|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-13-16 | | 1971: <amuralid> Great analysis. With players so equal in strength it's it's small decisions like an opening choice that tip the scales and decide the outcome. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | sonia91: <Sally Simpson: PS: Just read that Karjakin spent 25 minutes pondering the position after 29..Nxg3. I may have to re-write my Karjakin was not lucky bit or maybe he was just savouring the moment or considering the amount of time he gets in time trouble simply getting a thrill watching his time evaporate. 25 minutes is a long time as this level to refute a trick you saw coming.> Actually the times given by c24, chessbomb etc., are not correct, the game suddenly frozen afer Nxg3 and while the board was still showing the position after the aforementioned move, Nakamura already resigned. The remaining moves were added after. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | Pulo y Gata: <Mar-13-16 1971: I agree with <jphamlore> Nakamura playing the QID (Karjakin's pet opening) against him was a colossal blunder and Karjakin proved it by playing this game in textbook, model game fashion. Just a strange decision from Nakamura.> Ok, i then agree that opening is the be-all and end-all of chess. Thanks for enlightening us. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | 1971: It's not but it determines the style of play which suits some players better than others. The Queens Indian is an opening that Karjakin has much more experience than Nakamura so he better understands the underlying themes and plans. It was clear even in the post game analysis when Karjakin demonstrated typical ideas for the position that Nakamura missed. |
|
Mar-13-16
 | | Sally Simpson: Thanks Sonia91,
I got it from here on the World Championship Candidates thread: "Rama: Naka spent 8-9 minutes on the N-sac, then 25 minutes smelling it while Sergei worked it out. Don't we know the feeling." I knew boards were frozen everywhere, I figured this guy saw the live feed. Good. No re-write.
Hi Ulhumbrus,
I see you too have spotted the three on the trot moves all weakening c7. I'm sure Problemists will have a term for it (they have a unique term for everything else.) If not then it's a Nakamura! Hi Pulo,
Of course you are right. This posting in hindsight is a wonderful gift. Nakamura did not flip a coin to decide what opening to play. Rather than sit there waiting to see what improvement Karjakin had up his sleeve v his KID, he made Karjakin wonder what improvement Nakamua had v his QID. The possible pre-game plan being to get Karjakin to analyse everything into dust, get him into his habitual time and trouble and bounce him with a tactic. The slight flaw being Karjakin did not get into time trouble and the tactic had a hole in it. Hindsight (the kibitzers domain) dictate the whole plan was written in pencil on the back of a brown envelop but it's better than throwing arms up in despair howling why did Nakamura play the QID like he did it on the spur of the moment. Pula is right again (he's rarely wrong) if Nakamura had won the crowd here would be lording him as the new Lasker. The game was lost by a piece of miscalculation which could have come from any opening. As for style, players of Nakamura's ilk have the ability to infuse complications in any opening and Nakamura is much more than just a one trick pony. Kings Domain is closer saying Nakamura got impatient and miscalculated. It's as simple as that. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | 1971: Except he lost. There is no if he would have won talk because he lost. When you find the door to that alternate reality just jump in and stay there. He played into his opponents most well known opening. That's pretty stupid. He could have played the Queens Gambit instead, but he walked into Karjakin's pet line instead. An idiotic move. Fact is he lost. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | 1971: Hindsight is my domain but playing is too as I would beat both of you in a game even if you combined your strength. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | 1971: And unless you accept my challenge and beat me you're just two patzers looking from the same low vantage point agreeing with each other. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | Pulo y Gata: Lol, take it easy 1971. There is <if> talk precisely because he lost. In fact, there would be an <if> talk if he won, or even drawn. that's part of kibitzing. don't take disagreements too seriously. If you're visiting the philippines anytime soon, let me know. We can play some games then. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | 1971: There's always the Internet to play. I have no issue with you, we were having a discussion, but when HomerSimpson says "hindsight is the kibitzers domain" it sounds like he's implying I can't play. Because as always on this site there a personal insult to every argument instead of simply presenting your case. The challenge is still there, we can play to see who's a better player, I'll even play into your pet line to carry on the theme of this discussion. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | Pulo y Gata: I look forward to kibitzing on 1971 vs Sally Simpson then, since you both play online. I also can't promise I won't make subjunctive comments as in this game. My offer stands too for when you get to visit the philippines. I'm rooting for Sally, if I may say. ;-) |
|
Mar-13-16
 | | keypusher: <1971: There's always the Internet to play. I have no issue with you, we were having a discussion, but when HomerSimpson says "hindsight is the kibitzers domain" it sounds like he's implying I can't play. > Ludicrous. I guess any leap of logic works for a man if he is determined to feel insulted. Sally is calling you a kibitzer because that's what you are, at the moment. He's not saying or even implying anything about how well you play chess. |
|
| Mar-13-16 | | MCDreamz: <1971> I assure you this pretentious <Pulo> has nothing but empty boastings like his idol Nakameagol. He's probably well read but nothing more. He's got a few kiddie skills but that's it. He is just some patzer that even a self-entitled player like me will easily dispose off. I don't know why he always avoids "internet" challenges even from fellow Filipino posters here when he plays almost everyday on chess.com as <bw-pulsar>. As for <Sally>, he is a rated player but his rating is honestly quite meaningless in the eyes of this self-entitled player. You are quite right. They are both well informed, well read patzers but patzers nonetheless. |
|
Mar-13-16
| | Sally Simpson: Hi 1971,
Giri just played v Karjakin's infamous QID. sacked two pieces Nakamura style and looks like he had to bale out with a draw. "He played into his opponents most well known opening. That's pretty stupid." So now both Giri and Nakamura are stupid. :)
And Pula is right yet again! even you have slipped into the 'what if' mode. It's part of the hindsight kibitzing fun. We revel in it. "And unless you accept my challenge and beat me..."
You don't sound too confident.
But I'm well known in Scotland if ever there I'm always up for a few skittles games. |
|
Mar-13-16
 | | perfidious: <Geoff...."He played into his opponents most well known opening. That's pretty stupid." So now both Giri and Nakamura are stupid.>
Powerful lot of foolishness going on for a bunch who can supposedly play. The things I miss having that poster in la-la land..... |
|
| Mar-14-16 | | Sokrates: <1971: And unless you accept my challenge and beat me you're just two patzers looking from the same low vantage point agreeing with each other.> <MCDreamz: <1971> I assure you this pretentious <Pulo> has nothing but empty boastings like his idol Nakameagol. He's probably well read but nothing more. He's got a few kiddie skills but that's it. He is just some patzer that even a self-entitled player like me will easily dispose off ...> Rude, personal insults = placement on my ignore list. Off you go. |
|
| Mar-14-16 | | 1971: Sokrates - you have never once said anything thought provoking. HomerSimpson - When you said hindsight is the kibitzers domain it sounded like you were implying that I don't play. So why don't we play a match on the internet to see who really knows what they're talking about? My claim is your a patzer and your judgement really doesn't count. |
|
Mar-14-16
 | | moronovich: <1971: Sokrates - you have never once said anything thought provoking.> Sokrates is a higly esteemed veteran kibitzer on CG.You are a rookie. But it is never too late to look and learn. |
|
Mar-14-16
| | Sally Simpson: Hi 1971,
Don't know how you can construe:
"Hindsight (the kibitzers domain) dictate the whole plan was written in pencil on the back of a brown envelop but it's better than throwing arms up in despair howling why did Nakamura play the QID like he did it on the spur of the moment," As meaning 'you' cannot play chess.
If you read it, then it's me who is using hindsight and if for one second I thought you were a beginner to chess I'd be the last person on earth to throw an insult at you. I play on Red Hot Pawn. (greenpawn34) I only play subscribers. I only have one game on the go ATM as I have somehow hacked my way the final of a tournament and am expecting 16-18 games to start any day now. (I learned from experience if you have too many games on the go then you drop big clangers.). But if you want a game or two, you know where I am. (but no Catalans!) |
|
Mar-14-16
| | perfidious: <1971> is the Donald Trump of these pages: determined to find obloquy where there is none, who draws unwarranted inferences and is generally a pain in the fundament. <Geoff....If you read it, then it's me who is using hindsight and if for one second I thought you were a beginner to chess I'd be the last person on earth to throw an insult at you.> We were all there once--it is hypocritical and unreasonable in my view for anyone to heap scorn upon another for being a beginner, though I have known such people and have little respect for such attitudes. |
|
| Mar-14-16 | | Sokrates: <moronovich> Af hjertet tak! |
|
Mar-14-16
| | moronovich: Du er altid velkommen <Sokrates> ! |
|
Mar-15-16
 | | Penguincw: Video analysis of this game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMB.... |
|
| Mar-23-16 | | Garech: A classic case of "the sting in the end of the tail" (of a combination), as Fischer put it. Interesting comments above about the dangers of playing the QID defence against Karjakin; I think there's a lot of truth to them. Naka never really recovered from this loss. He must be totally heartbroken at the moment (round ten was today and he remains in second-to-last position). He'd talked about nothing but the candidate's for six months or more; this was his big chance and now he'll have to wait another two years, assuming that he qualifies. To quote F. Scott Fitzgerald:
"...He had come a long way to this blue lawn, and his dream must have seemed so close that he could hardly fail to grasp it. He did not know that it was already behind him, somewhere back in that vast obscurity beyond the city, where the dark fields of the republic rolled on under the night..." |
|
| Dec-18-23 | | Gaito: 
click for larger viewThe worst tactical trick is when you end up swindling yourself through deficient calculation. That was what happened to poor Nakamura in this game: he simply overlooked that after 33.Qf2! White will regain the piece by dint of the threat 34.Rc7. Had he been more careful in his calculations, he would perhaps have traded knights on d4 instead of sacrificing on g3. In that hypothetical case, the game would probably have ended in a draw. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
