Candidates tournament: who are you rooting for and why?

Naka, because he's never had the opportunity to play for the title. He's the oldest player at the tournanment. He won't have many other chances. Gukesh, and those young guys, will be around for decades.

But I'd say this is probably Naka's last chance. Considering he's been at or near the top for over a decade, it would be nice to see him get a shot at the title.

Naka - tough to root for given the "I'm a streamer fist and just here to play interesting chess" attitude

Nepo - tough to root for given that he has failed several times and also has curiously bad time management at times & doesn't always play to his ability

Firouza - seems like he may be a weenie & isn't putting chess first

Gukesh & Prag: likeable and the next generation, but how do you distinguish between them? I think Prag is more aggressive, if that matters.

So I'll go with Fabi, who may be the strongest or at least most consistent player in the pool at classical time controls and also seems like a very likable dude.

@esmiro said in #17:
> I believe that at this point, with only 5 games left, it will be very hard for any player other than Nepo, Gukesh or Pragg to win. This is just due to the round robin structure of the tournament. Say Hikaru comes out with a +2 performance (drawing 3 and winning 2), then even just a +1 performance by either Nepo or Gukesh would be enough to stay ahead (a +1 difference only amount to +0.5 points, of course, since drawing is 0.5).

I guess I spoke way too early hahahah

@esmiro said in #33:
> I guess I spoke way too early hahahah
you may still be correct, we will see after today's game

Hikaru because he is on YouTube and I watch him

@GW-ISR said in #34:
> you may still be correct, we will see after today's game

I mean, winning three games out of three is simply insane at those levels, and despite that, he is still tied with other two players. So, in light of this, I think my assessment was fair.
I couldn't predict something like this and it might still not be enough.

Nakamura should get rid of this "I must do content, make the content" nonsense. Who says that if he plays excitingly and loose, that's better "content"? I bet his fan would rather not see him on yet another Titled Tusday instead of resting and prepairing, just not to blunder moves like today's Be1 and potentially ruin everything.

Again, estabilish what's better "content" and sacrifying everything to that, it looks more of an obsession than a reasonable necessity.

@MarkIorio
I don't really take him seriously when he says "I played this move for content".

Despite how casual and "I don't even care" he tries to come off in his videos, he has most likely gone through a very serious preparation, with commitment and professional mindset.

@MarkIorio said in #7:
> I absolutely agree, except for sort of a Nakamura's "dark side", that shows out in the "disrespectful" video series, when he plays online under newly created identities to lower its rating and be paired with beginners at the sole purpose to mock and insult them, for content sake, he claims. I don't think it's just for creating lucrative contents, also despicable per se, I think he actually enjoys to sadically stalk beginners online, while he is a perfect gentleman in real life. Like a common resentful keyboard lion, that's uneducational at the very least.
> Other top level players would never do that.

I haven't seen him mocking players. I saw a few where he was playing under new accounts, which he uses as a teaching tool. The purpose is to show how to punish bad openings, mistakes, and teach beginners by playing beginners. He's a bit nerdy, too, so some of his comments are akward, but certainly not malicious.

@Sleprithslayer said in #39:
> I saw a few where he was playing under new accounts, which he uses as a teaching tool. The purpose is to show how to punish bad openings, mistakes, and teach beginners by playing beginners.
Mocking or not, I still dislike this practice and I'm glad that unlike chesscom, lichess not only does not encourage it but essentially forbids it.