what does this naka tweet mean?

It's hard for Naka to verbally crawl out from under the weight of 0 for 23. He's never won in 23 games. Yes, he got very close & shoulda, woulda, coulda, but he's got 0 wins. Period. 8 losses. I'm sure he can do the math. Also, Magnus is 109 points stronger than Naka. One.... O.... Nine. A Buck O Nine.

Naka would get crushed in a match against Magnus. It's not all about style & being cute & fancy so he can get a bunch of wow's & pats on the back for being all flashy, it's about results. Results, period.

correct d6 cost him big time- I only hope he learns the lessons from this match and goes on to prove that he can compete with magnus

A match between Nakamura and Carlsen would be as one-sided as a match between Leonid Kritz and Gata Kamsky.

You underestimate Naka. The man has beaten Carlsen before and can do it again. 

Well, yes, but not in clasical chess, it should be noted.

This made me chuckle. Heh.

As a huge Carlsen fan, I am happy he came so close to losing to Nakamura. It is clear from his past interviews and comments that he values players like Aronian and Kramnik as better opponents than Nakamura, and never gave a damn when Nakamura said he could beat carlsen or whatever. but I reckon, for his own good, that it's time he wakes up and realise oh hey nakamura is pretty good too . if he continues with the flippant attitude that he has towards nakamura, sooner or later he's going to lose. 

nakamura's comments is probably just a psychological trick. he's trying to psych himself up, it's kind of a motivation thing. no need to read too much into it. 

In what sense? Carlsen for instance, defeated Anand by not playing classical chess. Naka on that sense, is totally on the same page. Naka loves to play outside of theory... in fact some of his best games have been by such tactics. 

Nakumara has a made a comeback in the last two years... winning tournaments of high prestige. To think he is not a true contender now of the world title... is erreneous and ... illogical. 

If not... careless. 

Long time control games. Nothing to do with style.

Carlsen is 8-0, perhaps better. I don't think we can consider Hikaru much of a threat yet. No matter how much better Nakamura is performing than he was, Carlsen wins more tournaments that he enters than the other players combined.

Maybe you missed all the top comments. Kasparov even said himself, and I quote

''Anand played with openings, Carlsen played without... it seemed to work for him.''

You missed what my post was responding to.

You said that Hikaru has beaten Carlsen. The other guy said not in classical chess.

You seemed to think that this was some implication on a classical style. He meant Hikaru hasn't won a long time control game.

Gotta love how I misspelled classical here. Anyways, he has not beaten Magnus Carlsen in long time control games. He has beaten him in rapid and blitz, but not in long time control games.

Carlsen did what he does. He makes good moves, and chooses the path that gives his opponent the most chances to make a mistake. Naka made a mistake.

I'd wager he has. Ok... most games we get to see in top events, is not meant to mean he doesn't play standard. Keep in mind, Naka is as the nickname goes, the blitz king. Though it would be refreshing to see him play a couple of standard games... may sort the wheat from the chaff. I myself work far superior to standard chess than I do in blitz. I work well in complicated scenario's rather than working against time troubles. 

I'm confused. What do you mean by standard? If standard is meant as Classical games and rapid games, then I guess Nakamura has one win, according to chessgames. But he still hasn't won a classical game against Carlsen, which are the games being played in world championship matches.

When I say standard, I mean any time control over 20 minutes. He may not have won one against Carlsen in standard, but this means diddly squat. I've seen some of the complex permutations he can create in only five minutes. Some of his opponents, cannot calculate like that. Nakamura, is Carlsens best academic rival. He is highly underestimated, and widely not liked. 

..... Are we still talking about an uneven world championship title contest or....? I just think it would not be logical to say Nakamura is his best rival in any sense of the term because Carlsen still holds an edge in the blitz games as well. It just seems like there are opponents that give Carlsen tougher games. Just to add a name to the mix, Fabiano Caruana seems like an opponent that's tougher for Carlsen than Nakamura.

I really do like Naka and I think in some of his games he plays as brilliantly as Carlsen.  But lets be real, Carlsen is the world champion for a reason.