4 ms·
I haven't watched the full video yet, but some interesting observations so far: - 7m 20s: Context on metric used (note that Feller was confirmed cheating): htt
by nomilk 4y ago
I haven't watched the full video yet, but some interesting observations so far:
- 7m 20s: Context on metric used (note that Feller was confirmed cheating): https://i.imgur.com/jgaCLc4.png https://i.imgur.com/jgaCLc4.png
- 12m 20s. (paraphrasing) A clinically perfect game (by Carlsen) is still only 79%
- 17m 10s Naka's 2 best games to analyse on chessbase
- 20m Naka says Hans's analysis of one game (not against Carlsen) was "ridiculous"
- 24m 30s "once you see (a good move) you can't unsee it ... but until you see it, it's not obvious at all"
- 27m 30s - "Fischer had 0 games at 100% in his entire career"
- JacobThreeThree 4y agoFor comparison, what was Hans' percentage?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- nomilk 4y ago(in order of appearance in the video) - 72% (17m 30s) Against Mishra ("for many people it was a most suspicious game"). Naka: "this is a good performance but it's not insane". Yosha: "nothing too suspicious" - 100% (21m 15s) - Several more 100% (from ~25m)