|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-16-13 | | csmath: <I saw people trashing Nakamura for his dubious opening play and obvious missing the Nb6--Nc4 idea on the live arena at chessbomb during this game but remained silent. I knew he would put up the resistance of a staph infection and he did. Why he was so willing to enter such a dark and dangerous jungle for the knife fight with kramnik is a mystery but I guess it doesn't matter if you have better night vision.> There is nothing heroic about this game.
Nakamura entered into lousy and probably completely lost position and only by a "grace" of Kramnik's blunders Naka survived somehow and even won the game. This is one of those typical rapid games when somebody messes up and wastes a perfectly good game. It happens to everybody but it does not deserve any accolades. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | SirRuthless: <csmath> You are entitled to your opinion of course... Nakamura could have gone in the tank and attempted some desparado he knew would fail but he dug in and played the endgame very well and found enough complications to drag kramnik into time pressure while improving his own clock situation. He then outplayed kramnik in the endgame. Nothing special in the opening or middlgame and very special in the endgame. I believe this game and the humiliating fashion in which kramnik lost will have future implications. Nakamura is simply better than kramnik now. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | mike1: outplayed Kramnik????? |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | anjyplayer: Very very difficult game, and won beautifully. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | csmath: <He then outplayed kramnik in the endgame.> No he did not. Kramnik shot himself in the foot because he played for a win not because he had problems. For example he could easily played 42. ...Kxd7 (if he could not find 42. ...Bf8) and the game would be without any risks for him although the draw would have been likely. Then he proceeded to play for "win" even though he had none in sight. < I believe this game and the humiliating fashion in which kramnik lost will have future implications. Nakamura is simply better than kramnik now> In your mind. Contrary to your opinion, I see no evidence of anything else than one more blunderous game from this tournament. |
|
Dec-16-13
 | | tamar: Garry's tweet on Hikaru's twitter account-
<Garry Kasparov @Kasparov63 16hCongrats @GMHikaru for big win in London! Comments on his opponents' errors are strange. That is how you win! Push hard & punish mistakes!> |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | csmath: Kasparov is a funny guy in this. He does not like either of these two players yet he started to be complimentary of Nakamura recently. Is this some sort of FIDE politics? He has been trying really hard to get into Magnus's behind as well. :-) Face it, this game is one of those games when passer is all you have to try to survive and all you do is to try to get it to promotion. There is absolutely nothing out of ordinary in Nakamura's play. As for black it is hard to find the win in short time but it is also interesting that Kramnik attempted to win "at all costs" and then lost which is what often happens and it is actually typical. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | csmath: What I see in this tournament is nothing new. Naka has been the best blitz player in the world for a while now. He has ability to think fast and is not error prone (as much as Kramnik) which is important. He is also very confident in his blitz/rapid play. That is all known and verifiable. Does that mean that he is getting better in classical time control? Who knowns, perhaps he is although from my own point of view I don't think he changed his game in any way. I think he is getting a little more cautious in long games which could help. After all he is one of the top 4-5 players in the world right now and has been for a while. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | parisattack: <csmath: What I see in this tournament is nothing new. Naka has been the best blitz player in the world for a while now. He has ability to think fast and is not error prone (as much as Kramnik) which is important. He is also very confident in his blitz/rapid play. That is all known and verifiable.
Does that mean that he is getting better in classical time control? Who knowns, perhaps he is although from my own point of view I don't think he changed his game in any way. I think he is getting a little more cautious in long games which could help. After all he is one of the top 4-5 players in the world right now and has been for a while.> Naka has actually moved up further than I expected with his somewhat ragged style. But I think its great to have a player or two willing to take risks, shake things up at the Elite level. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | DrChopper: So if you make blunders, it doesn't proves anything, but if you make mistakes you're just bad?! I don't see the point to compare blitz/rapid with classical game. The only conclusion you can say about this game is that Nakamura calculate fast and precisely in low time control and that he is very good in blitz/rapid. The tactics made by Naka were also interesting for a rapid game. If you talk about classical control, Nakamura and Kramnik are near equal and as much dominant for now. However I think Kramnik's play decrease while Naka is upping. Anyway, chess is a sport and everything can happen because everybody make errors. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | SirRuthless: <csmath> I think Nakamura and Kasparov through mutual distaste for Carlsen have found common ground and decided to push the beds together again. I reiterate that Nakamura has passed Kramnik in classical chess and really any time control of chess. Whether this is due to Kramnik's decline or Nakamura's rising, I am not sure. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | Shams: Kasparov sure blows a lot of sunshine Carlsen's way for supposedly disliking him. And say, when did Garry start hiding his feelings about other people? If you have any evidence Kasparov has a "distaste" for Magnus, you should share it. Inferences drawn from the mere fact that Carlsen decided he no longer wanted to hire Garry as his trainer will receive no points. |
|
Dec-16-13
| | tamar: A match between these two would be highly interesting. Why not? Nakamura needs match experience, and even though he is #3 in live ratings, most of the chess world still believes Kramnik is better. Let the bidding begin! |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | rogge: <mutual distaste>, what a jerk. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | SirRuthless: <tamar> How about a 960 match. That would be even more interesting... |
|
Dec-16-13
 | | perfidious: Notice to anyone expecting corroboration from <SirRuthless>: don't hold your breath. Same as <shach> when it come to Kasparov, he has a special pipeline to the great man's thoughts, as he knows better than Garry Kimovich what is in his head. |
|
Dec-16-13
| | tamar: Nakamura would win a 960. I don't think Kramnik has ever participated in that format, while Naka beat Aronian in a final some years ago. Dream 960 match would be Carlsen-Nakamura. That one would be hard to call. |
|
| Dec-16-13 | | QueentakesKing: A won or drawn game by black gone wild! |
|
| Dec-18-13 | | Jambow: You guys are not giving Kramnik enough credit, yes against Nakamura in particular he seems to blunder and play below par too often. Kramnik is advancing his game by taking risks, now he will learn when not too hopefully. During the candidates when the show down was between him and Carlsen he really went for it and did well I might add. Learning to push more often and win with black at the RIGHT time could make him stronger than ever, which isn't easy at his age but Gelfand doesn't know it! |
|
Dec-18-13
 | | plang: It looks like this is being counted as a classical win intheir head-to head match up - it should not be. |
|
| Dec-19-13 | | SirRuthless: <plang> Actually it isn't. Nakamura really is plus 2 vs kramnik. +5-3 the rest draws. I know it seems improbably but it's true. Recently Nakamura has been winning between them in classical. Call it luck or whatever it really doesn't matter. |
|
| Dec-20-13 | | Mr. Bojangles: < I believe this game and the humiliating fashion in which kramnik lost will have future implications. Nakamura is simply better than kramnik now> Lmao |
|
| Dec-22-13 | | RedShield: <Over the last year, Nakamura has beaten Kramnik several times, which seems to have sapped Kramnik’s confidence and led him to play tentatively.> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/22/c... Twice is several? |
|
| Dec-23-13 | | SirRuthless: Over the last year and a half 4 or 5 times against 1 maybe 2 losses... |
|
| Mar-29-14 | | Rama: In the press conference following his tournament-winning draw with Karjakin in Siberia today, Vishy says he took Krammy out to dinner after this game and in conversation Vlad sort-of talked him into participating in the 2014 Candidates. An unforced error? |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
