Naka and Bortnyk talking trash on Carlsen

#19

You’re doing something called MMA math in a sport of MMA. It’s a known fallacy and is proven wrong again and again and again in real life. You’re basically doing a version of “fighter A beat fighter B, fighter B beat fighter C, therefore fighter A is better than fighter C”. Reality doesn’t work that way. Fighter C beats fighter A just as often, it turns out. Same stuff was being said previously and yet Carlsen easily beat Naka in blitz and bullet in a dominating fashion. He is a better player, and remember: these games he played VS Tang (my favorite), he is playing bong clouds and fooling around.

Obviously Naka can beat Carlsen, but Carlsen is a favorite given their history VS each other etc. I was just saying Naka and Bortnyk need to show some class and respect. Not just lie into a camera with a straight face.

@Kusokosla
It would be a fallacy if you only considered one opponent. But if you consider more opponents then it starts to paint a picture. It's not absolute but it's still better than nothing.

#22

Even if so, styles make fights, they say, Naka has a mental block VS Carlsen. And I would simply look at the games, you mention score VS other opponents, but if you look at the games, Carlsen isn’t trying.

Interesting, for example is how people often bring up his fairly even score VS Daniel, but if you look at the games Carlsen plays bong cloud, looses by a split second, then when he needs to win he smashes Daniel in about 12 moves, then goes back to fooling around.

In any case, Naka and Bortnyk should have said Naka would have a chance VS Carlsen, not the other way around, given their history and individual score which is more important.

"I don't like what somebody said so I will make a topic in the forum and whine about it."

This whole topic is pointless. Naka could play a titled arena anonymously if he actually wanted to prove he was better. That he doesnt tells you everything you need to know.