Daniel Naroditsky Clashed With Vladimir Kramnik — Feud Explained Amid Tragic Death

The chess community mourned the sudden loss of grandmaster Daniel Naroditsky. He was a rising star known for both his competitive skill and his warm, approachable presence as both a streamer and teacher. On YouTube, many admit to being absolutely gutted to know they will never see another video uploaded or live stream featuring Daniel.

As the chess community reflected on his legacy following his passing, many were drawn back to one of the more painful chapters in his final year: the feud between Daniel Naroditsky and Vladimir Kramnik.

The tension between these two influential figures was more than just a disagreement. Keep reading to see the details of the feud between Daniel Naroditsky and Vladimir Kramnik explained.

Vladimir, a former World Chess Champion, had long voiced concerns about online cheating in blitz and bullet games. Instead of following what many considered to be proper etiquette among this community by keeping those concerns within private channels, he chose to make them public.

This included making a very pointed accusation at Daniel via his X (formerly Twitter) account in October 2024. To date, Vladimir never submitted any formal evidence to support his claim. As chatter on Reddit explained it best, Vladimir used his high profile status in the chess community to make accusations and ruin careers with no evidence.

Daniel, known for his calm demeanor and thoughtful commentary, didn’t jump into the fight. In fact, he stayed silent for months. Eventually, however, the weight of the situation pushed him to speak — not through a social media post or press release.

According to Prime Timer, he opened up about his side of the situation during his appearance on a chess podcast called Take Take Take. H said, “I’ve been nice and civil and courteous to this army of troglodyte lowlifes for way too long, … I’m not going to tolerate any of the hate any longer.” He described those spreading the claims as “worse than dirt,” and acknowledged that the attacks were taking an emotional toll.

What made this feud so impactful wasn’t just the accusation — it was who was involved. Daniel had come to symbolize a new era in chess: fast-paced, digital-first, and community-driven. His bullet speed runs and coaching streams made the game accessible and fun for players of all levels. Vladimir, in contrast, represented the classical tradition — slower formats, elite competition, and a strong belief in upholding structure and integrity.

Many felt that Vladimir had crossed a line. On Reddit, users accused him of leveraging his legacy to tear others down. One commenter noted that he didn’t accuse Daniel because of any solid evidence, but because Daniel was the most visible streamer affiliated with Chess.com. “If it wasn’t Danya,” the user wrote, “it would've been Hess. And if not Hess, then Aman. Just insane.”

Another added, “He sounded like a man-child struggling with confidence issues. And for some reason, Danya was supposed to stand up for him.”

In the eyes of the chess community, Daniel came across as someone trying to avoid conflict and focus on the game, while Vladimir was seen as turning a personal campaign into a public crusade.

This wasn’t a feud fought out over years of bitter rivalry. It was a one-sided conflict that revealed how easily reputations can be harmed by public figures speaking without evidence. Daniel never lashed out or escalated the fight. He just asked to be left alone to do what he loved — play chess, teach, and connect with the community.