So he studied that possibility not only up to where he won a piece, but past that to 22...Rxh2 23 Rxe7 Rh1+ 24 Bf1 Rf8

click for larger view

<NS - starts, FC comments how amazed he is at Nak's calculational powers "He deserves a draw">

https://youtu.be/oE7z-O_pwfc?t=347

<FC- "The thing is that you know about the possibility, but you don't know how difficult it is."

...

NS - "(Referring to Nak, amazed to see White with move and piece up, but Black has drawing chances) ... the guy's a genius."

FC - "... I prepared this... I mentioned Nc6 as an interesting option, and basically my notes say that nobody will ever go for this. ... but then he went for this ... but Ng8 was a very unwelcome surprise">

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oE7...

1) his knowledge of the game to come out on top in tactical skirmishes (nobody said a tactician had to be an ignoramus mainly driven by off-the-cuff inspirations),

2) his knowledge of the other player (C was constantly talking about his analysis of how far Nak had seen ahead),

3) his imagination (whether in preparations or during the game).

" but I think the ones I mentioned are more important than most closely mimicking Stockfish, which strikes me as a rather degrading objective for humans."

Agree 100% with that and the whole post.

---

It does appear there was some opening shadow boxing going on.

Here

click for larger view

in Caruana vs Nakamura, 2016 Nakamura played 7...h6 and walked into a minefield.

This time he opted for 7...Qb6 a position he has never had as Black and Caruana has never had as White.

Here

click for larger view

Nakamura as White a few months ago in Nakamura vs I Nepomniachtchi, 2017 played 8.h3 and won.

Nakamura may have picked up an improvement from after game analysis for Black and was perhaps wondering did White have an improvement on his own play as White v Nepo.

Agree 100% with that and the whole post. >

Agree 100% with that and the whole post. >

<I suppose a lot of people think improving at chess is a waste of time, but it's strange to see that attitude endorsed on the website.>

This doesn't imply improving?:
<It's not necessarily the person who calculates most quickly like a computer but rather the player who best uses:

1) his knowledge of the game to come out on top in tactical skirmishes (nobody said a tactician had to be an ignoramus mainly driven by off-the-cuff inspirations),

<FC - "... I prepared this... I mentioned Nc6 as an interesting option, and basically my notes say that nobody will ever go for this. ... but then he went for this ... but Ng8 was a very unwelcome surprise">

I think he is saying "but Ng8 was a very welcome surprise."

<But Caruana slip out 8.Qd3 and had Nakamura hoping around the minefield again till he trod on one.">

Excellent metaphor. That's how I used to feel when I used to blitz with IMs in the park: Now what trap am I going to fall into?

Sometimes friends would tell me: You can learn all about it by reading this chess book (and that one, and that one), but Keypusher's right (coincidentally it seems, since he obviously didn't read what I wrote) that I have never had (or found) the time for an infinite amount of book preparation. Unfortunately, I have to work for a living and my job leads me to study other infinitely time-consuming fields (like foreign languages and literature).

It was just my take on what was possibly going on in the opening.

Here.

click for larger view

my 8.h3 should of course be 8.a3 and yes people have played Qxb2 here and resigned after 8...Qxb2 9.Na4.

(If Caruana had lost that one he would have been lambasted for setting opening traps and showing no respect.)

"I have to work for a living and my job leads me to study other infinitely time-consuming fields (like foreign languages and literature)."

The bright side is you can buy and read foreign chess books without waiting for them to get translated....and hiked up in price.

Not too sure what K.P. means, maybe he picked up on the mention of Stockfish and ' closely mimicking Stockfish' thinking you cannot improve unless you use a computer.

The old great masters kept chess in the public eye and popular, add in all the editors of chess magazines, the newspaper column writers.

The 1,000's of unknown organisers and unpaid controllers who help run tournaments and of course the unpaid posts of all those who kept chess clubs running. (in my experience it has always been down to one or two dedicated individuals in every club.)

Without all those the creating and building of a chess machine for the general public may not have been a viable financial idea and the progress they have made today may never happened.

<The 1,000's of unknown organisers and unpaid controllers who help run tournaments and of course the unpaid posts of all those who kept chess clubs running.

Without all those the creating and building of a chess machine for the general public may not have been a viable financial idea and the progress they have made today may never happened.>

Going back to your earlier post (sorry for the delay but i just staggered off a 7-hour flight), I actually managed to trap somebody once with that poison pawn variation Na4, but really strong players usually have an antidote to the poison in the more sophisticated variations.

Of course I'm not privy to the details but 'invited' usually entails one or two of the following, bed and board, travel expenses, an appearance fee. Often all three.

Shirov could be invited to these things and his appearance would be quire refreshing but his under 2700 grade is not what the organisers/sponsors want.

Ivanchuk! The great chess inigma.

You have heard of Schrödinger's cat. What about Bill Hartston's cat.

He says cats don't play chess because they don't want to.

I sometimes think if Ivanchuk wanted to he could be World Champion, he just does not want too.

----

I've had a thought. (I'm dangerous when I start thinking.)

Carlsen has figured out the only way he can breach the elusive 2900 barrier is to share his grade amongst other players by dropping points, there are now 6 players in the 2800+ club.

He needs these guys to get higher grades and then...and only then..will he go back to his winning ways feeding off their inflated grades to reach 2900.

I hadn't heard of Schrödinger's cat: "a cat, a flask of poison, and a radioactive source are placed in a sealed box. If an internal monitor (e.g. Geiger counter) detects radioactivity (i.e. a single atom decaying, the flask is shattered, releasing the poison [pawn?], which kills the cat"(courtesy of Wiki).

Quite the morbid thought experiment, I shudder to think what else S. fantasized about in his spare time :-)

I agree that cats don't want to play chess but I bet they're thoroughly capable of modifying positions left on the board overnight.

If you're wondering why it took me so long to reply, I'm just coming out of my coma. Spoken like a man who's never heard this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZC... (Prokofiev was a very good chessplayer by the way), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vc0..., or this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sfm....

Anyway, they're both great, including as a duo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJh....

The Yehudi Menuhin comment.

My post before that I used the George Bernard Shaw quote hinting that no matter what anyone posts there will always be someone on here to disagree.

You then happen slip in that Oistrakh was a great violinist. I just had to disagree.

The fact I know diddly-squat about any violinist makes it perfect. With a lot of Kibitzers here the least they know the more intense their opinion.