Yeh i played through all the games from Saint Louise, what a great tournament! I really like MLV, he's such a fantastic player. To me he is the kind of player that Mamedyarov (M*) should aspire to be. M* has incredible tactical ability but he plays Classical chess like he's playing blitz. His style is great to watch, I really appreciate his flare and enjoy his games but he seems to lack the ability to turn down a tactic. This whole ..g5 idea that appears in both the games above. The threat of ..g5 is stronger than the execution (imo). Why not just develop? What is so terrible about putting the King safe? Tal was a whizz bang amazing sacrifice player, but he could Castle. If Mamedyarov can calculate a sharp variation, he can calculate a quiet one too. If he's is going to mix it with Carlsen/Caruana then he needs to become more Universal. Caruana didn't even have to try to force a weakness in his position, he knew M* would jump at the first opportunity to do it himself...
Originally posted by Marinkatomb Yeh i played through all the games from Saint Louise, what a great tournament! I really like MLV, he's such a fantastic player. To me he is the kind of player that Mamedyarov (M*) should aspire to be. M* has incredible tactical ability but he plays Classical chess like he's playing blitz. His style is great to watch, I really appreciate his flare and enj ...[text shortened]... e a weakness in his position, he knew M* would jump at the first opportunity to do it himself...
do you think this is why Nakamura can have a tough time against these guys, he is too blitzy, like M*
Originally posted by robbie carrobie do you think this is why Nakamura can have a tough time against these guys, he is too blitzy, like M*
I'm not sure about him. I think his problems are more emotional/psychological. It's clear that on his day he can beat anyone (i include Carlsen here, though clearly he has some sort of psychological voodoo thing going on atm). He changed his style quite considerably to try and adapt, with some success. I think he needs to get himself a trainer that understands him. Look at Andy Murray in tennis. He was ever the nearly man for years. As soon as he got together with lendle he found that extra killer punch that was missing. His performance dipped at the crucial moments and Lendle managed to get him through that somehow. Nakamura is the same sort of player imo. If you look at when he won the Tal memorial a few years ago, that was when he was collaborating with Kasparov. I don't want to hand the credit for that win the Kaspa, but i don't think it is a complete coincidence either. Nakamura has a high opinion of himself. If he could get a trainer/coach who doesn't tolerate that nonsense (as i'm sure Kasparov didn't) then he might find that extra killer punch that he is missing. Caruana has a great trainer, as is often reported. It is a rare talent that scales the heights without a good team behind them..
Originally posted by Marinkatomb I'm not sure about him. I think his problems are more emotional/psychological. It's clear that on his day he can beat anyone (i include Carlsen here, though clearly he has some sort of psychological voodoo thing going on atm). He changed his style quite considerably to try and adapt, with some success. I think he needs to get himself a trainer that under ...[text shortened]... is often reported. It is a rare talent that scales the heights without a good team behind them..
Originally posted by sonhouse Then there was Bobby and Capa🙂
Yes they were exceptional. I see Nakamura as a 'Jimmy Connors' sort of player. Big guns going forward, but perhaps not the most dextrous player. Nak could be top in my opinion, but he needs someone to drive him on to find that extra 2 or 3% that would make the difference.
caruana v mamedyarov (explanation please)
07 Oct '14 19:302 edits
Back to Top