Tweet
In round 8, Nakamura suffered his first loss in the tournament against former world champion Kramnik of Russia. Nakamura's over aggressive pawn storm, on the kingside of another Dutch Leningrad, was man handled in a very natural manner. Kramnik did not need a brilliant move to win.
However, the overall question in my mind is: was Nakamura playing only for a win, and nothing but a win?
should Nakamura play for a draw with the black pieces against the last of the 4 giants? Surely, a draw has its many advantages. Nakamura is ahead of Kramnik in the standings (5-4.5). I guess Kramnik would be satisfied with a draw after Nakamura's fantastic showing !!
I believe it is easier for Nakamura to draw Kramnik than to win against him. And to review his standings, he does not really need to win. He is firmly in the top 3 and Kramnik is the last of the 4 giants he has to face.
Nakamura tried to gain immediate play in the center by 10....e5, while Reinderman prefered 10....Qa5 in Giri 2517 - Reinderman 2560 1/2 2009 Hilversum, The Netherlands.
The interesting question in this game is: should Black play to develop his pieces, or play to create a kingside attack? It seems that Black did not want to consolidate/develop his pieces, hurrying instead to counter attack.
It is obvious white was better after Black's 21....f4, in view of several factors:
1. development - white has completed his development while Black has only 2 pieces. White is controlling the b and d files.
2. Furthermore, Black has a weakened kingside.
3. Plus the quality of the White player.
Such advantages are normally attained after sacrificing a pawn or 2, but here, no pawn sacrifice was even needed.
After Kramnik's 32.Bb7, Nakamura had to fight for the draw. White's 41.c5 tells me there was nothing left for black to play for.
This is a suicidal game for Nakamura who violated the opening principle- develop your pieces.
Despite this defeat, Nakamura has very good chance of finishing with honors.
However, the overall question in my mind is: was Nakamura playing only for a win, and nothing but a win?
should Nakamura play for a draw with the black pieces against the last of the 4 giants? Surely, a draw has its many advantages. Nakamura is ahead of Kramnik in the standings (5-4.5). I guess Kramnik would be satisfied with a draw after Nakamura's fantastic showing !!
I believe it is easier for Nakamura to draw Kramnik than to win against him. And to review his standings, he does not really need to win. He is firmly in the top 3 and Kramnik is the last of the 4 giants he has to face.
Nakamura tried to gain immediate play in the center by 10....e5, while Reinderman prefered 10....Qa5 in Giri 2517 - Reinderman 2560 1/2 2009 Hilversum, The Netherlands.
The interesting question in this game is: should Black play to develop his pieces, or play to create a kingside attack? It seems that Black did not want to consolidate/develop his pieces, hurrying instead to counter attack.
It is obvious white was better after Black's 21....f4, in view of several factors:
1. development - white has completed his development while Black has only 2 pieces. White is controlling the b and d files.
2. Furthermore, Black has a weakened kingside.
3. Plus the quality of the White player.
Such advantages are normally attained after sacrificing a pawn or 2, but here, no pawn sacrifice was even needed.
After Kramnik's 32.Bb7, Nakamura had to fight for the draw. White's 41.c5 tells me there was nothing left for black to play for.
This is a suicidal game for Nakamura who violated the opening principle- develop your pieces.
Despite this defeat, Nakamura has very good chance of finishing with honors.
Comment