The chess world, still reeling from the sudden death of American grandmaster Daniel Naroditsky at 29, has turned its grief into outrage — much of it directed at former world champion Vladimir Kramnik. The Russian grandmaster’s comments following Naroditsky’s passing have ignited one of the most heated controversies in modern chess, with players and fans accusing him of cruelty, hypocrisy, and moral irresponsibility.
Naroditsky, a respected educator, commentator, and one of the game’s most beloved public figures, was found dead earlier this week in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Charlotte Chess Center described his passing as “unexpected” and requested privacy for his family. No cause of death has been officially confirmed.
But within hours of the announcement, Kramnik posted two messages on X (formerly Twitter) that many saw as an attempt to justify or deflect responsibility. In one, he wrote:
“Too high price paid, but if I was the only person shouting about obvious long term problems of Danya becoming alarming, requiring urgent measures from people around, while ‘friends’ only cared about hiding it and erase evidence, it’s rotten to the core.”
In another post, he shared a screenshot of a private chat he claimed to have received from a friend on October 18 — two days before Naroditsky’s death. The messages read:
“Danya streaming. Looks like he is on some serious drugs. Quite worried, chess mafia is dangerous.”
Kramnik added:
“What exactly happened? Because I received this two days ago from a friend of mine chess fan, and at least did what I could to warn people to do something urgently in my posts. To those who prefer blaming and shaming instead of helping. Awful tragedy, hope properly investigated.”
The posts were met with immediate backlash. Many saw them as an effort to portray Naroditsky as unstable or substance-dependent — without evidence — and to shift focus away from Kramnik’s own role in a long-running feud that many believe deeply affected Naroditsky’s mental health.
Months of Accusations
For nearly a year, Kramnik had used his social media accounts to accuse numerous players — including Naroditsky — of online cheating, often citing vague “patterns” in statistics. He had previously clashed with top players like Hikaru Nakamura and Alireza Firouzja, as well as Czech grandmaster David Navara.
Naroditsky, who built a reputation as a fair and articulate voice in chess media, strongly denied the accusations. In one of his final streams on YouTube, he appeared distraught as he addressed the relentless claims, saying the rumors had “lingering effects” on his career and personal life.
Nihal Sarin: ‘He Literally Took a Life’
Indian grandmaster Nihal Sarin, who played Naroditsky in his final online games on Chess.com, directly blamed Kramnik for the tragedy. Speaking to The Indian Express, Sarin said:
“He (Kramnik) has kind of literally taken a life.”
Sarin recalled that Naroditsky had confided feeling “under immense stress due to a lot of baseless accusations — headed by Kramnik, of course.” Sarin added that he too had been targeted by Kramnik but had survived thanks to a stronger support network.
“What Kramnik does is completely unacceptable,” Sarin continued. “You burn down a city to catch some cheaters, basically. You kill some thousand other innocent guys to get one or two.”
Top Players Speak Out
The backlash against Kramnik extended to nearly every corner of the chess world.
Hikaru Nakamura, who had been among the first to challenge Kramnik’s claims months ago, wrote bluntly:
“I said it before, I’ll say it again… he can go f*** himself.”
Magnus Carlsen, the world’s top-rated player, took a more measured tone but admitted regret over not doing more to defend Naroditsky publicly.
“I supported him privately,” Carlsen said, “should’ve done it more publicly.”
Prominent chess coach Jacob Aagaard called Kramnik’s conduct “evil” and said there was “nothing moral” about how he behaved. “Daniel was a dear friend,” Aagaard wrote. “If you understood my earlier comment differently, I apologize. I’m not functioning 100% right now.”
Chess streamer Nemo Zhou (aka akaNemsko), a longtime colleague of Naroditsky, went further. In an emotional statement, she urged FIDE — the sport’s governing body — to revoke Kramnik’s titles and erase his record from official archives.
“What Kramnik has done to David Navara, Hikaru, and Danya cannot be tolerated,” she said. “Chess should be a place for kindness and inclusion. It should be unilaterally unacceptable to use a platform that chess has given you to bully, harass, and slander a colleague.”
Zhou called on the FIDE Ethics and Disciplinary Commission to “set an example” by imposing meaningful sanctions.
A Divided Legacy
The fallout has revived debate about Kramnik’s legacy. Once celebrated for dethroning Garry Kasparov in 2000 and for his quiet, cerebral style of play, the 49-year-old has in recent years become one of chess’s most polarizing figures.
His critics say he has weaponized his status as a former world champion to intimidate others, often leveling cheating accusations without evidence. His defenders, a small but vocal minority, argue that he has raised legitimate questions about online integrity — though few now defend the tone or timing of his latest posts.
Even some of Kramnik’s longtime admirers have expressed dismay. “He gave so much to chess,” wrote one international master on X. “But in the past year, he’s done just as much to destroy people.”
FIDE and the Question of Accountability
So far, FIDE has issued no official comment on Kramnik’s statements, though internal discussions are reportedly underway. Several high-profile figures, including Nemo and Aagaard, have demanded that the Ethics Commission formally investigate Kramnik’s conduct.
Critics argue that the chess world has long lacked adequate mechanisms to protect players from harassment, particularly online. The tragedy, they say, should serve as a wake-up call for the sport to establish clearer boundaries between critique and character assassination.
“The events leading up to this tragedy happened in broad daylight,” Nemo wrote. “They could have been stopped.”
A Community in Mourning
While debate over accountability rages, the overwhelming sentiment remains grief. Across social media, tributes to Naroditsky continue to pour in — from students, fellow streamers, and world champions alike.
“Daniel was one of the kindest, most thoughtful people I’ve met,” wrote commentator David Rensch. “It’s impossible to put words to this kind of loss.”
To many, Naroditsky represented the very best of chess — a bridge between the professional elite and a new generation of digital learners. His YouTube lectures, chess.com commentaries, and compassionate demeanor earned him near-universal admiration.
That admiration now contrasts sharply with the bitterness surrounding his death. For many in the chess world, the tragedy has revealed a darker side of their community — one where fame, ego, and online hostility can consume even the brightest minds.
As one player wrote in a widely shared post:
“We lost one of the good ones. And it didn’t have to be this way.”
I’m the senior editor of Attacking Chess, a keen chess player, rated above 2300 in chess.com. You can challenge me or asking questions at Chess.com.
