Carlsen on Nakamura: "Inept"

I read it on a Google translation, but Susan Polgar confirms it.

http://www.tv2.no/a/5944455

Didn't know there was such bad blood between them, lol.

Here's what I don't understand: How can you call another top10 player inept?

If it's true, this would be the first ugly comment I heard from Carlsen.

I love it when the WC talks down to amazing players.  Kasparov did the same.  Reminds me it's all relative, and we're all terrible (and that even the best players are bias).

This would only encourage me to beat Carlsen if I were Naka though, because Carlsen has put the pressure on himself.  If Carlsen wins, it's only expected, but if he loses, he has to eat his words.

He probably meant it in a friendly way.

He hasn't been known to be kind. I believe he made some mean comments after winning the world championship, but Anand reacted like the gentleman that he is. I can't seem to find that interview now.

Here are two interesting quotations from Hikaru Nakamura. First, from his Twitter account last year, after Magnus Carlsen won the title:

Starting to realize that I am the only person who is going to be able to stop Sauron in the context of chess history.

Second, there's this from the cover of the latest issue of New In Chess Magazine. [N.B. I haven't received my copy yet, and perhaps all is clearly explained therein.]

I do feel that at the moment I am the biggest threat to Carlsen.

Carlsen taking potshots at Kramnik is also well known - got to kick 'em while they are down! Btw I called 12 yo Carlsen a patzer - so it's always fun to eat your own words

Here's what he had to say about the other competitors (always Google translation):

Levon Aronian:

- My strongest challenger.

Fabiano Caruana:

- Very high confidence. Playing in the same way to everyone. Perhaps the most dangerous with Aronian.

Veselin Topalov:

- Very good shape at the Olympics. Generally a good opponent for me.

Maxime Vachier-Lagrave:

- Has played little against him. Very creative, good tactically dangerous player.

Didn't hear about those. Care to share a link?

The google translation of quotes seems accurate.

The word he used for Naka was "uduglig" which I would normally translate with "useless".

The impression I get from the article is that this is just a snappy one-linet. An attempt at humour. Nakamura and Carlsen has had this back and forth going for a while now, so I Nakamura is probably an acceptable target for this type of humor. 

There is a Google translator?  Link?  How does it work?  For how many languages does it work?  Sounds interesting.  

As for the comments to Kramnik, I totally felt that was done in good humor when I heard it (tone of voice and smile on his face).

http://susanpolgar.blogspot.mx/2014/03/carlsen-kramnik-thinks-he-knows.html

http://www.chessdom.com/13-year-old-magnus-bought-every-word-kramnik-said/

Basically he said he liked Kramnik when younger - but when he got older he figured out Kramnik isn't that good nowadays

Lol this adds some spice to the top chess scenery. Hope we see one day a WC match between the two - that will be a nice fight to watch :D

they should fight it out like we did in..... never mind.

Carlsen does smile a lot after basically calling Nakamura useless :-) Of course he doesn't actually consider him to be that, but seems to enjoy the trash talk part with him. I recall Nakamura posting on Twitter about some Norwegian hockey player that he was a sympathetic guy, unlike some other Norwegians he knew, or something like that.

Giri wrote in New In Chess recently that Kramnik would need to score better results if he wanted to continue his trash talk with Carlsen. Maybe Carlsen doesn't have anything against some trash talk in general, but Kramnik and Nakamura may be the top players he wouldn't place first on his birthday party invitation list.

Winning world cup with 128 players is scoring good enough results for qualification if you ask me

And sharing the first place on points in Candidates with Carlsen

Or do they say that you are only as good as your last tournament result?

I think what they say is rather that when you repeatedly claim that Carlsen is not better than yourself, you need backing this up with more than one good result once in a while, if you are around #10 yourself and Carlsen has around 70 points down to #2.

The World Cup win was OK, by the way, but he didn't face any opponent in the top 20 there. Afterwards saying that Carlsen is #1 based on non-chess skills seems a bit over the top. I think stuff like that from Kramnik has been irritating Carlsen for a while.