• dustyData@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Except, we now know he wasn’t. Carlsen was salty because his ego was bruised by losing to someone he perceived as being beneath him. He wasn’t seeing any 4d chess BS romantic mental projection of the game. He was just mad that he lost. Be aware, it wasn’t that Niemann was unfairly landsliding Carlsen. Quite the opposite, Carlsen had already won two games against Niemann. When he lost the third game he got mad that someone else studied the same obscure opening as him and resigned on the fourth game after a single move. Just an adult tantrum. This is chess, everyone loses at some point or another, no matter how good you are or how large the skill gap with your opponent. Statistically in a large enough amount of games, you will lose some.

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      That would be plausible if Neimann knew the line but if u watch his post match interview it is obvious he’s struggling with the logic that line follows. So I’m expected to believe Neimann could play the line flawlessly enough to make Magnus quit in the moment but afterwards can’t justify his play and thought process?
      Obvious tell he was cheating.
      Yes Magnus knew right away.

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I will defer my opinion to that of someone who knows more about chess than me. According to Grand-master Anatoly Karpov’s analysis of the game:

        “Carlsen surprisingly played the opening so badly with white that he automatically got into a worse position. Then he showed a strange inability to cope with the difficult situation that arose on the board. Comments that White lost without chances are complete nonsense.

        Yes, he played badly, his position was worse, but he didn’t have to lose: if he hadn’t sacrificed a pawn there would have been nothing terrible for him in that position. With more careful play he could have made a draw.”

        Maybe Niemann cheated, maybe he didn’t. But the true is that the reason Carlsen quit was because he got flustered. He could’ve, and as a matter of fact had previously, kicked Niemann’s ass with skill. He could’ve made this a draw, keep playing the tournament and still dominate. But he played one bad game and had to throw a hissy fit of historical proportions.

        • Dkarma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          You have no evidence and are obv biased against Carlson. Go watch the interview and then see if u still believe Hans. Carlson aside Hans does not have the skill to even remember his own thought process when working this obscure line? Proof right there.