Nakamura is a 2750 GM. The fact is, there are quite a few 2750 GMs and one or more 2800s, and only one of them can be World Champion at any one time. And match play is different from tournament play.
Ben Finegold made some comments on the US Chess Championship coverage that obviously he would favor Nakamura over Gelfand, and over almost anyone. So did Gelfand qualify for, and win, the Candidates matches just by accident? Did some big-money guy step in and make all those other guys lose to him? Did Gelfand really not play that final game to become the only one to beat Grischuk in the Candidates match? It was a game in a style that I don’t think Nakamura could play. It was just unbalanced enough that Grischuk could not get his bearings (for the first time in the tournament), but not unbalanced enough that Grischuk could find an attack.
It’s nice to have national heroes, but Nakamura has a very tough job ahead of him to get to and win the World Championship. There are other brilliant players out there too.
Does anyone else dislike Nakamura’s tendency to try to win by exhaustion? Well over 100 moves so far today, good thing young Lenderman has stayed cool and collected. I almost hope Nakamura makes a blunder and Lenderman can win, as punishment for dragging this out and out.
Mr Quinn writes, “Does anyone else dislike Nakamura’s tendency to try to win by exhaustion?” He then accuses the Grandmaster of, “…dragging this out and out.”
I do not think Mr Quinn could be more wrong! GM Nakamura is all that is good in chess these days. If only more GMs had his fighting spirit we would not be subjected to the boring match for the world championship that is boring us to death. I followed every move and for part of the game GM Lenderman had chances. Could the reason he did not offer a draw be that he, too, was looking for a chance to win? This was an epic battle; a titanic struggle. It will be remembered as long as chess is played. I was completely riveted to the game and the coverage by Beniffer, which was excellent! In covering all the games all those hours Beniffer may be as tired, or even more tired than the players!
I cannot help recalling a game played by my friend, the Legendary Georgia Ironman and a young fellow also from Atlanta a few years back at the US Masters in Hendersonville, NC.
Brookshear, H Timothy - Francis, Benjamin 0-1
C18 US Masters op
- d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6 3. e4 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Qa5 7. Bd2 Qa4 8. Nf3Nc6 9. Be3 f6 10. Be2 c4 11. O-O Bd7 12. Qb1 O-O-O 13. Bf4 f5 14. Ng5 Rf8 15. h4 h6 16. Nh3 g6 17. Qc1 Rf7 18. Bd2 Rfh7 19. f4 Be8 20. Rf3 Nge7 21. Rf2 Rg7 22. Qb2 Kb8 23. Rb1 Nc8 24. Bf3 Nb6 25. Qc1 Rhg8 26. Kf1 Nd8 27. Ng1 Qd7 28. Nh3 Qe7 29. g3 Ba4 30. Ke2 Nc6 31. Qb2 Kc7 32. Rg1 Na8 33. Rfg2 b5 34. Be3 a5 35. Ra1 Kd7 36. Nf2 Rb8 37. Nd1 Nb6 38. Qc1 h5 39. Nb2 Rb7 40. Qd2 Rg8 41. Rgg1Rgb8 42. Rgb1 Qf8 43. Kf2 Ra8 44. Qe2 Qe8 45. Kg2 Ke7 46. Nd1 Kd7 47. Kf2 Kc8 48. Kg2 Qe7 49. Nf2 Kb8 50. Nd1 Raa7 51. Nb2 Kc8 52. Kf2 Ra8 53. Kg2 Rab8 54. Kf2 Na7 55. Kg2 Na8 56. Kf2 Nc7 57. Kg2 Qd7 58. Kf2 Rb6 59. Kg2 Nc6 60. Kf2 Ne7 61. Kg2 Ne8 62. Kf2 Ng8 63. Kg2 Ng7 64. Kf2 Nh6 65. Kg2 Ng4 66. Bxg4 fxg4 67. Bf2 Nf5 68. Qd2 Kc7 69. Qc1 Qe8 70. Nxa4 bxa4 71. Rxb6 Rxb6 72. Rb1 Qb8 73. Rxb6 Qxb6 74. Kf1 Kb7 75. Ke2 Ka6 76. Qa1 Qb8 77. Be1 Ne7 78. Bd2 Qf8 79. Qb2 Nc6 80. Be1 Na7 81. Bd2 Nb5 82. Bc1 Qf5 0-1
I cannot help but wonder if Mr Quinn would have advocated the players agree to a draw in lieu of trying to “win by exhaustion?”
I cannot help but wonder about anyone who would write such as Mr Quinn has written. I wonder why the man is involved with the game of chess if he thinks the way he does.
Armchair Warrior
They almost made the 50 move rule; they made 40 I think. Then exchanged a pair of pieces. 
It’s possible to have an exciting long game but this was not it, as far as I’m concerned. I can’t speak for Lenderman but I think he would have taken a draw at any point. I don’t think the commentary said anything to the contrary.
Glad you enjoyed the game and saw value in those 40 moves. I saw about 10 moves worth of value in them. Our differing views of the game probably come from differing evaluation of the positions in it. A day or two ago, Nakamura also forced Onischuk (I think) to play an ending out to K vs. K. You’re free to call this fighting spirit. I call it ridiculous against a good GM.
Anand gave a short draw today against the Sveshnikov. GM Sveshnikov himself criticized Gelfand’s exchange into an opposite-bishops position, but it was very effective in taking the air out of the position. That is Gelfand’s job as Black in this match, and according to Shipov it was a theoretical novelty that worked and showed how to produce a draw in that sub-variation. So it was a quick game that produced new theoretical knowledge, unlike Nakamura’s very long game that may have produced no new knowledge. Different strokes for different folks, Mr. Bacon.
No Mr Quinn, our differing views of the game come emanate from your disparaging words toward GM Nakamura in accusing him of trying to win by exhaustion. From what you have written I can only assume you would have said the same thing about Bobby Fischer’s win in game thirteen of the world championship match in 1972, the greatest game I have ever seen (and many GMs agree). The game was technically ‘even’ but Boris was unable to prove the theory in practice. To his credit GM Lenderman was able to prove it to Hikaru yesterday.
I just got off the phone with the Legendary Georgia Ironman and we discussed this exchange, without my mentioning his game with the young NM Francis. He brought it up, saying, “The position was locked up and I began to run short of time and Ben kept the pressure on. Although I was upset after losing such a game, I do not blame him because he did what he had to do to win.” And that is the point, sir, GM Nakamura tries to WIN! Winning is what the game is all about, Mr Guinn, is it not?
I watched Hikaru play in Sturbridge, Mass, in 2002. The top boards would agree to an early draw and go next door to eat and drink, but Hikaru was having no part of it. The top boards would be empty until he worked his way up and the other GMs knew they would have to fight that day because nakamura would force them to play! If you look at the games of the highest rated player in the world today, Magnus Carlsen, you will find that he continues trying to find any opening in an even position in orrder to win.
You write that the Nakamura-Lenderman battle of epic porportions,“… produced no new knowledge.” Is that how you determine an interesting game, Mr Quinn?
You write, “It’s possible to have an exciting long game but this was not it, as far as I’m concerned.” Did you really not find it exciting when GM Lederman played c5 breaking the game open?
You have a right to your opinion, sir. Different strokes for different folks, Mr Quinn. If you cannot derive enjoyment from a game like this, and feel the need to post such a ridiculous accusation toward a fine, worthy champion with an indomitable will to win, I can only feel pity for you, sir.
Armchair Warrior
When does stating one’s opinion bring about such righteous indignation? By the way this is only an opinion.
Shipov was happy again today and says this WC match is producing a lot of new theoretical knowledge. He wishes it were longer, because then more opening theory would be updated. Short, elegant games, after which you know something you didn’t know before; new trails are blazed. Yes I do find that interesting and valuable.
I did post the original comment, that Mr. Bacon objected to, to raise the issue. It is still my opinion that this sort of “fighting spirit” is at best a mixed bag. Mr. Bacon has a different opinion.
BTW Kamsky-Nakamura today was utterly fascinating. Congrats to both players for the game, and to Nakamura for the win!
Well Arti, now we know there is one person in the chess world enjoying the world championship match… 