semipatz,
my comment was more about the "fluidity" of ratings, if i may call it that. ratings, and rating differences, would be close to 100% accurate only if a very large number of games were played between players in a large rating range.
many 2650+ players feel the rating gap to the top is artificial, for the reason that this fluidity is not attained.

It is great to see Kramnik being beaten in a Petroff! Did he make any great mistake? Looking at the game, seemed like great play by Naiditsch, but this is far beyond my league ;-)

Naiditsch is rated 2665, not 2624. The table should be corrected.

Oh, I see. 2624 was his rating until the new list that just came out.

Even at 2665, as far as I can tell from looking as chessgames.com, Naiditsch is--I *think*--the lowest-rated player to beat Kramnik at classical chess in at least 10 years. No one even under 2700 had beaten Kramnik since 2005.

Kramnik seemed to be already crushed on the 23 move. Kramnik did't play well also against Wely. In a very promising position Kramnik gave to Wely a way to stabilize, but Wely missed it.

Apparently, Kramnik went astray when he failed to take the Rook on the 19th move. Fritz 11 gives

19... Qxe5
20. Qb4+ Ke8
21. Qxb5+ Kd8
22. Rd1 Ne2+
23. Kh1 Nd4
24. Qxb7 Rc8
25. h3 g5
26. Qxa7 Ke8
27. Qxd4 Qxd4
28. Rxd4 f5=

It's certainly understandable that Kramnik hesitated to play such into such a wild and dangerous variation. It?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s not really his kind of chess--but it was necessary in this case.

i think kramnik is just showing ........to make anand off . we will see this type of loss from anand also in coming tournament. now i am sure kramnik is not going play petrof ....in bonn match against anand , now this defence is out from kramnik's list . this is very old idea to waste opp-'s time for opening preparation .similarly as kasparov was using e-vans gambit before the wcc match against anand 1995. but Naiditsch played realy good game. full credit to that.

[lang_nl]Hoi allemaal, heb de notatie van Naiditsch-Kramnik scrollbaar gemaakt zoals een aantal van jullie opmerkte in de Enqu?ɬ™te.[/lang_nl][lang_en]Hi all, partly because some of you asked for it in the Survey, I've made the notation of Naiditsch-Kramnik scrollable.[/lang_en]

@Peter
Thanks very much for making the longer annotations scrollable, this makes it very pleasant to replay a game with the board steady on my screen.

Greetings!

Huge novelty from Naiditch 19 Qd2. Kramnik should have taken the rook om e5. But if you havent looked at it before it looks very risky. The position is more or less lost after 19. Ng6. Some how i dont think Kramnik, not because of the loss today, will play the Petroff against Anand later this year. Think we might se the Ruy Lopez. if Anand plays 1. E4.

Kramnik is not a strong player, he is strong making draws.

How many games has Kramnik played against 2700- players in the last 10 years?
Very few top guys risk playing in anything except super-tournaments, in order to protect their ratings. Lame, but that's how it goes...

"Even at 2665, as far as I can tell from looking as chessgames.com, Naiditsch is?¢‚Ǩ‚ÄúI *think*?¢‚Ǩ‚Äúthe lowest-rated player to beat Kramnik at classical chess in at least 10 years. No one even under 2700 had beaten Kramnik since 2005."

I think we all know that Kramnik is extremely strong in the endgame. So Jonas' comment looks rather ... well, not very balanced.

great game, that's the second very attractive loss by Kramnik this year ... remember his game against Topalov in corus. If he keeps like that I might even start enjoying his chess :P

Coco Loco, even supertournaments usually have some under 2700 players. And you can lose rating points just as easily against players your own rating as against weaker ones. Yes, you have to lose more games, but you're LIKELY to lose more games.