Something I appreciate about these speed run videos from Danya is that his opponents are frequently blitzing out moves while Danya explains and calculates. In the end, the position is so good that the time element matters much less than his opponent anticipated.
Also, they are playing against a hyperbullet expert. I remember Danya saying once that being below 30 seconds is not any kind of time trouble for him. A mortal like me is likely to blunder with that amount of seconds even with an overwhelming advantage.
@@Arthas30000 the bowdler attack is not refuted. It does however allow black to equalize. A lot of chess still needs to be played. Only the first move advantage is gone.
@@gnikdroy That's the whole point of a refutation. Granted, chess still needs to be played, but the point is that it is garbage for white. There is no advantage gained from it as black very easily equalizes or gains an advantage
Love these type of games. It feels like 1000 level = around move 10 there'll be a blunder, or just bad opening prep getting to a bad position. 1500 = around move 20 there'd be a blunder or the player falling for a tactic / trick. Then 2000 you have to work hard to accumulate all that pressure for a sustained period of time. You have to know how to play on all sides of the board, and the other guy isn't going to blunder away a win ... but could make slight inaccuracies that you can capitalize on 7 moves later. I think you can see the difference here when the opponent (BTW he played a great game) starting to crack ... he kept shuffling his queen, whereas Danya made Qc1 and Qb1 worked beautifully when there's nothing open on the king side, and the middle of the board seemingly closed. It's the cracking of the queen side that got him this W. Lots to learn. Great game Danya, and you're a great teacher.
2k players also getting murdered in the opening as black ;p It's just all about lvl of precision and preparation. Whether it's 500, 1000, 1500 or 2000 and no matter what he plays: there is always a way (combining theorethical best moves with best practical approach). You may not see it, you may not realize it exists but somewhere there lies hidden. However in majority of cases we don't find it and game prolongs. It's not that they get so much better it's no longer possible - it's just that we get weaker in comparison :) With white obviously we have enough margin of error that we avoid that scenario so in that case blunder or serious mistake is needed.
Just absolutely beautiful, sir. I love it when a youtube video that has been pre-recorded instructs me to not overthink a move because I'm trying to blunder a knight. Keep doing these, man, these videos are instructive and super entertaining!
I love these games, the whole idea discovered in post game analysis of being able to push the pawn to D3 to paralyse the enemy structure is something I had never yet seen or thought of and I am going to be thinking about that tactic in my future games now, very interesting.
Great recap! What am awesome complex position. Thank you for allowing the immense amount of lines and examples. Really cool seeing your calculations for Ne4 and the moves you saw. The computer is a pain and some lines are inhuman but the whole D pawn idea was insightful. You even mentioned it (allowing the bishop into the game) being a blind spot for you.
Naroditsky go to line “oh wait a second there’s a sick tactic here but oh my gosh it doesn’t quite work. Wait, it might actually work. I gotta calculate”
Bb5 at 36:07 what I like to call a Safety pin ! get it hahaha. Keeping your eyes peeled for those eye popping moves is always fun and exciting when your opponent misses the idea, tactic, or trick. GG! thanks
I love your videos because of the respect you show other players. Danya: "Opponent is playing phenomenal." or at worst "Well that was not the best move, and heres why." Hikaru or Gotham: "This dude just sucks. Like no disrespect but just trash tier." sometimes against literal GMs for one mistake in a fast time format
I get this offbeat Bc4 stuff way too much even up to 2000 elo, where you would expect people to invest a bit in their openings. Black is better but it is definitley a tough nut to crack. Great video, thank you!
I need to tell something to Daniel. Dan, I hope it gets to you. I am telling this because I am one of them who follows you and is even listening to you at FIDE championship. I see these days chess has become a game of business. People are more into streams and Quick games rather than focusing on the beauty of chess. In the 9th game press conference of FIDE, when the players were asked if they would write a book about their games, both replied that it is not their job. They need to play chess. And the answer, as I found and Social Medias responded, was beautiful. I see lots of potential in you and young players like you. Someday, I would like to see you guys in the FIDE Finale. I hope you got my message. Thanks for the video, though.
I didn't see ...Nf6-e4 coming. It was a beautiful way to seize the initiative, after which black was essentially telling white what to play. "play d4, play c3, etc". To me, a very instructional game - thx.
Yeah, i got Anish Najdorf cource, and it's like 29 chapters. And ~25 chapters starting from the position after a6, huge najdorf tabia. But in fact, 95% of my games dedicated to the 2 chapters: Various moves 2 and Various moves 3. All this bishop C4 openings, grand-prix, smith-morra. wing gambit, 2. f4. Sometimes Alapin, but even this is already rare. It's very difficult to learn opening in such circumstances. And when you meet actual open sicilian player - well, you almost have no expirience in this even after 100+ e4-c5 games.
27:45 - This collapse reminds me of a Hemingway quote on how people go bankrupt: "Gradually, then suddenly." It's usually paraphrased as "Slowly at first, then all at once."
This game highlights why so many players still play Bc4 against the Sicilian at 1900+ rating levels. Even if black knows the common plan of playing ...e6 and ...d5 to stuff the bishop, the bishop just drops back and pressures Black's center from a2. In the resulting position , black has a nice center with pawns on c5 and d5, but most amateur players don't know how to find a good plan in that particular pawn structure. The position is not so simple for Black to play, and I think Bc4 has a worse reputation than it actually deserves. Danya's idea of going ...b5 and ...c4 in these types of positions is a good one and should be remembered.
I find it wild how few open sicilians have happened - I'm around the rating in the video it's still the most common line I face, just for some reason noones playing it against Danya
I know this is a weird question but for the life of me I cannot find the video where danya is playing bullet and premoves a lot of pawn pushes while saying something like “so we are playing the blblblbl opening blblbl variation” and blblblbl’s the pawn up the g file as white… i wanted to show it to a friend but I cannot find it. Any help would be appreciated it was hilarious
47:00 gotta love the patzer twitchers that immediately rely on engines to cheaply gain respect by commenting the answer the computer handed to them on a silver platter…. Ps, love how you brought up Dvoretsky ‘chess tests’ it’s a great book to study- if you’re 1600- master level even then it’s a great resource. I’m around 2100 and to this day I’m learning the ideas from it. I also recommend his endgame book. Legendary.
If everybody 1550+ or so on chess study these books than I really understand,why me,hobby player is today demolished from these peoples in few moves....
I feel like every single move Daniel made was perfectly logical and exactly what I would have played... Right up until b5. I would not have seen b5. Even though the reasons he played it make perfect sense to me and I've even done similar things in my own games. But I just had no eyes for that pawn at all. I simple wouldn't have thought of it. 😓 And then he follows up with Qc8. I was wanting to play Qb7 instead with eyes on the long diagonal and the unprotected knight on f3. So that's two in a row I wouldn't have got, and all of a sudden I would have lost that game instead of winning like he did. And then Ne4 - I don't know. I _might_ have seen it. I did in the game but it's different when you're actually playing. I certainly didn't see all the continuations that he saw. And my position would have been slightly different anyway. It's instructive, but it's also disheartening. I can still get better, and these games definitely help, but also it drives home so clearly how I'll just never be as good as that. And that kinda hurts.
It's not about having 'seen' things before. Not entirely. Think about how players historically came to these ideas: cold, hard logic. As well as losing a ton of games while not forgetting to ANALYSE those games afterwards. To be frank, a lot of us casual online players don't take chess that seriously. As for ...Ne4, that comes with what Charles Hertan in his calculation book 'Forcing Moves' called developing unbiased _computer eyes,_ as well as good board vision and the willingness to calculate and visualize deep.
I was thinking of Nb8-d7-f6-e4 around 23:00, is there something wrong with that or is it just too slow? The knight doesn’t do much on c6 as far as I can see
