibitzing on this site. I enjoy analyzing games and do so all the time, recently deciding to post some to help others and interact.
Carlsen's decision does not need explanation, his credentials speak for him. It's a matter of style, where caution and pace particularly against players like Naka is very prudent.
In this particular instance, if Naka had not made an immediate mistake on the same move (21) the game may have turned out quite differently. Either way, my commentary is not a criticism of Magnus the guy is amazing to me.
|Jun-21-11|| ||kappertjes: Just FYI I can't make sense of the part about the Kasparov quote. |
With the 'getting anywhere' I meant 'does not support your argument in any way' as in 'Just saying that you are right does not ....'.
Anyway, I like analysing and people analysing too, so I guess thanks for the kibitzing!
|Jun-21-11|| ||LIFE Master AJ: Carlsen defeated Nakamura handily.
Nak might have won Tata Steel (2011), but this shows he probably needs more experience at the top level.
|Jun-21-11|| ||DrMAL: <kappertjes: Just FYI I can't make sense of the part about the Kasparov quote.> Kasparov emphasizes this in his video "My Story" (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xECx...).|
Yes, I think this game is a good example of Naka needing more experience he never took on a mentor such as Kasparov.
|Jun-21-11|| ||LIFE Master AJ: Anybody ever figure out what exactly "Nak" did worng here?|
6...Bg4!? (maybe - '?!') did not look quite right, but I have a feeling that he missed something, somewhere down the line ...
|Jun-21-11|| ||LIFE Master AJ: 20...Ng4; MIGHT be playable, but I have not "Fritzed" this game yet. (So beware, I may have missed something big.)|
|Jun-21-11|| ||DrMAL: <LIFE Master AJ: Anybody ever figure out what exactly "Nak" did worng here?> Starting with 18...Nd5 instead of 18...Ng4 Naka counterattacks without enough regard for white's attack, a judgment call that seemed dubious when watching.|
|Jun-21-11|| ||KKDEREK: <LIFE Master AJ: Carlsen defeated Nakamura handily.
Nak might have won Tata Steel (2011), but this shows he probably needs more experience at the top level.>|
And he have to stop to cheat..right?
|Jun-21-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: lol, AJ hasn't used his computer so he may have missed something big....|
Btw, AJ -- did you never learn that capitals on the internet is poor etiquette? ("Netiquette".)There is a difference between "might" and "MIGHT". The latter is shouting.
|Jun-22-11|| ||moronovich: <Jun-21-11
LIFE Master AJ: 20...Ng4; MIGHT be playable, but I have not "Fritzed" this game yet. (So beware, I may have missed something big.)>
I am holding my breath.Canīt hardly wait.And it better be big.
|Jun-22-11|| ||TheFocus: I am baffled that an "experienced" master, a Life Master at that, who has played chess since 1966, can not accurately analyze a simple game like this without an engine.|
I also notice that you cannot analyze ANY game without needing an engine.
Of course, playing through your games, I notice that you don't really play that well. You are poor in positional or strategical play and your endgame needs work. This is mainly a result of you playing mostly against class players and rarely against masters. You want to improve your game, <AJ>, you gonna have to play the big boys on a regular basis.
No wonder you have not broken 2300 yet, and remain at your rating floor for so long. And you have been a "master" for how long?
|Jun-22-11|| ||fab4: In answer to <AJ> I think Naka's wheels start coming off after 26..Re2 ?|
I agree with you <TheFocus>.. there's way too much over reliance on engines on this site. All my input is from me.
|Jun-22-11|| ||LIFE Master AJ: Yeah, I ran it by Fritz, 18...Ng4 seemed fine, 18...Nd5; |
... ... ...
(and the red light comes on).
|Jun-22-11|| ||LIFE Master AJ: Its what I keep telling people.
I tell folks all the time, just because the machine does not like a move means that its really bad. The trick is to avoid those moves like 18...Nd5? (??) in this game.
I call moves that actually lose material or overlook key tactics, "GAME-BREAKERS."
I make my students circle them on the scoresheet ...
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 13 OF 15 ·