Why all the fuss about Nakamura?

that is disappointing to me. Point being, the op is essentially asking why there are a lot of Nakamura fans on chess.com. Thats like asking "What's all the fuss about the Packers in Wisconsin". Its a silly question. Anyways, I like Nakamura's play and will be rooting him up. Just like:http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/grischuk-bandwagon

I didn't mean to make fun of Nakamura, he's really an exciting chess player. Here is the link to the match site:

http://www.saintlouischessclub.org/live-games-nakamura-v-ponomariov-robson-v-finegold

I've been listening to the pre-match interviews on that site. It's pretty fun, and Robson is so cute!

^yep, that's why I posted the game above from the 2010 Olympiad. I love the crazy pawn storm. And its against a candidates match semi-finalist.

Go! naka Go!

You Americans. You had 2 players that were -real Americans-.

• Morphy - who went crazy in his old days
• Fischer - who was crazy since birth.

And I still find it fascinating how you can call someone named HIKARU NAKAMURA (and he was born in Japan) American chess player?!

Nakamura's culture is the US one, and he's an "American" kid.

Which culture do you think he belongs to?

He also got his chess here. He's mostly a product of the American chess milieu.

Why do people think blood is so important?

You also forgot Pillsbury.

Pilsbury was not crazy as I know. All this nationality and professional sport is looking ridiculous already.

Russia National Basketball team has 2-3 afro-american players.

Greek National Basketball team has 1.

Croatia National Soccer has Brasilian player.

Germany National Soccer team is half Turkish.

Novak Djokovic had offers from Englang Tennis federation every month when he was younger, so they could call him English.

During Yougoslav civil war - Austria had strange criteria for accepting refugies. They took only soccer talented kids, as they hoped it will help their national team in long run.

And I'm sure if Anand take USA passport tomorrow, you will call him best American chess player ever.

Trolling or just ignorant?

So, which culture does Nakamura belong to again?

BTW, I'm on the record here as noting that Kamsky is not an American chess product. Technically an American player but not an American product.

Re Pillsbury: You said we Americans had only 2 real American players (of greatness). Pillsbury was both great and American. Just correcting you.

You are refering to chess players as products? And I'm not talking about culture. I'm talking about nationality. It's traded today for better conditions.

And how is Nakamura your "product"? He had USA trainers? He went to USA chess school? Or he just happened to live there and play tournaments in USA.

Hahahahaha!  Nakamura is as American as anyone who was born and lived there all their life.  Nakamura lived there since he was 2.  He doesn't even know Japanese.  Stop with the stupid posts.

I think this is probably the closest to being correct, although it doesn't explain it all.  Kasparov actually brought up the peculiarity of American player attention in one of his My Great Predecessor's volumes.

It seems that you were talking about race, not nationality. Naka's nationality is US. What else?

17th May 2011, 10:33pm

#39

by Streptomicin
Pozarevac Serbia

Member Since: Nov 2008
Member Points: 4229

You Americans. You had 2 players that were -real Americans-.

• Morphy - who went crazy in his old days
• Fischer - who was crazy since birth.

And I still find it fascinating how you can call someone named HIKARU NAKAMURA (and he was born in Japan) American chess player?!

Of course people are products of their environment. Soviet players were Soviet products, in the main. Naka is an American one.

According to some America has only had two great chess players ?!  How many has Serbia had ? 

Simply put, ethnicity is irrelivent. Nakamura grew up in America; he was enculturated into American society, and to my knowledge is a CITEZIN. Therefore, he is an American. He is a member of the American Nation (in the political and anthropological sense).

Ofcourse Nakamura is racially Japanese, everyone knows that, but he is an American citizen.  Have two people who never heard of him talk to him over the phone, one who lives in Japan, and one who lives in America.  Both will conclude he is American.  He has American accent, he lives in America, his culture is American.  Are you some racist or something?  Even Nakamura knows he's American.

lol, how did you quote my post with my picture on? I'm looking at it and thinking, when did I say this?? 

@ Nakamura is as American as anyone who was born and lived there all their life.  Nakamura lived there since he was 2.

This is what I am talking about. Ok, not so much about Nakamura, living in a country at age of 2, does make one accept that country and culture. I'm talking about something else. That nationality does not have that value as it had before.

Take this example, when Marko Jaric and Adriana Lima got married, Lima got our passport in less than few weeks. Why am I talking about this, my work is connected with Social care, and I have seen women who live here for 10-15 years, who have children who are born here, and they have no rights at all, because they can't get our passport for 15 years. And that is sad.

Take Alisa Maric WGM, you should know about her. Born in New York, best female chess player in (I must say rich) history of Serbian/Yugoslav chess. And than, here, or some other place, can't remember, I read that she is highest rated USA female player ever.

National sport lost its identity long time ago. Now we can talk about great teams, and great individuals. It still makes us proud to hear that someone from your neighbourhood is doing well in the world. But what do you think, that Novak Djokovic plays for Serbia? He plays for himself, and than for everyone else.

Nationality does mean a lot (certainly to me) and to a lot of people. To say that a world class chess player--or top flight athlete participating in an international competition--is so selfish that he/she has no consideration for the countrymen that they represent is a shallow statement.

Than you must be very naive.

I agree some and understand what you mean.  I don't think Nakamura is good example, but I do know what you mean. 

Vlade Divac, he who won everything, once talked about.

He said that during the game, you are not playing for you nation or federation, you are not playing for medals or glory, or for 30.000 people that are watching you. You are playing for yourself and other 4 people that are on the court with you. You play to get the best out from you, and you play to not let down others who are there, busting thier b... with you and for you.

Then, when everything is over, you can say what ever you want.