It is Kramnik Adams who to support?
Gilbert Palmer
Funny how we have in the last eight of the world
championship several players who have not yet been
given entry into the elite of world chess by
invitations to the big tournaments. I like this idea.
The Round 5 pairings are: Kramnik-Adams,
Movsesian-Akopian, Polgar-Khalifman, Nisipeanu-Shirov.
I had never heard of Nisipeanu before - does anyone
know anything about him?
Who to root for?
Personally speaking round five sees my favourite modern
player Vladimir Kramnik of Russia pitted against Mickey
Adams of Cornwall. This presents me with a problem -
Who to support? Who to root for? Difficult question.
However after some thought and deliberation, and having
taken into consideration the fact that Kramnik, genius
that he is - is a Johnny Foreigner we have decided for
one round (and one round only) that Mickey will enjoy
the full support of this house, as Adams is (well sort
of) British.
Oh the trials and tribulations of being a chess fan...
Go for it Mickey - he's bound to slip up at some
stage - knock his Petroff out of the park.
I'd also like to see
Khalifman beating Polgar - Should be a good match this
they are both fiercely attacking players, but I have
never had an e-mail from Polgar so I would like to see
Khalifman win.
Akopian beating Movsesian - I have always thought
Akopian a class act, not too familiar with his games
however but he does pop up every now and then with a
lovely middlegame.
Shirov beating Nisipeanu - I'd like to see Shirov go
all the way to the final and then if he wins - turn
down an offer to play Kasparov! Although I do think
that Kramnik (should he get past tricky Mickey and that
will be tough) would beat Shirov THIS TIME.
Gilbert Palmer
A chess fan
Adamski
Palmer <gilb...@virgin.net> writes
>LAS VEGAS
>
>Funny how we have in the last eight of the world
>championship several players who have not yet been
>given entry into the elite of world chess by
>invitations to the big tournaments. I like this idea.
>The Round 5 pairings are: Kramnik-Adams,
>Movsesian-Akopian, Polgar-Khalifman, Nisipeanu-Shirov.
>
>I had never heard of Nisipeanu before
Exactly. Because certain chess magazines would rather put Krush or
other women not in the top 1000, on their covers, than devote their
energies to profiling and interviewing the young Turks.
>- does anyone
>know anything about him?
>
>Who to root for?
>
>Personally speaking round five sees my favourite modern
>player Vladimir Kramnik of Russia pitted against Mickey
>Adams of Cornwall.
Has Mickey come out in support of Cornish Independence yet?
>This presents me with a problem -
>Who to support? Who to root for? Difficult question.
>
>However after some thought and deliberation, and having
>taken into consideration the fact that Kramnik, genius
>that he is
Anyone calling anyone a genius on this group needs to provide their
five master games by way of evidence. I'll be very interested to see
which games you care to select.
> - is a Johnny Foreigner we have decided for
>one round (and one round only) that Mickey will enjoy
>the full support of this house, as Adams is (well sort
>of) British.
>
>Oh the trials and tribulations of being a chess fan...
>
>Go for it Mickey - he's bound to slip up at some
>stage - knock his Petroff out of the park.
>
>I'd also like to see
>
>Khalifman beating Polgar - Should be a good match this
>they are both fiercely attacking players, but I have
>never had an e-mail from Polgar so I would like to see
>Khalifman win.
Name dropping is so vulgar, as I said to Prince Phillip last week.
Send me The Khalif's email. I have some questions for him.
>
>Akopian beating Movsesian
Rolf, those five games, please.
Isofarro
Adamski wrote in message ...
>In article <7ou1ek$425$2...@nclient11-gui.server.virgin.net>,
Gilbert
>Palmer <gilb...@virgin.net> writes
>>LAS VEGAS
>>
>
>Exactly. Because certain chess magazines would rather put Krush
or
>other women not in the top 1000, on their covers, than devote
their
>energies to profiling and interviewing the young Turks.
Then thank goodness they didn't waste more space on that
nonchess player bloke Fischer.
Phew!
Iso.
Gilbert Palmer
KRAMNIK CALLED A GENIUS
>Anyone calling anyone a genius on this group needs to
provide their
>five master games by way of evidence. I'll be very
interested to see
>which games you care to select.
You only want FIVE?
My dear unbeliever! Never in the course of hosiery,
sorry 'history' has such a doddle been tossed in my
direction... but this is quite good, because at my web
site (under construction and waiting the outcome of a
planning permission) I have an un-official biography of
Kramnik writ by my own fair hand, thanks to your puny
little and slightly arrogant challenge and I will now
take the opperchancity to append the following games to
the said (unofficial) biography...
But only five games? ah well,
For anyone with chessbase or chessbase light - simply
copy the following games (one by one) go to chessbase,
hit a new game and press Ctrl+V for the game to be
replayed on the screen. Alternatively if you are like
Adamski, play through them on a board a Newcastle Brown
Ale at yer elbow...
Genius GAME ONE: Here's Kramnik's game that changed a
variation - 7.g4 was considered dangerous country up
until this game, but Kramnik's 7...Bb4! novelty put
paid to this variation. One of the finest finishes in
chess hosiery, sorry history, this:
Gelfand,B - Kramnik,V [D45]
European Team Cup 1996, 1996
[Hodgson]
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Qc2 Bd6
7.g4 Bb4! 8.Bd2 Qe7 9.a3!? Bxc3 10.Bxc3 b6! 11.Bd3 Ba6
12.Qa4 dxc4 13.Qxa6 cxd3 14.Qxd3 0-0 15.g5 Nd5 16.Bd2
[16.e4 Nxc3 17.Qxc3 c5!] 16...f5!! 17.0-0-0 [17.gxf6?
Qxf6] 17...c5 18.Kb1 b5!! 19.Qxb5 Rab8 20.Qa5 Rb3!
21.Ka2 Rfb8 22.Rb1 e5!! 23.Rhc1 Qe6 24.Ka1 exd4 25.Rxc5
[25.exd4?? Rxf3] 25...Nc3 26.Nxd4 Rxb2!!-+ 27.Rxb2
[27.Rc8+ Kf7] 27...Qa2+!! [27...Qa2+ 28.Rxa2 Rb1#] 0-1
That was a queen sacrifice you know....
Genius GAME TWO - Heard of Vishy Anand? Here's Kramnik
giving up his queen for a rook a bishop and a passed d
pawn in the middlegame - to which Anand has no answer -
this game deserves to be in everybody's 'most
instructive' file:
Kramnik,V (2765) - Anand,V (2735) [A30]
Supertorneo Las Palmas Las Palmas (6), 1996
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 b6 3.g3 Bb7 4.Bg2 e6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Nc3 0-0
7.Re1 d5 8.cxd5 Nxd5 9.e4 Nxc3 10.bxc3 c5 11.d4 Nd7
12.Bf4 cxd4 13.cxd4 Nf6 14.Ne5 Bb4 15.Re3 Rc8 16.d5
exd5 17.exd5 Bd6 18.Nc6 Bxc6 19.Bxd6 Ba4 20.Bxf8 Bxd1
21.Be7 Qc7 22.Rxd1 Nd7 23.Bh3 h6 24.Bf5 b5 25.Bb4 Rd8
26.Re7 Qc4 27.Rxd7 Rxd7 28.Bxd7 Qxb4 29.d6 Qa4 30.Rd3
Qe4 31.Bxb5 Qe1+ 32.Kg2 Qe4+ 33.Kg1 Qe1+ 34.Kg2 Qe4+
35.Kf1 Qh1+ 36.Ke2 Qe4+ 37.Kf1 Qh1+ 38.Ke2 Qe4+ 39.Kd1
Qg4+ 40.f3 Qh3 41.d7 1-0
Genius GAME THREE : Here's the famous game from the
Moscow PCA where Kramnik sacs a piece in the middlegame
against a certain Garry Kasparov and crushes him like a
walnut - one of the most genius type games around. If
any of you have never seen this game - let yourself
have a treat and play through this, the full game is
available on video don't you know:
Kramnik Vladimir - Kasparov Garry [E93/03]
It (active), Moscow (Russia) (2), 1994
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.d4 0-0 6.Be2 e5
7.d5 Nbd7 8.Be3 Ng4 9.Bg5 f6 10.Bh4 h5 11.Nd2 Nh6 12.f3
Nf7 13.Qc2 Bh6 14.0-0-0 c5 15.dxc6 bxc6 16.Kb1 a5
17.Na4 c5 18.Nc3 Be3 19.Nd5 Bd4 20.Nb3 Bb7 21.Nxd4 cxd4
22.f4 Rb8 23.Rhf1 Nh6 24.c5 Bxd5 25.exd5 Nf5 26.fxe5
Nxh4 27.exd6 Ne5 28.Rxd4 Nf5 29.Rxf5 gxf5 30.Qxf5 Kg7
31.Bxh5 Rh8 32.Rg4+ Kf8 33.Qe6 Rb7 34.c6 Rxb2+ 35.Kxb2
Qb6+ 36.Ka3 Qc5+ 37.Ka4 Qc2+ 38.Kb5 Qb2+ 39.Ka6 Qe2+
40.Kb7 Rh7+ 41.d7 Nxc6 42.dxc6 1-0
Genius GAME FOUR Against the same opponent here's the
FAMOUS 31.Nc7!!!!!!!!!! game:
Kramnik Vladimir - Kasparov Garry [E97/13]
It (cat.19), Novgorod (Russia) (5), 1997
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.d4 0-0 6.Be2 e5
7.0-0 Nc6 8.d5 Ne7 9.b4 Nh5 10.Re1 Nf4 11.Bf1 a5
12.bxa5 Rxa5 13.Nd2 c5 14.a4 Ra6 15.Ra3 g5 16.g3 Nh3+
17.Bxh3 Bxh3 18.Qh5 Qd7 19.Qxg5 h6 20.Qe3 f5 21.Qe2 f4
22.Nb5 Kh7 23.gxf4 exf4 24.Kh1 Bg4 25.Nf3 Ng6 26.Rg1
Bxf3+ 27.Qxf3 Ne5 28.Qh5 Qf7 29.Qh3 Nxc4 30.Rf3 Be5
31.Nc7 Rxa4 32.Bxf4 1-0
Genius GAME FIVE: This is one of my favourite Kramnik
games of all time - a positional masterpiece with the
black pieces known as "the famous 29...Bd8!! game", who
says the Queen's Gambit is boring? Look at this:
Beliavsky,A (2710) - Kramnik,V (2770) [D58]
Investbanka Belgrade (5), 16.11.1997
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Be7 5.Bg5 0-0 6.e3 h6
7.Bh4 b6 8.Qb3 Bb7 9.Bxf6 Bxf6 10.cxd5 exd5 11.Rd1 Re8
12.Bd3 c5 13.dxc5 Nd7 14.c6 Bxc6 15.0-0 Nc5 16.Qc2 Rc8
17.Bh7+ Kh8 18.Bf5 Ne6 19.Nd4 Nxd4 20.exd4 Rc7 21.Qd3
g6 22.Bg4 h5 23.Bf3 Rce7 24.g3 h4 25.Qd2 Kg7 26.g4 Re6
27.h3 Bg5 28.Qc2 Qd6 29.Qb3 Bd8 30.Bg2 Qf4 31.Rc1 Bc7
32.Rfd1 Rf6 33.Qc2 Re3 34.Kf1 Rxc3 0-1
And so gentlemen of the jury - I rest my case. Kramnik
is a genius!
>Name dropping is so vulgar, as I said to Prince
Phillip last week.
>
>Send me The Khalif's email. I have some questions for
him.
Get it yourself - He's a bit busy at present with young
Polgar...and sorry if I sounded as if I was droping a
name - I was not intending to - but it might have come
across like that. I suppose it is a bit like you
always dropping Mig's name - eh?
Phil Innes
>
> Adamski wrote in message ...
> Genius GAME ONE: Here's Kramnik's game that changed a
> variation - 7.g4 was considered dangerous country up
> until this game, but Kramnik's 7...Bb4! novelty put
> paid to this variation. One of the finest finishes in
> chess hosiery, sorry history, this:
I think both you gentlemen had best refrain from insulting Russian GMs legs. I
cannot recommend this approach from my own experience.
The above note is interesting - reminds me of Bronstein's histoyr of making
the KID "not a losing opening" (Pachman-Bronstein, Moscow 1946) and where he
says that the intial move order avoided the much-feared Saėmisch.
There is a report at
http://www.chesscenter.com/exerpt.htm
>
> >Name dropping is so vulgar, as I said to Prince
> Phillip last week.
Actually, I do not remember this comment, have we been introduced?
> Gilbert Palmer
> A chess fan
Philip
Adamski
Palmer <gilb...@virgin.net> writes
>Adamski wrote in message ...
>
>KRAMNIK CALLED A GENIUS
>
>>Anyone calling anyone a genius on this group needs to
>provide their
>>five master games by way of evidence. I'll be very
>interested to see
>>which games you care to select.
>
>
>You only want FIVE?
>
>My dear unbeliever!
Excuse me, it's a house rule.
I was hoping you'd place greater emphasis on earlier in his career, as
more in the spirit of Rolf's original request re Polgar.
Help is at hand in the person of the V-man himself, interviewed by NIC
back in May 1993:
Q: In the September 1963 issue of Chess Life Robert Fischer analyzed a
game he played against Hans Berliner at the Western Open. At the end of
this highly illuminating analysis Fischer wrote, 'It is difficult to
find one particular game that is typical of my "style". This comes
close.' It was a seemingly simple, straightforward, chrystal-clear (sic)
game. Which of your games do you think are representative of your style?
K: (After a short think) My game against Ulibin in Chalkidiki last year.
Against Ivanchuk in Linares this year. Kamsky in Linares. Seirawan in
Manila. And John Nunn in Manila. I could name other games, but these
were games where at certain points I showed interesting ideas, something
deep. I cannot say that I always play very deep games and that's why I
am very happy when occasionally I play a game that can be seen as an
entity.
[Event "It (cat.14)"]
[Site "Chalkidiki (Greece)"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[White "Kramnik, V"]
[Black "Ulibin, M"]
[Round "9"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A40"]
1. d4 e6 2. c4 Nf6 3. Nf3 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 Qe7 5. g3
Nc6 6. Nc3 O-O 7. Bg2 Bxc3 8. Bxc3 Ne4 9. Rc1
d6 10. d5 Nd8 11. dxe6 Nxe6 12. Bb4 Bd7 13. Ne5
N6c5 14. Nxd7 Nxd7 15. O-O a5 16. Ba3 Rfe8 17. b3
b6 18. Bb2 Rad8 19. Qd4 Qf6 20. Qxf6 Ndxf6 21. Rfd1
h6 22. e3 Nd7 23. Kf1 Re7 24. Ke2 Rde8 25. g4
Re6 26. h4 R6e7 27. Bf3 Ndc5 28. Rd5 Na6 29. a3
Nac5 30. b4 axb4 31. axb4 Na6 32. b5 Nac5 33. Ra1
Nf6 34. Rdd1 Nfe4 35. Ra7 Kf8 36. g5 hxg5 37. hxg5
Nxg5 38. Bc6 Rc8 39. Rh1 Kg8 40. Raa1 Nce6 41. Rh4
f6 42. Rg1 Kf7 43. Bd5 Ke8 44. Rh8+ Nf8 45. f4
Nge6 46. Kf3 f5 47. Rg6 Nc5 48. Bxg7 Rf7 49. Bxf8 1-0
[Event "It"]
[Site "Linares (Spain)"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[White "Ivanchuk, V"]
[Black "Kramnik, V"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B33"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3
d6 6. Bc4 Qb6 7. Nb3 e6 8. Bf4 Ne5 9. Be2
a6 10. Bg3 h5 11. h3 Qc7 12. f4 Nc4 13. Bxc4
Qxc4 14. Qf3 h4 15. Bh2 Bd7 16. O-O-O Rc8 17. Rhe1
b5 18. Qf2 Qc7 19. e5 b4 20. Rd3 dxe5 21. fxe5
bxc3 22. Rxc3 Qxc3 23. bxc3 Ba3+ 24. Kd2 Nd5 25. Re4
Rxc3 26. Rg4 O-O 27. Qxh4 Rfc8 28. Nd4 Bb4 29. Ke2
Bb5+ 30. Nxb5 Rxc2+ 31. Kf3 axb5 32. Rxb4 Nxb4 33. Qxb4 R8c3+ 0-1
[Event "It"]
[Site "Linares (Spain)"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[White "Kramnik, V"]
[Black "Kamsky, G"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D02"]
1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. c4 c6 4. Nc3 e6 5. Bg5
Nbd7 6. e3 Qa5 7. Nd2 Bb4 8. Qc2 e5 9. Nb3
Qc7 10. Be2 dxc4 11. Bxc4 O-O 12. O-O Bd6 13. h3
Re8 14. Rad1 exd4 15. Nxd4 Be5 16. f4 Bxd4 17. Rxd4
Rxe3 18. Rfd1 Nf8 19. f5 Qe7 20. Bxe3 Qxe3+ 21. Qf2
Qxf2+ 22. Kxf2 Bxf5 23. Rd8 Rxd8 24. Rxd8 b5 25. Be2
a5 26. Bf3 Bd7 27. Ra8 g5 28. Ra6 Ne6 29. Bxc6
Bxc6 30. Rxc6 b4 31. Ne2 a4 32. Rc4 Nd5 33. g3
Kf8 34. Nd4 Nec7 35. Nc6 b3 36. axb3 axb3 37. Nb4
Ke7 38. Nxd5+ Nxd5 39. Rd4 Ke6 40. Rd3 h5 41. Rxb3
f5 42. Rb8 f4 43. Rh8 fxg3+ 44. Kxg3 Nf6 45. b4
Kd5 46. Rh6 Ne4+ 47. Kg2 h4 48. Kf3 Nd2+ 49. Kg4 Ne4
50. b5 Nf2+ 51. Kf5 1-0
[Event "Olympiad"]
[Site "Manila (Philippines)"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[White "Kramnik, V"]
[Black "Nunn, J"]
[Round "14"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E81"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3
O-O 6. Be3 c5 7. dxc5 dxc5 8. Qxd8 Rxd8 9. Bxc5
Nc6 10. Ba3 a5 11. Rd1 Be6 12. Nd5 Bxd5 13. cxd5
Nb4 14. Bb5 Nc2+ 15. Kf2 Nxa3 16. bxa3 e6 17. d6
e5 18. Ne2 Bf8 19. d7 Bxa3 20. g4 h6 21. h4
a4 22. Rd3 Bb2 23. g5 hxg5 24. hxg5 Nh7 25. f4
Ra5 26. Rd5 f6 27. Rxh7 Kxh7 28. gxf6 exf4 29. e5
Kh6 30. Nxf4 Bxe5 31. Rxe5 Rxd7 32. Bxd7 Rxe5 33. f7 1-0
[Event "Olympiad"]
[Site "Manila (Philippines)"]
[Date "1992.??.??"]
[White "Seirawan, Y"]
[Black "Kramnik, V"]
[Round "7"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D31"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 c6 4. e3 Nf6 5. Nf3
Nbd7 6. Bd3 dxc4 7. Bxc4 b5 8. Be2 a6 9. e4
b4 10. e5 bxc3 11. exf6 Nxf6 12. bxc3 Bd6 13. O-O
O-O 14. c4 c5 15. Ba3 Qa5 16. Bxc5 Bxc5 17. dxc5
Rd8 18. Qb3 Qxc5 19. Rab1 Bd7 20. Qe3 Qxe3 21. fxe3
Ne4 22. Rfc1 Nc5 23. Nd4 Ba4 24. Bd1 Bxd1 25. Rxd1
Rac8 26. Nb3 Rxd1+ 27. Rxd1 Kf8 28. Rd6 Ne4 29. Rxa6
Rxc4 30. Kf1 Rc2 31. Ra8+ Ke7 32. Ra7+ Kf6 33. Ra4
Nd6 34. Nd4 Rc3 35. Kf2 Nc4 36. e4 g5 37. h3
h5 38. Rb4 Ne5 39. Rb1 Ra3 40. Ra1 Nd3+ 41. Ke2
Nc5 42. Nb5 Ra4 43. Nd6 Nxe4 44. Nxe4+ Rxe4+ 45. Kd3
Ra4 46. Kc3 Ke5 47. Kb3 Ra7 48. a4 Kf4 49. Kc4
f5 50. Ra3 e5 51. a5 h4 52. a6 e4 53. Kd4
e3 54. Kd3 Kg3 55. Kxe3 Kxg2 56. Ra2+ Kxh3 57. Kf3
g4+ 58. Kf2 g3+ 59. Kf3 f4 60. Ra1 g2 61. Kf2 Kh2 0-1
>
>
>>Name dropping is so vulgar, as I said to Prince
>Phillip last week.
>>
>>Send me The Khalif's email. I have some questions for
>him.
>
>Get it yourself
I don't think I care for your tone. The questions can wait. They
won't go away.
>- He's a bit busy at present with young
>Polgar
Lassie is on her way home. BTW did you see the clip of her playing
Zjag on TWIC? Boy, she's getting to be a big girl. Gives our vet
friend something to grab a hold of.
Edward Autumn
Who to support???
Rule Brittania, Britannia rules the waves!
Darren Jones
>Who to support???
>
>Rule Brittania, Britannia rules the waves!
You realise that's guaranteed to put every non-Brit off!
--
D Jones
Isofarro
Adamski
>
>Help is at hand in the person of the V-man himself, interviewed by NIC
>back in May 1993:
Some other excerpts that might interest you:
A good few years ago news started to filter through from the then Soviet
Union that a fresh young 'K' had appeared on the chess scene, an
extraordinary talent called Vladimir Kramnik. Another young 'K', Gata
Kamsky, has often complained publicly about the problems he encountered
in his early Soviet days when hordes of Kasparov supporters were
allegedly making life difficult for him. How were your junior days? Did
people help or stimulate you or did you have similar experiences?
K: No, I didn't. I cannot say, as Kamsky related about his case,
that anyone frustrated my development as a chess player. On the
contrary, a lot of people have helped me. As a junior I got ample
opportunity to play tournaments in Krasnodar and the neighbouring
region. Things got even better after I had won the under-15 junior
championship of the Soviet Union when I was tweleve years old. I scored
nine and a half out of eleven, an excellent score. After that result
Botvinnik invited me to his school, which he was leading together with
Kasparov at that time. Both Botvinnik and Kasparov helped me to find
some tournaments to play in. I could not name anyone who blocked or
hindered my progress.
(...)
Was there anything out of the ordinary that impressed or struck your
teachers at the Botvinnik-Kasparov school when you first went there?
Any remarkable feats you performed?
K: (Smiles) Yes, there was. I had a very original style for a boy of
my age. I was very fond of the endgame and liked to exchange pieces. Of
course, Botvinnik found this fantastic. This came as a complete suprise
to him. At the time I already had a good understanding of which squares
I should put the pieces on and which plan I should go for. I remember
that when I was ten years old I studied My System by Nimzowitsch, a book
which contributed a great deal to my chess education.
In what manner? You say that you already had this natural feeling of
where to put the pieces. What did Nimzowitsch add to that?
K: No, I did not mean that I had such a natural feeling. Now I would
say that probably I got this feeling from reading this book and that
later I developed this further.
Did you have easy access to chess books?
K: I can say that my style may be explained by the fact that my
favourite book was Anatoly Karpov's Sixty Best Games. I played through
these games over and over again and this probably helped formed my
style. I only had very few chess books. There were not many chess books
in the local bookshop. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that
the books chose me rather than that I chose the books (laughs). It is
quite possible that my style would have been completely different if
my first book had been a games collection of Kasparov. But this was
just the way it went.
(...)
Which are the things you miss most when you are at home in Tuapse at
the Black Sea and vice versa when you are away from home?
K: Honestly speaking the thing I miss most in Tuapse is intellectual
contact. Of course, there are my parents and my brother, but them I have
already known a long time. You must understand that the towm where I
live is in a certain sense just a big village. There are hardly any or
maybe no people who have travelled and have something interesting to
say. That is certainly something I miss a lot. But I am a Russian and
when I am in the West I may miss the company of other Russians. Only
a Russian can understand another Russian. That is the feeling I miss
most when I am in the West.
(...)
Of course it is not only energy. A couple of days ago Anand expressed
his admiration for the enormous amount of new ideas you have. Do you
work hard on this or do these ideas come naturally to you?
K: That is true. Apart from my energy the source of my successes is my
working hard. Particularly on the openings. I have many ideas in the
opening.
You said that you like to work alone. However, you also work together
with Shirov, a collaboration that may seem a bit strange to the outside
world as your styles are quite different.
K: I can tell you that I have never in my life spent two or three weeks
training together with anyone. As for Shirov, we may meet at tournaments
and spend one day on a certain position. Or we may call each other by
telephone and discuss a variation on the phone. But there has never been
any question of systematic collaboration. I have never had a permanent
trainer. Just as with Shirov I've been in contact with many people and
have profited a lot from these contacts by finding out how they think.
Their views. They did not even have to be strong grandmasters. Also
masters might inspire me with their way of thinking and their
understanding of chess.
Could you mention any names?
K: People like Gelfand or Khalifman, but these are well-known names.
I can also mention lesser known players, like Tseshkovsky. He has a
very deep understanding of chess. Or Ibragimov, a very interesting chess
player. Or Khenkin, another grandmaster. There are many people. I always
felt attracted to people with a personal way of thinking. That's how I,
too, always wanted to look at chess. I may mention once again the name
of Tseshkovsky. His way of looking at chess and his understanding is
completely different from mine. That makes it interesting to work with
him. Let me give you an example. After this tournament I started to
think about the following phenomenon. If you take the Sicilian, there
are three types of player who play that opening. First, players who just
play the Sicilian. The second category of adherents to the Sicilian feel
this opening. I fit in this second category. I have been playing the
Sicilian ever since I was six, so I feel this opening. The third type of
player is someone like Tseshkovsky, a player who understands this
opening. This is not easily attained. Except for Tseshkovsky I can
mention the names of Kasparov and Short. They understand this opening.
The others feel, or even worse, play this opening (laughs). I might look
at a position and have a feeling that it's slightly better for one side.
I would show this position to Tseshkovsky and he would wonder why I
wasn't so sure and say, "What are you talking about? Of course it's
better."
(...)
>
>Q: In the September 1963 issue of Chess Life Robert Fischer analyzed a
>game he played against Hans Berliner at the Western Open. At the end of
>this highly illuminating analysis Fischer wrote, 'It is difficult to
>find one particular game that is typical of my "style". This comes
>close.' It was a seemingly simple, straightforward, chrystal-clear (sic)
>game. Which of your games do you think are representative of your style?
>
>K: (After a short think) My game against Ulibin in Chalkidiki last year.
>Against Ivanchuk in Linares this year. Kamsky in Linares. Seirawan in
>Manila. And John Nunn in Manila. I could name other games, but these
>were games where at certain points I showed interesting ideas, something
>deep. I cannot say that I always play very deep games and that's why I
>am very happy when occasionally I play a game that can be seen as an
>entity.
>
Who amongst the younger players do you feel some affinity for as far
as style is concerned?
K: That is difficult to say. I might mention Sakaev. Not for his style,
but because of the way we approach chess. There are a lot of positions
that we understand and evaluate in the same manner.
And older players?
K: I have the same with Khalifman.
And even older?
K: So far I haven't had too much contact with others, but if I look
at the games of Ivanchuk I get the feeling that we have many things in
common as well. If you take Gelfand for instance, just to give a
contrasting example, he is something completely different. In my opinion
Gelfand loves difficult, extremely complicated positions. That's the
kind of position he steers for and the kind of positions he plays very
well. I, on the other hand, prefer positions with very clear positional
reference points. Hard to define what that means. It's something you
simply feel.