Hikaru Nakamura Pinpoints Gukesh’s ‘Biggest Weakness’ After Defeating Him at Freestyle Chess Grand Slam
Berlin, February 13, 2025 Hikaru Nakamura, the World No. 3, delivered a critical assessment of D Gukesh’s approach to chess analysis after defeating the reigning world champion in the 5-8 classification match at the Weissenhaus leg of the Freestyle Chess Grand Slam Tour. Nakamura, who secured victory in a closely contested match, expressed surprise at Gukesh’s reluctance to analyze games with other players, calling the practice “insane.”
The match saw a series of draws in the classical and rapid tiebreak games, before Nakamura finally broke through in the fourth game to secure a crucial win against the Indian prodigy. With this result, Gukesh ended the tournament without a single victory, highlighting potential areas for improvement in his game.
Nakamura’s Critical Take: Gukesh’s Biggest Weakness
Following his win, Nakamura did not hold back in his post-match analysis, shedding light on what he perceives as Gukesh’s primary weakness.
Key Points from Nakamura’s Critique:
Lack of Collaborative Analysis: Nakamura believes Gukesh’s refusal to analyze games with fellow grandmasters is hindering his growth. Limited External Learning: Unlike top players who engage in deep post-game discussions, Gukesh’s approach appears too insular. Missed Tactical Adjustments: The American GM hinted that Gukesh’s reluctance to seek diverse perspectives may be affecting his adaptability in high-stakes tournaments.
“It’s insane that Gukesh doesn’t analyze games with others. You have to look at different perspectives to evolve as a player,” Nakamura remarked.
This assessment underscores the importance of collaborative learning in chess, especially at the elite level, where even the smallest strategic adjustments can make a difference.
Match Recap: How Nakamura Outlasted Gukesh
The encounter between Nakamura and Gukesh was tense and closely fought, with both players displaying exceptional defensive resilience.
Classical Games: Both players played out two draws, demonstrating a balanced strategic approach. Rapid Tiebreak: Another draw followed, setting the stage for a high-pressure fourth game. Decisive Game: Nakamura capitalized on Gukesh’s minor positional errors, converting his advantage into a match-winning performance.
This marked Gukesh’s worst tournament outing in recent months, as the young Indian failed to register a single win in the competition.
Is Gukesh’s Training Method Holding Him Back?
Nakamura’s critique raises an important debate about Gukesh’s preparation methods.
Traditional vs. Modern Training Approaches in Chess
| Approach | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|
| Collaborative Analysis | Exposure to diverse playing styles, faster learning curve | Requires open-mindedness & adaptability |
| Solo Analysis (Gukesh’s Approach) | Strengthens self-reliance, deepens personal study | Limits perspective, may miss tactical nuances |
Most top grandmasters—including Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana—regularly analyze games with peers, reinforcing Nakamura’s argument that collaborative learning is crucial for success.
If Gukesh continues to avoid external analysis, it could stunt his development and adaptability in high-pressure situations.
What’s Next for Gukesh? Key Areas to Address
Strategic Adjustments: Gukesh must consider incorporating peer-based analysis into his preparation. Mental Resilience: Overcoming tournament slumps is part of an elite player’s journey. Tactical Refinements: Adapting to mid-game positional changes more effectively.
Despite this setback, Gukesh remains one of the most talented young players in the world, and how he responds to this criticism will be key to his long-term success.
