Kramnik beats Naiditsch, shares lead with Carlsen

19 Responses to “Kramnik beats Naiditsch, shares lead with Carlsen”

1. Castro on July 6th, 2009 2:45 am
   

   
   Who removed the incredible comment of the incredible “ceann” I was about to read in full? LOL (on the previous Dortmund article, I think)
   When I got there, it had disapeared.
   I just remember it talked about this tournament and “Petrofnik” playing…
   Just laughs!

   That comment should fit lovely, after today’s games.
   Once again the defense lots of people love to hate gives us a beautyful game. And yes, by Kramnik, a player some love to hate too…

   Even Peter stressed that it must have been “not Arkadij Naiditsch‚Äôs day”, and that he “went for an innocuous line in which Black can comfortably develop his pieces”.
   Oh lord! Do you really think Naiditsch (someone on 2700) is that na?Øve? Can’t you imagine he sees more than you and me about “innocuous”, and he may have played with some dangerous ideas, and even have foreseen Bxh3 (as I think he did)? And that he (and his plan) was just outplayed by a player in better shape?
   Must the Petrof defense (and it’s “innocuous” white lines) continue to be treated like that.
   I think all 3, Naiditsch, Kramnik and the Petrof, gave a lesson today, but sure, one only takes it if he wants!
2. Castro on July 6th, 2009 2:51 am
   

   By the way, and anyway, if fact the game is a bomb.
3. Tom on July 6th, 2009 7:50 am
   

   “Speaks books” is a nice little Poirotism —- should be “volumes”!
4. Fabrice on July 6th, 2009 8:42 am
   

   Naiditsch’s 16.Ne2 don’t seem so bad because what else White can do against the sack in h3 ? Maybe after black’s 12th move, Blacks are already better and that whole line seems bad for white…
   Yeah, these IGM are very strong and we cannot judge them with simple annotations as “There’s no time for manoeuvering anymore as Black is fully mobilized”. Be carefull lol
5. Arne Moll on July 6th, 2009 9:09 am
   

   @Tom, obviously you’re not familiar with the Queen song ‘Breakthru’. It’s striking how often people correct others for their use of language while instead showing a lack of knowledge themselves.
6. Tom on July 6th, 2009 10:06 am
   

   Ah ha! You’re right, I didn’t know that song and stand corrected. Although I’m not sure an ignorance of Queen lyrics is quite the same as an ignorance of language!
7. Arne Moll on July 6th, 2009 10:42 am
   

   True enough; it’s just always risky to say some form doesn’t occur or is impossible. Next thing you know, it turns out Shakespeare (or Queen) has used it dozens of times!
8. patyolat on July 6th, 2009 12:22 pm
   

   I happen to be Hungarian but can’t stand what L?©k?? does at the table. If he doesn’t like to fight why doesn’t he collect stamps instead? Taking a chance doesn’t seem to be in his dictionary. If his opponent doen’t run into one of his preprepared lines then it is always quitting time for him .

   It is too bad that none of the chess sponsors realize how much more exciting Fischer random matches are where players have to improvise from the first move on.
9. Michael Schwerteck on July 6th, 2009 1:27 pm
   

   I might be wrong, but I think Carlsen could have won with 30…Rf6. Can anyone find a defense for White?
10. gg on July 6th, 2009 1:51 pm
    

    “Must the Petrof defense (and it‚Äôs ‚Äúinnocuous‚Äù white lines) continue to be treated like that”

    Kramnik is the leading Petroff expert in the world and he had one win in a dozen years before playing Naiditsch so it is at least more drawish than the Sicilian.
11. ceann on July 6th, 2009 4:58 pm
    

    WHAT A BORING TOURNAMENT….
12. Castro on July 6th, 2009 5:51 pm
    

    @gg

    I was refering to “hating” the Petroff. If you think having a better record, as black, than the Sicilian, is a reason to hate, so be it! I don’t think so. Maybe the Caro-Kahn sould be hated too… By the way, I don’t play none of these defenses, but I like and respect them all a lot!
    Anyway, being “more drawish” than the Sicilian is understandable, as the Sicilian has that “visualy unbalanced and opened” aproach, which stimulates White to rightaway “do things”, and even try to punish Black. But maybe, if one could be more objective, they give similar oportunities. Who knows?
    The thing I love is when someone rejoices with some white win against the hated Petroff, as if saying: “Here, take that! You were trying not to play chess, but white punished you playing chess”. On those ocasions, I rejoice myself, because it’s funny, but pity that person, as a chess lover, because in fact he is a fairy-tale lover! (Which is nice, but shouldn’t be confused)
13. Castro on July 6th, 2009 6:08 pm
    

    Sorry, by the way, another thing is when we, in open and fully assumed irony or friendly provocation, make that kind of statments.
    In a Breyer-like mood, I myself used to provoque my friends at the club, by calling 1.d4 “anti-chess”. When one of them asked me “Why?”, I answered “Because it is too good”.
    Another “victim” would be the French defense, which I called “That shy advance of the king’s pawn”. Instead, my friend had a diametricaly opposed view. He’d say “1.e4 e6 and White can resign”.
    (You see, we got stuck in the 20’s )
    So, these funny aproaches I understand. Not the pseudo-serious of, for instance, those Petroff-hatters.
14. Castro on July 6th, 2009 6:31 pm
    

    @Michael Schwerteck

    Either you made a profound analysis on that, or 30.Rf6 still needs a reason to really being that dangerous. After 31.Rxa7 it’s 31.Qe5 we must fear, right? But is that so decisive? Haven’t white eventualy at least a perpetual or a fortress anyway? It’s quite an endgame, anyway!
15. christos (greece) on July 6th, 2009 6:34 pm
    

    @patyolat: I do not judge Leko so harshly. In my opinion, all approaches to tournament chess have the right to exist, including Leko’s, who probably takes less risks than anyone else in the world. However, this strategy has led him to important successes in the past, and to wins in major tournaments (Dortmund being one of them).
    Besides, especially in his game against Jakovenko he was playing black, and I think everybody would gladly accept Jakovenko’s draw offer if they were in his shoes.
16. Michael Schwerteck on July 6th, 2009 6:50 pm
    

    @ Castro: After 31.Rxa7 I want to play 31…Qb6 and hide the king on d6 in case of rook checks. White then wins the queen with Ra6, but loses the bishop and the rook ending looks lost to me.
17. Castro on July 6th, 2009 9:06 pm
    

    @Michael Schwerteck

    Nice idea! I didn’t think about Qb6, because didn’t considered trading the queen there. I only saw the doble threat Qe5 (which can be good, also). However, it would be convenient to know if that rook ending you led us to is in fact won, and I’m not that sure. Very sharp it is, and it looks very difficult for white to defend or even win! The problem seems to be that in all variations white has to give up it’s rook too soon (with delayed counterplay of it’s own pawns, and without even taking f7 first), and so the black king and rook would have an easy sweeping operation. But I confess it is anyway quite unclear to me yet, which is normal, because I’m a weak player (and don’t have time for more of my great weak analysis now, anyway) But I wouldn’t be surprised if indeed there is a defense…
18. LajosArpad on July 8th, 2009 2:38 pm
    

    L?©k?? is a super grandmaster. He is a solid player. If somebody doesn’t like this style, he/she can have other favourite player, there is no reason to dislike a person just because his style.
19. Tom on July 8th, 2009 2:42 pm
    

    I like L?©k?? too. I also like his enthusiastic, honest and straightforward (bar the analytical detail!) annotations in NiC.