Interesting game between Stripunsky and Nakamur...

Apparently this was the first time Nakamura played the dragon.

I was curious, however, after 12... b4, why white didn't just capture with one of the knights. If anyone could shed some light on this I'd be appreciative.

http://www.monroi.com/wdc/flashviewer/watch1.php?round_id=1167&game_id=15194&s_id=QWER8U6T

He could've...and won a pawn. The problem is there are two many open lines leading to white's king. Even if white played 12. h4 (which he should have). Naka would have probably made the same move. Stripunsky knows Nakamura; he knows he doesn't want to get into a tactical duel with Naka. He knows he's never won a game against N, so he wants to play safe. That's the only reason i can think of for Stripunsky to play 12. h3, which is way not book. It runs counter to the spirit of english attack, much too passive for the situation. Check the next game where Naka plays Shabalov and Shabalov destroys him because (i've come to conclusion) Naka shows no judgment in opening. That's why he'll never rise to the very top echelon of world chess. Naka plays very interesting chess, he's fun to watch, but in the end all his tactical tricks don't work with the top players.

I wonder why he didn't prepare it with ...a3. Probably to slow, right?

Originally posted by buddy2
He could've...and won a pawn. The problem is there are two many open lines leading to white's king. Even if white played 12. h4 (which he should have). Naka would have probably made the same move. Stripunsky knows Nakamura; he knows he doesn't want to get into a tactical duel with Naka. He knows he's never won a game against N, so he wants to play safe. ...[text shortened]... fun to watch, but in the end all his tactical tricks don't work with the top players.