Its pretty standard conversion for a top 20 player

@@arkos1179 not so standard

not so standard (2). and judit is just great fun! i always watch the live comentaries that she does. she has a mom vibe + crushing world champions in chess

​@@brant25I totally agree her commentaries are exceptional she sees many great moves instantly and I also agree on the mom vibes. Now especially on her conversion in this game I liked very much her move at 10:42 BB5, to open the way for the rook. Because in that position the worst piece was the knight so the first instinct would have been to improve the knight for example via b6 and d5, after you kick out the enemy queen with let's say Rc6 in order to avoid the queen trade. I haven't thought very much on these moves that I suggest but what I want to say is that her decision to move the bishop again which was great was not obvious. And her next moves were also very clinical and tactically very concrete,she exploited her iniative to the maximum. Maybe they seem obvious when you see them played and explained to you but when you have to decide OTB between these moves and others equally logical at first sight it's not so easy. And she played with 98% accuracy in a very complicated position, that's not standard or easy at all,even on SGM level. Judith was a beast!!!

This was judith peak though

You people watch 2-3 games and go crazy 😂😂 any of the current top 20 can play like this

Anand kramnik ivanchuk is far better than judit polgar

@@PK-xv4bg clown take bruv. I can, off the top of my memory, name like ten games when Judit held her own in a fascunating manner against insanely good players in their own right.

@@AndjeiKuna delusional life

My previous video

She's pretty good at putting the blood in the water too

Jerry is absolutely a legend when it comes to breaking down chess, showing us how to see the board, making chess entertaining, his soothing voice and delivery and his dry wit. Being a GM is another skill which just takes a lot of sacrifice to just study and acquire the skill to calculate and be able to focus for a long time, I really believe it should not be a end goal for a chess player. There is so much to contribute and what Jerry has been doing for me since 7 years I think its far much noble than rather him being a GM.

@@rohitchakravarthi94 I love Jerry's intellectual approach to chess. And I'm a big fan. So my question is genuine. Not doubting Jerry's abilities.

karpov was the reason everyone started playing it

Thank you 👍

Thanks

Yes only few times, in total she has been crashed...Carlsen, Kasparov and even Karpov all have superior result against Polgar, Kramnik was her worst nightmare, with ZERO win..

So a lot of employment for a streamer

Naaaasty

👍

Yes, please (day 2 request, also)!

I believe he once “challenged any woman player in the world to a game at knight’s odds”, and there were no takers. What he thought of Polar as an individual player I don’t know.

@@MoonBurn13 he changed his ways throughout the years :)

Fischer may have personally coached the Polgar sisters. Didn't he live in Hungary when they emerged as strong players?

Barring move 1 it lost a pawn for most of the game including the first 15 moves

@@Nabbottt Ok I only glanced at that during Jerry’s commentary, so you’re probably right, thanks. I know for certain Jerry despises the move Bc1-d2 though. 😀

I think 100% means that you made the best move (according to the engine) in 100% of cases. There could be some moves (in this case 2% of them for Polgar) where you didn't play the absolute best, but the alternative you have chosen is only slightly worse, and therefore is not considered an inaccuracy.

​@@alessandro3139if its slightly worse it's an inaccuracy not a mistake tho

@@eyeofhorus1301 I've not talked about mistakes. I've said that if your move is only slightly worse than the absolute best, than is considered a good move, and not an inaccuracy. If after playing a move as black you are -0.53 instead of -0.54 (after the best move) I think it's not fair to consider that an inaccuracy. I think there is a minimum centipawn loss (for example 10, or 15 or whatever it is) to consider a move an inaccuracy.

@@alessandro3139 True. Actually, does anyone know the threshhold from nothing -> inaccuracy -> mistake -> blunder?

That's polgar sisters..

Polgar sisters

Hi! I don't get your point. Karpov made 1 mistake at move 16 according to the tale of the tape. I don't want to believe you are throwing shade at Judit!

​@@user-hn8lm8th8khe's defending that it wasn't the best karpov

​@@user-hn8lm8th8k?? Karpov clearly fell off after hitting 50. And that one mistake is pretty decisive

Polgar avoided women only tournaments