On the implications of Kramink's comments on Carlsen

After defeating Carlsen in Round 7 of Norway Chess, Kramnik remarked that the world champion is still the best player in the world, and is simply in a temporary bad phase - sentiments that are probably in line with how Carlsen's fans see his recent performances. Kramnik also noted, however, that Carlsen has consistently had trouble with black in the tournament, and suggested that he should work on his black repertoire. Now... think about that for a minute. When was the last time you heard an active chess player give advice to Carlsen? Sure, there was the occasional "this move might have been better" in a post-game press conference, but nothing so general as "he should work on his openings" - which sounds like something one would say about a student or an inferior player (Kramink said something to that effect regarding Andreikin after beating him in the World Cup final).

Granted, Kramink these days is somewhat of an elder statesman in the chess world, which may give him a bit of leeway to comment on younger players, similar to how commentators like Yasser can talk about Carlsen's weaknesses from the perspective of someone who has already been through the experience of being an elite professional chess player. But there were no such comments from Kramnik, Anand or any of the other older players when Carlsen was at 2860 and completely dominating over everyone else. So are Kramnik's comments now a sign that fellow chess players are changing the way that they view Carlsen - that he is no longer a giant among men, the greatest talent to ever play the game since Kasparov, but increasingly the best among equals? Are his fellow players starting to believe in earnest that he is beatable - perhaps even on the World Championship stage?

Thoughts, anyone?

The top 5-10 GM's always believe they can beat anyone in the future - without such confidence they wouldn't keep those high ratings. Note that Karjakin lead partway through last Nov.'s WC match.

That's probably true, but it's been a while since any other active player has dared to publicly give advice to Carlsen, hasn't it?

Also, given Carlsen's reaction during the interview with Maurice, I wonder how he felt about Kramnik's comments once they came to his attention (assuming they did).

... and now I've learned not to create a thread, save it using the preview function, and then post it 24 hours later. Apparently that's a great way to ensure that as few people as possible see the thread.

Kramnik, as a former WC and a top player for 20 years, is probably in a position to pass comment. He is also a noted 'opening expert'. I also notice he likes to 'win' the post match press conference. After Aronian crushed him at Norway he argued till he was blue in the face that his position was holdable in the post match with Short. Aronian was chuckling and pointing out different ways that white would break through.

I think Carlsens problem in classical is simple, the guy is tired. The match against Karjakin took a lot out of him. Not to mention all the months of prep leading up to the match. He's yet to fully recover from that IMO. Magnus mentioned after day one of the blitz in paris that he's exhausted. Normal Magnus wouldn't be "exhausted" after a couple days of rapid and one day of blitz. Tired? Sure. But not totally wiped out and day 2 of paris blitz, Magnus definitely ran out of gas and was lucky to still share 1st at the end. But in the playoff when it mattered most, he dug down and smoked MVL. He's still top dog and that ain't changing anytime soon.

Kramnik is right

He certainly isn't winning tournaments as smoothly as he used to.

Lmao macer

Yes - and even when he started doing not as well (say, starting from Norway Chess 2015), their attitude toward him didn't really change for a long time, at least on the surface. Other players still threated him like he was on a completely different level. Now, however, it seems that is perhaps no longer the case.

Which is funny since Grischuk and Carlsen once remarked in a post mortem that Kramnik's black repertoire was bad - I remember two games, one vs Karjakin where he lost a pawn early on due to bad opening play and one against Carlsen where bad opening play was too the cause of defeat. I'm sure there are many more. If there's a thing that doesn't seem to be a problem for Carlsen, it's certainly opening play (at least to my patzer eyes). There was a tournament or two last year where he didn't face a single opening problem when playing black.

For a smooth win

Highly recommended by Maurice Ashley.

Maybe of interest: https://chess24.com/en/read/news/kramnik-on-carlsen-s-slump-candidates-qualification

Carlsen has openly admitted that Kramnik and Anand (and others) are superior opening theorists, but also that it doesn't concern him. He prefers to figure things out over the board.

He's reached #1 (and stayed there for years) with minimal opening study. Why change now?

But yes, I agree with the OP: It seems that his peers are now sensing chinks in the armor.

Kramnik  knows better than you guys what to say to Carlsen...Also, Carlsen used to play a lot of Kramnik's games over.

it's easy to give Carlsen advice, any little kid could come along and tell him to stop crying and man up when things don't go his way.

Who is Kramink? A mink?

Ahh, that reminds me... when I was doing a bit of research for this thread, I found a different thread on Chess24 on Kramnik talking about Carlsen:

https://chess24.com/en/read/news/kramnik-calls-carlsen-a-genius-gets-icy-response

This one was from a while ago though, and the comments were made when Carlsen lost the #1 spot in 2010 after having occupied it briefly, so the context is quite a bit different from the current situation.