What thoughts are running through your brain when you get paired against someone rated a few hundred points above yourself? Are you an “eternal student” type of person, meekly expecting to lose, but to get a free lesson in return? Or do you spend your evening before the round trying to find a drawish line for White which is supposed to help you earn a much-desired draw? If so, I believe you are hurting your chess future! 

A true champion does his best to win every game. If he loses, he takes the medicine and learns the lesson. Players of a weaker spirit think in a different fashion. They rely on ratings and titles and start making calculations: “this guy is a GM, so a draw would be nice”; “that dude is 2200, so I have to beat him for my IM norm”. In fact, this shortcoming is typical even of average GMs, while only the very top guys have this ambition to excel and to take risks. 

In 1988, Garry Kasparov was giving a simul to six promising US juniors. In one of the games, Daniel Edelman (2360) started repeating moves against his opponent with White, clearly hoping for a draw. Garry was disgusted and shocked by such behavior: "You have White; you have to play. That is my opinion, sorry. When I was young, I would never have missed a chance to play the World Champion." Kasparov offered Daniel a chance to continue the game, but in the end the conflict was settled, and a draw was agreed. Since I have never heard about Edelman, I decided to check out his chess bio. It turned out that the guy has “only” reached IM level and the rating peak of 2420 over the course of many years. Now that’s not what one expects when being a 2360-rated junior, right? However primadonnish Kasparov’s outrage has been, one can’t deny that he was right in the sense of discovering a glaring flaw in Daniel’s psychology. Judging by what we know about his further chess career, lack of fighting spirit probably wasn’t Edelman’s only problem in chess. 

Unfortunately, all the videos of this accident seem to have been removed from YouTube. You can see the footage in the "American Gambit" (1989) documentary. 

Some people think that if their opponent plays a beautiful game, it’s OK to lose. I don’t. You have to be merciless.

Great champions are well-known for dominating their contemporaries. When Kasparov was in his prime, quite a few other top GMs had this aura of hopelessness right from the start of the game when facing him. For most of them, even making a draw was considered a good result, and very few dared to dream about defeating Gazza. On a psychological level, this is not particularly surprising when you realize how devastating the scores of most super GMs were against the 13th World Champion. Here are some of Kasparov’s stats in classical chess against the world-class players of his era:

·       8 wins, 0 losses, 5 draws against Evgeny Bareev

·       15 wins, 0 losses, 14 draws against Alexei Shirov

·       9 wins, 0 losses, 8 draws against Boris Gelfand

·       7 wins, 0 losses, 2 draws against Judit Polgar

·       3 wins, 0 losses, 8 draws against Valery Salov

Similarly, people from Carlsen’s generation, +-5 years, seem to be utterly intimidated by him. This reminded me of a joke that a much older person, chess legend Vladimir Kramnik, made when he finished second in one of the tournaments, right behind Carlsen. He stated that he had essentially won the event since Carlsen was in a different league compared to others. And this revelation was coming from a man who whitewashed Kasparov in a WCC match! Unsurprisingly, a common belief these days is that Carlsen’s peers will probably not be able to wrestle the crown away from him unless he decides to walk away undefeated. In contrast, the young and upcoming chess prodigies don’t seem to idolize him as much as players of the older generations. Even though they are still considerably weaker that Magnus, you can see how passionate they are to show their best when facing him. No chickening out into a draw from most of them. 

I am trying to beat the guy sitting across from me and trying to choose the moves that are most unpleasant for him and his style.

One may point out that the experience of the top players who face each other repeatedly in closed event is very much different from what most of us deal with. This is partially so, but the point still stands true. Besides, even if you play at the club level, you typically have your own “bosses” around, such as nemeses who keep crushing you over and over again in friendly blitz, or people who win the championship of your city year after year, and so on. If you want to overcome them one day, you should believe in your ability to give them a run for their money when you meet over the board. 

I can’t count the times I have lagged seemingly hopelessly far behind, and nobody except myself thinks I can win. But I have pulled myself in from desperate [situations]. When you are behind there are two strategies – counter-attack or all men to the defenses. I’m good at finding the right balance between those.

Another related topic that comes to mind is the “every Russian schoolboy knows” advice to play solidly in an event where the caliber of opponents exceeds your out. Some old-school coaches believe that, especially when reaching GM or super GM level, you should first learn how to handle the pressure and to make draws, and only then aspire to beating the rating favorites. However, I believe this tip works best for people who are relatively faint-hearted and easily dismayed by losses. On a separate note, even some very top GMs have this “glass jaw” issue: if they suffer a painful defeat, they have trouble pulling themselves together. Also, this approach can be detrimental to the young talent’s development in the sense that they get used to 50% being a great result. Consequently, some of them grow up too cautious and not ambitious enough. And if the audience was applauding them for being able to hold their own against the chess elite at age 15, when they hit age 25 or 30, they still hug that coveted 50% mark, but the applauses are no longer there. In my opinion, people who want to unlock their potential fully shouldn’t be afraid to take risks or discouraged by losing streaks. If you can’t cope with a few losses in a row, you will probably not stick around for long in competitive chess anyway. 

So far, we have mostly been discussing the psychological aspect of this issue. However, even in purely chess terms, it is much more preferable to play for a win than for a draw, not to mention feeling doomed and marking time before an unavoidable loss. Stronger chess players don’t like being pushed around, challenged. They enjoy being feared and love seeing the opponent naively try to exchange as many pieces as possible, usually making one small concession after another along the way. Then, when the underdogs reach a drawish or worse endgame, the favorites capitalize on their experience and grind it out rather effortlessly. I have seen this a gazillion times in my tournament practice.

While learning from other people’s mistakes is what we should all strive for, most of us learn the lesson better when it is a firsthand experience. For me the moment of truth was a game against an experienced candidate master rated 2200+. I was a kid back then and felt intimidated by the opponent’s rating and patronizing look. The fight fizzled out into an endgame where I was slightly better due to having a bishop pair (two bishops and a few pawns vs. his bishop and knight with some pawns). I was so proud of myself that I offered him a draw. This is the worst thing you can do in such a situation! The veteran gave me a stern look and played on. I felt insulted and disappointed and collapsed quickly, pushing pawns on the side where I was weaker, allowing him to create a passed pawn and eventually promote it. From that moment on, I have been going for the throat of any opponent, including top GMs when I was Black. And, I have to tell you, they didn’t like that, since when the opponent goes all-out against you, you can’t expect an easy walk in the park like the one I described above. 

Self-confidence is very important. If you don’t think you can win, you will take cowardly decisions in the crucial moments, out of sheer respect for your opponent. You see the opportunity but also greater limitations than you should. I have always believed in what I do on the chessboard, even when I had no objective reason to. It is better to overestimate your prospects than underestimate them.

Bottom line: I suggest you put up a fight in every game. You will enjoy chess more this way, and opponents will be afraid of you, even if they are higher rated. However, of course, playing for a win doesn’t imply being reckless or pressing the position too much when it doesn’t allow it. Also, there are certain situations when a quick draw is useful, for instance, when you are ill. Still, the “play for a win in every game” rule applies to most situations in chess.

The Play Magnus app does have an “offer draw” feature. However, when you challenge Magnus Carlsen, Judit Polgar, Wesley So or other character there, I highly recommend that you do your best to knock them out! 

“Not winning a tournament is not an option for me unless it’s no longer theoretically possible – then of course winning becomes impossible. But up to that point, not winning is just not an option.” – Magnus Carlsen. 

The question whether there is rating inflation in chess or not is one of the most hotly debated topics in the chess community. Some players accept it as a universally acknowledged fact that the ratings keep growing year by year and hence assume that top masters from the past would have been rated higher today than they were back then. This belief is further enforced by interviews of former world-class players who are currently inactive. Some of them like fondly recalling their glory days when there was a limited number of 2600s in the world, and only a couple of 2700+ GMs. By mentioning this fact, they proceed to make a claim about the ratings having inflated. But is this true if we consider objective playing strength, not ranking? 

Jose Raul Capablanca was a merciless chess machine who hasn’t lost a single tournament game from 1916 to 1924. 

In his article titled “Would Carlsen have beaten Capablanca?” , GM Daniel Gormally tried to explain to the audience that chess standards have risen a lot over time. As a result, if we used a time machine to bring any of the masters from the past into the modern day, they wouldn’t stand much of a chance. The article attracted an incredible amount of attention from the readers and was received rather poorly. Let’s see what Daniel opined about Capablanca:

But what about Capa? How would he compare strength-wise to the players of today? I think he would come off rather badly. The difference in terms of knowledge and understanding between the players of today and the players of the 1920s and 30s is enormous. I know people who think Capablanca would struggle to break a 2500 rating if he came back today. I'm not sure if I completely agree with this, because Capablanca's raw chess talent is much higher than a 2500 player, but chess is also a game of information. It's difficult to see how Capablanca would have coped with the greater knowledge and sharp chess theory of today's chess elite. Sure, give him six months, and he might be able to bridge the gap, but it really is a huge leap. It's like trying to compare Jesse Owens to Usain Bolt, he'd be left many yards behind.

Here is what Dr. GM John Nunn had to say about one of the participants of the Karlsbad-1911 super tournament featuring such legendary names as Alekhine, Rubinstein, Nimzowitsch, Tartakower, Spielmann, Marshall, etc. In fact, they were all contemporaries and rivals of Jose Raul Capablanca to one extent or another. The quote is from “John Nunn’s Chess Puzzle Book”:

In order to be more specific about Karlsbad, take one player: Hugo Süchting (1874-1916). At Karlsbad he scored 11.5/13.5 or 'minus 2', as they say these days - a perfectly respectable score. Having played over all his games at Karlsbad I think that I can confidently state that his playing strength was not greater than Elo 2100 (BCF 187) - and that was on a good day and with a following wind. 

Let me quote one more passage from the same source:

Returning then to the question as to how Süchting scored 11.5 points, the answer is simply that the other players were not much better. If we assume Süchting as 2100, then his score implies an average rating for the tournament of 2129 - it would not even be assigned a category today.

This assessment seems quite reasonable to me. I also had an impression that the winners of the tournament used to play at below IM level by modern standards. However, when you tell that to typical chess fans, they start puffing, rolling their eyes wildly and accusing you of blasphemy! The same people also love whining about the “overrated” top players nowadays and claiming that someone like Morphy would have beaten them all. They seem to fail to acknowledge the difference between the terms “talent” and “playing strength”. Paul Morphy was definitely an extremely talented individual who was miles ahead of his contemporaries in terms of chess skills. However, back then the overall level of chess in the world was so low that he had no chance to become a proficient player by modern standards. After all, our knowledge about all aspects of chess has increased tremendously since that time, especially in the last few decades of computer revolution. That being said, some ex-World Champions remain objective and admit that. For instance, when people start bugging Garry Kasparov who is the better player: Magnus Carlsen or Garry in his prime, Garry always points out that the next generation tends to surpass the achievements of the previous ones and offers analogies such as that modern students know more about science than Isaac Newton, but it doesn’t diminish his discoveries. It’s just that you can’t directly compare chess players (or scientists) who have lived in different eras. 

Another reason why people tend to overestimate the prowess of the players of the past is that we typically remember only the best masterpieces of their lifetimes. And if you check out all the games, you will realize that they have been blundering left and right on their offdays. Even with game collections, it is not that simple. I recall a funny conversation with IM Vladislav Akselrod on this matter. One of his students asked him whose games to study as an example of attacking chess. Vlad’s first instinct was to give him a tip of advice that dates to the Soviet days: “Study Alekhine’s games since he was an exceptional tactician!”. However, when Vlad himself opened a book of Alekhine’s selected (!) games…at this point he made a vivid grimace as if he had tasted something sour! As a result, he decided that, with all due respect to Alekhine’s greatness, nowadays there are probably better role models for aspiring competitive chess players. 

What about the statistical evidence? In the paper titled “Intrinsic Chess Ratings” by Kenneth W. Regan and Guy McC. Haworth (May 18, 2011), the authors posed two important chess questions:

1.     Has there been ‘inflation’—or deflation—in the chess Elo rating system over the past forty years?

2.     Were the top players of earlier times as strong as the top players of today?

They have arrived at the following conclusion:

…there has been little or no ‘inflation’ in ratings over time—if anything there has been deflation. This runs counter to conventional wisdom, but is predicted by population models on which rating systems have been based [Gli99]. 

The results also support a ‘no’ answer to question 2. In the 1970’s there were only two players with ratings over 2700, namely Bobby Fischer and Anatoly Karpov, and there were periods as late as 1981 when no one had a rating over 2700 (see [Wee00]). In the past decade, however, there have usually been thirty or more players with such ratings. Thus the lack of inflation implies that those players are better than all but Fischer and Karpov. Extrapolated backwards, this would be consistent with the findings of [DHMG07], which (like some recent competitions to improve on the Elo system) are based only on the results of games, not on intrinsic decision-making.

Since Elo ratings were introduced in 1971, only three players were able to set new all-time records.

If you talk to players whose careers have spanned decades and who are still active, they will probably acknowledge that the standards have risen dramatically. In the past, Mikhail Tal used to say that he would have crushed his former self from the days when he was the World Champion since his understanding of chess has improved a lot. And that was before the computer age, which has revolutionized chess! To give you a more recent statement, last month I have stumbled upon an interesting quote by Sergei Tiviakov in the “Chess for Life” book by Matthew Sadler and Natasha Regan, published in 2016:

What areas of your game have improved and worsened? 

In general, my level of chess playing has become better. I am playing a better level of chess than before. But the problem is that the general level of playing chess in the world has increased much more than my level of chess. In comparison, I am falling behind. Sometimes I look at my older games and I’m really surprised how poorly I played before. In general, I think I’m playing better than before.

Sergei Tiviakov, three-time Dutch Chess Champion. Image © ChessBase.ru. 

Sergei is one of the most experienced players on the circuit, who has played a few thousand tournament games, winning dozens of events and visiting a plethora of countries. At one point, he had a streak of 110 consecutive games undefeated. He knows what he is talking about, and I can totally relate to what he is saying.

When I and my friends were starting on “serious” chess and received ratings of about FIDE 2000, we had no opening files and could play pretty much anything we wanted from scratch. Our “preparation” was finding a scoresheet from the previous round and checking out what first move your opponent made. We were rather clueless about endgames, even very basic ones, such as the Lucena position in rook endgames. Our defensive skills were pretty much negligible. Nowadays, thanks to chess engines, databases and other modern technology, kids learn to play like engines from the very start. They know sharp lines up to 15-20 moves and have much more middlegame experience due to being able to spam online training games against a diverse field of opponents. They prepare carefully with databases, engines and opening trees, relying on statistics to pick the optimal weapons against the opponents. They are much more resistant since engines teach you how to sacrifice material for the sake of getting counterplay, or to defend stubbornly in general even when things look bleak. I could go on about this for a long time, but my informal assessment is that someone rated 2000, let’s say, 20 years ago, would probably be 1700 or so by modern standards. That is, if we are talking about a time machine type of scenario. 

COVID-19 has had a tremendous impact on chess ratings as well. Namely, the improving players didn’t get much chance to compete during the last couple of years. As a result, nowadays in open tournament there are many kids rated like 1500-1600 who tear apart experienced 2000+ players. This, in its own turn, affects players with higher ratings as well, since if you were farming those 2000 guys before, now their ratings will probably plummet to 1800-1900, and you would be expected to score much more points against them than previously. I have seen GM discussions on FB on this topic, and we are talking about active professionals who are close to their peak in terms of strength, not some washed-up has-beens who need to come up with excuses to justify their poor performances. 

Anyway, no matter what the research findings, logical arguments and empirical experiences of the leading GMs and computer scientists are, I still realize that I am fighting an uphill battle here when trying to prove my case. The eyes of most chess fans will remain dazzled by the very best masterpieces of the good old times and by the scale of the personalities of the maestros. 

Wondering how to improve faster than the chess world in general? Try out Magnus Trainer, a one-stop app created by World Champion Magnus Carlsen and his star-studded team of experts! 

Unless you have been hiding under a rock, you must have heard about “rating inflation” in chess. Is it a scientific fact or a popular myth that deserves debunking? 

Rating Inflation in Chess: True or False? 

If you are following the Oslo Esports Cup (don’t tell me you aren’t!), you have surely noticed that Magnus Carlsen has been struggling with some health issues throughout the event. He looks weary and is sometimes on the verge of falling asleep over the board, has a nasty cough and walks around shakily, trying to speak to the reporters as little as possible. 

Unfortunately, sicknesses are an unavoidable part of a tournament player’s routine. Let’s say you find out before or during an event that you are ill. How do you handle this dire situation? 

In a perfect world, you should seek medical help and then decide whether to continue or not. However, quite often the symptoms are not that scary, and you have no possibility to consult the right doctor in due time, so you have to take risks and make decisions on the spot.

We have had a long discussion on this topic in the 2000s with Natalia Pogonina. I was arguing in favor of withdrawing when you are sick. My points were that when you are ill, you might worsen your condition by playing on. Also, you tend to perform poorly, hurting your rating and not winning any prize. Overall, the whole process feels more like a torture than entertainment. Moreover, even when you are not ill, some players, for instance, participants of open events in the US, routinely drop out of the tournament if they start poorly. The reason for this is that the prize fund there typically has a pyramid shape, and only finishing in the top spots allows you to reap tangible rewards. Therefore, if you start with, let’s say, 2/4, you are out of contention and may as well save yourself some time by withdrawing from the event. 

Natalia, however, disagreed and pointed out that one should have a fighter’s spirit and be ready to play on even if things are not going your way. What she said was essentially “Winners never quit, quitters never win”, even though she doesn’t like such simplistic motivational quotes. As far as I remember, regardless of the issues she has been having, she only withdrew from one tournament in her life. And that was in the Russian Women’s Superfinal in 2009, when the doctors stated that playing on was an absolute no-no. 

I can see where she is coming from. Once you start nurturing your inner weaknesses, you will eventually fall apart psychologically and be giving up on tournaments not only when you are seriously ill, but when you feel tired, distracted, burned out, demotivated and so on. This is a slippery path that can lead to quitting competitive chess in general. 

Also, she has this attitude of a player who regularly competes at the most prestigious individual and team women’s tournaments and/or gets appearance fees. The responsibility in such events is on a different level compared to someone who plays local open events just to have fun. Of course, one does not simply bow out of a World Championship or Chess Olympiad after catching a cold. 

Overall, I believe there is some truth to both her and my arguments. A lot depends on whether you are an amateur, semi-pro or pro player. For most of us, our wellbeing should arguably be of a much higher priority than tournament standings or FIDE ratings. For pros who live by the “chess is my life” motto, the conclusion could be different. 

In 1961, Mikhail Tal was scheduled to play a rematch against Mikhail Botvinnik. The conventional narrative is that in the 1960 match Botvinnik didn’t take his opponent seriously enough and lost the title, 8.5-12.5. Then the Patriarch of Soviet Chess did his homework, revamped his openings, and came back in style, convincingly defeating the Magician from Riga, 13-8. This story has another plot as well. Mikhail Tal generally had fragile health and therefore died young. Before the rematch, he was having serious issues with his kidneys and asked for a postponement. Mikhail Botvinnik, a formalist and someone who argued that one should never do your opponents any favors, demanded that Tal undergo an extensive examination in Moscow. Indirectly, he was hinting that the illness was a cover-up. Tal was insulted and, according to his coach, Alexander Koblentc, blurted out, “Even if I am half-alive, I will still beat the old fart!” As a result, aged 24, Misha Tal became the youngest Ex-World Chess Champion and never got another shot at the title. 

Bobby Fischer visiting Mikhail Tal in a hospital in 1962

I have known some selfish chess players who made such decisions based only on their personal wellbeing and even joked about "evening the odds" by infecting the opponents. However, if you believe the illness you have may be contagious, there is an important aspect of caring about other participants. 

At the FIDE World Cup 2021, Levon Aronian, who was the #3 seed, forfeited both games in the second round of the event for health-related reasons. As far as I know, his decision was based not only on his personal problems, but also on the unwillingness to put other participants of the tournament at risk. 

Let’s say you have weighed all the pros and cons and made a responsible decision to keep playing on. 

Interviews with Vladimir Kramnik have been eye-opening for me when it comes to dealing with illnesses as a chess player. His tips are especially useful for people like me, perfectionists and control freaks, who try too hard to perform well.

According to Kramnik, in general, no matter how well you prepare for an important event, there are no guarantees that everything will go smoothly. There is always some magic involved. Sometimes you do everything “right”, and the result is terrible. In other cases, you are facing one obstacle after another, but the outcome is favorable. 

Kramnik has been known for playing tournaments with an extreme fever, sleep-deprived, experiencing pains in his body and so on. According to him, especially as you become older, you are getting used to the new norm of not feeling totally OK on pretty much any day. If you embrace it and treat it as an exciting challenge that is part of every person’s life, it is much easier to deal with the issues. Moreover, it is a good way to shake off the stress and tension that haunts some people who are obsessed with their tournament performances. In other words, if you let go of the burden of performing at your best and focus on (literally) surviving the day, sometimes your results even improve! In fact, Kramnik has won some tournaments feeling extremely poorly, and his opponents were not even aware of this! 

Some friendly trolling from the 14th World Chess Champion

If you are experiencing health issues, think how to make life easier for yourself.

In 1985 in Tilburg, Tony Miles was going through severe back pains. To soothe them somehow, he took painkillers and played while lying flat on a massage table. One of his opponents, Roman Dzindzhichashvili, said that in return he will stand throughout the entire game! He also smoked over the board, which was not forbidden back then. It is hard to say whether Miles’ decision was justified or not. As far as I know, his doctor lamented that lying on his belly with such a condition was the worst thing he could have done. Still, from a chess perspective, it was a lifehack that allowed him to play on in the tournament. Notably, Miles shared the first place there with Robert Huebner and Viktor Korchnoi, scoring 8.5 points out of 14. 

When you are feeling sick, it makes sense to fall back upon your solid, bulletproof opening repertoire that you know from a to z. That is, if you have it, of course! In contrast, experimenting with openings and trying out new sharp lines that you haven’t mastered yet can lead to a disaster. When you are sick, you need to minimize the amount of calculation required, because blunders are much more likely to come as compared to when you are your normal self. 

You would normally not expect Magnus Carlsen to make such blunders. However, when you are sick, everything is possible! 

If you are one of those people who spend hours rehearsing their opening lines before the round, it may be a way of shooting yourself in the foot when you are ill. If your head is dizzy, you are unlikely to memorize the lines well, and getting yourself tired before the match even starts can become your undoing. However, if you play your trusted openings (see the previous item), you are less likely to need a lot of time for rehearsing. 

This tip is particularly useful when you are struggling with a short-term issue that lasts only a couple of days, such as a cold. When you face a friend or someone lower-rated than yourself, there is an option of trying to make/offer a quick draw to save some precious energy and buy yourself some time for recovery. Of course, you had better not show weakness by desperately begging for a draw after the first few moves. Otherwise, the opponent might figure out that something spooky is going on and turn down your offer.

Back in the XXth century, so-called “Grandmaster draws” were quite popular. In long round robins, players would make early draws with opponents whom they knew well and respected and focus on beating the underdogs. Bobby Fischer was particularly mad about this practice since the Soviet GMs would regularly draw each other, saving energy, and target the rest of the field. 

I recall sitting next to a guy who had the habit of showing up at tournaments drunk. This time, he was so under the weather that he could barely move the pieces. He started out with 1.d4, made a couple more moves and, shaking his head and scratching his long beard, squinted through his glasses and muttered: “The position is so CLOSED. I guess it is a draw!” The opponent knew him quite well, had a lower rating and was Black, so he agreed. The arbiter, who was observing this spectacle all along, finally intervened and lectured the first guy, warning that he will be excluded from the tournament if this happens again. As a result, I have added another catchphrase to my arsenal about the position being “closed” and hence drawn. Of course, you should use it for comic relief when the situation on the board is as far from this description as can be. 

That being said, I wish you to stay healthy and be able to play your best chess!

Let’s return to the Oslo Esports Cup. So far, Magnus 10 has proved out to be a formidable opponent for some of the best chess players in the world. Can you do better than them? Download the Play Magnus app and give the challenge a try! 

Let’s say you start feeling ill during a chess event. Do you play on or withdraw from the tournament?

Before playing a friendly game of chess in a casual setting, make sure to discuss what set of rules you will be following. For instance, some people believe it is acceptable to take moves back before the opponent has replied (or even after!). The “a move counts as one only once you release the piece” rule is even more widespread in amateur games. 

As you probably know, in tournament play, takebacks are not allowed, and the “touch-move” rule stands tall. That is, you have to say “J’adoube” if you wish to adjust the piece. Otherwise, you have to move it if you touch it, as long as it is legal. In blitz, Russian-speaking players often use the frivolous saying, “If you touch, you have to marry!”, to remind the opponent about the touch-move rule. 

Even though these rules are well-known to any serious tournament player, the temptation to break them is too large, especially when there is a lot at stake! Let’s recall a few such accidents. 

In 1961, GM Eduard Gufeld played 15…Qa5? in a decisive game of the Netherlands-USSR student match against Alexander Jongsma, allowing a well-known Nd5 trick with a discovered attack. According to GM Genna Sosonko’s memoirs, when one of Alexander’s peers decided to find him in the playing hall and inform the lucky guy about such a “present”, Alexander returned to the board only to allocate the queen on b6! Twenty years later, Gufeld confessed to his opponent that he had indeed played Qa5 in that game before taking a move back…

One of the most famous touch-move controversies transpired in the Judit Polgar vs. Garry Kasparov game at Linares’1994. An interesting recollection of the events is given in Judit’s “From GM to Top 10” book. There is no universal agreement on what happened there, but a widespread belief is that Garry did release the piece only to pick it up and put the knight on a different square. Judit instantly realized it and looked at the arbiter, but he either hadn’t noticed anything or, according to some theories, was on friendly terms with Kasparov and didn’t enforce the rule on him. Anyway, Polgar must have decided that it is not worth it to mess with Kasparov, who at that time could easily make sure that you would stop getting invitations to top tournaments. She didn’t protest and ended up losing the game. Interestingly enough, some reporters forgot to turn the camera on and recorded this footage, which led to a scandal! Ah, the good old days when there were no live streams…

You can challenge Judit Polgar at ages 5, 7, 9, 12, 17 (she played in Lineres’1994 at this age!) and 29 in the Play Magnus app. Judit will pretend not to notice if you touch one piece and move another, but please don’t take advantage of her generosity!

In 2003 GM Vladimir Malakhov allowed GM Zurab Azmaparaishili to take back a move after an obvious lapsus manus. Azmai said something like, “I have to trade first, of course!” and his intelligent opponent didn’t object, although he could have easily gotten a free point. As a result, Zurab won the game and the gold medal of the European Chess Championship, while Vladimir ended up being the runner-up. 

In the 2009 World Blitz Championship, Magnus Carlsen blocked with the wrong rook against Alexandra Kosteniuk and, in the heat of battle, tried to amend the situation quickly. Alexandra, a seasoned chess warrior even back then, stopped the clock and gave him a “no-no” look. Carlsen left the board in disgust, not bothering to offer her a handshake. As of this day, he still hates losing but has matured and acts as a role model in terms of sportsmanship. 

In the World Cup’11, David Navara assumed he had touched his king by accident in the game against Alexander Moiseenko. According to the video, he actually didn’t. Alexander decided not to call the arbiter, and Navara agreed to a draw in the game instead of checkmating his opponent. During the press conference, he explained that he didn’t want the match to be decided this way and felt guilty for accidentally touching a piece and not moving it. Both GMs went on to receive a special “Fair Play” prize. 

In 2016, Garry Kasparov repeated the same knight trick, this time about Hikaru Nakamura, who took it surprisingly light-heartedly and didn’t bother calling the arbiter.

These stories are just the tip of the iceberg. Now let me share a couple of personal anecdotes about the touch-move rule.  

When I was 9, I played in a championship for kids in Sweden. My opponent quickly lost the game but then declared that it was “unofficial” and suggested we play “the real one”. I didn’t speak Swedish, so it was hard for me to explain to the arbiter what had happened. I recall myself crying because of such unfairness, losing the second game to that little cheater and performing way below expectations in the entire tournament. I wonder how my opponent’s chess career and life in general went…Maybe he is a successful lawyer now? 

In 2021, I was playing the Nezhmetdinov Memorial in Kazan, Russia. I heard a heated discussion during the round, stood up from the board, and decided to check out what was happening. A middle-aged man was agitatedly complaining that his opponent, a sly-looking skinny kid, made a rook move and then took it back! As proof, the victim showed his scoresheet with the move written down. The boy, however, coolly shook his head and said that he had never touched the rook. Given the nature of the position, a rook move would be totally losing for the boy, and the move on the board would surely win. They called the arbiter, then the chief arbiter, then listened to the players sitting next to them. Still, no one has seen what happened, and it’s not like you can accept such a statement as definite proof. As a result, the chief arbiter ruled that it was a “your word vs. my word” case, and the game proceeded as if nothing had happened. The man turned red and lamented: “Don’t you have any conscience whatsoever? You know you did make that move!”. The boy remained silent and played on, pocketing a win shortly after. As you can see, even though chess is considered one of the fairest sports in the sense that the arbiters have minimal effect on the game, in some cases, their ruling can become crucial. We even joked at some point with my ex-coach that I could play in a tournament where he would be the chief arbiter and, if needed, call him up and say, “He touched this piece!”. And my coach would confirm: “Yes, I saw that as well! Make the move, please!”. There’s a grain of truth in every joke, though. 

Summarizing, I believe that Caissa is a strict but fair mistress. There is no need for either foul play or unsolicited “gentlemanship”. I neither ask nor give takebacks. Do you agree? Does the touch-move make sense to you or not? 

Wondering how they teach Norwegian kids not to grab pieces randomly during the game? They tell them to “sit on their hands”. You can find the lesson with the same title in the Magnus Trainer app, as well 600+ more interactive lessons and fun mini-games. 

Do you like and follow the touch-move rule in casual games?

On February 8, 2022, Yuri Averbakh became the first centenarian chess Grandmaster ever! Let’s see how many of these curious facts about him you already know:

·        The previous record for the longest-living Grandmaster was set by GM Andor Lilienthal – 99 years and three days.

The Russian Chess Federation could not miss the chance to congratulate Yuri Averbakh on such a spectacular anniversary.

·        One of the first childhood memories of Averbakh was being on the Red Square in Moscow on a snowy day when Mikhail Frunze died in 1925. The Lenin’s Mausoleum was still wooden back then, as it was built in 1924 and changed to stone only in 1930. As you can see, when Averbakh was born, Lenin was still alive, and Stalin was not yet officially in power! 

·        He barely missed the draft for WWII due to arriving at the recruitment point in summer shoes. By the standards of that time, Averbakh was quite a big man (1m 90s tall, 45 shoe size), so they couldn’t provide him with the proper boots and asked him to buy them himself somewhere else. He couldn’t find them in any shop in his city and decided to travel to Izhevsk to fulfill this quest! Long story short, to make a living, he ended up working as an engineer instead of going to war! 

·        As someone who attended the 2nd Moscow Tournament and spent all his life in the chess world, Averbakh must have seen in person or at least been the contemporary of all the World Chess Champions except for Wilhelm Steinitz!

·       Averbakh played nine World Chess Champions, achieving the following results: Max Euwe (+2, =0, -0), Mikhail Botvinnik (+3, =14, -11), Vasily Smyslov (+1, =9, -3), Mikhail Tal (+0, =8, -5), Tigran Petrosian (+4, =16, -2), Boris Spassky (+0, =7, -4), Bobby Fischer (+0, =1, -0), Anatoly Karpov (+0, =0, -1), Garry Kasparov (+0, =0, -2).

Congratulating Yuri Averbakh on his 100th birthday, Garry Kasparov recalled, among other things, the games they played and the fact that Averbakh acted as an arbiter during Kasparov’s matches against Karpov, Short, and Kramnik. 

·        Averbakh’s main tournament successes include competing in the legendary Candidates tournament in Zurich in 1953, winning the prestigious USSR Chess Championship in 1954, and sharing first in the 1956 edition of the championship, finishing second after a playoff (behind Taimanov but ahead of Spassky). 

Players and officials in the 1953 Zurich Candidates Tournament. We can spot Yuri Averbakh, the tallest person in the group, standing next to Vasily Smyslov, with whom they had been friends for 70 years or so.  Image from Zurich-cc.com.

·        Averbakh became a Grandmaster at 30 and essentially retired from professional chess at 40, believing he had reached his peak. He would occasionally play from time to time, though, but without setting serious competitive goals. His last “serious” game was in 2007 when he took part in the USSR vs. Yugoslavia match. 

·        Apart from chess, Averbakh’s strong passion for sports was volleyball. Then he got hooked onto boxing; was a big fan of swimming, and had the first-class sportsman rank in it. He also mentioned that he usually scored 23+ points out of 25 in a shooting range. 

·        Averbakh’s daughter Evgenia was the third wife of GM Mark Taimanov. The latter, apart from being a strong GM, was mostly known as an acclaimed pianist and the person who lost a Candidates match to Bobby Fischer with a devastating 0-6 score.  

·        Averbakh had a surprisingly low heart rate, 25-30 heartbeats per minute. With a cardio stimulator, it has reached 55-60 and has been at this level for the last 15+ years. 

·        In 2021, Averbakh was hospitalized and subject to intensive care due to COVID. Fortunately, he managed to recover. Sadly, the chess community lost a few remarkable players to this disease, including famous coach GM Yuri Dokhoian and renowned chess theoretician GM Evgeny Sveshnikov.

·        When asked about his longevity, Yuri Averbakh usually attributes it to working a lot. Apart from intellectual pursuits, he has always been active physically, for instance, attending a swimming pool well into his 80s.

·        Yuri Averbakh developed his typology of chess players. It has become reasonably well-known and accepted in the chess community: 

Why did I not become a World Champion? I classify chess players into a few groups. The first one is Killers. Drawing parallels with boxing, they not only try to win but want to knock out the opponent. In chess terms – to suppress him. This could be said about Botvinnik, Fischer, Korchnoi, and Kasparov has such traits as well. This is a rather popular type. The second group is Fighters. Fighters do their best, but for them knocking out the opponent is not a must; to win is enough. Lasker, Bronstein, and Tal belong to this group, even though Tal also had the traits of an Artist. The third group is Sportsmen. For them, chess is a sport, just like tennis. So, they try their best, but when the game ends, they act like normal, ordinary people. Capablanca was like that, or Keres. And the fourth group is Gamers. For them, chess is just a game. They could play cards, dominoes, pretty much anything. A classical representative of this group is Karpov. All the World Champions fit one of these four groups. And there are two more – Researchers and Artists. None of them have become World Champions since their motivation is not high enough. I am a researcher. Chess is interesting for me as a subject of research. 

·        Apart from being a top chess player, official, and arbiter, Averbakh is known as the author of many chess books, especially the endgame series. He was the chief editor of the magazines “Chess Moscow”, “Chess in the USSR”, and “Chess Bulletin”. He also worked as the host of a TV show “Chess School” from 1969 to 1991. 

“Journey to the Chess Kingdom” introduced Alexander Khalifman, Boris Gelfand, Vasyl Ivanchuk, Alexandra Kosteniuk, and many other top GMs to the wonderful world of chess. 

·        A few opening variations are named after Yuri Averbakh. 

King's Indian Defence, Averbakh Variation (E73): 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 0-0 6.Bg5

King's Indian Defence, Semi-Averbakh system (E73): 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Be2 0-0 6.Be3

Modern Defense: Averbakh variation (A42): 1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.e4

We wish Yuri Averbakh many more fruitful years to come! 

Yuri Averbakh has been passionate about chess throughout his entire life. We share our love for the game with you by developing the Play Magnus apps. If you are looking for a fun and efficient way to master chess, please make sure to check out our products! 

Chess has just obtained its first centenarian Grandmaster! 

Happy 100th Anniversary to GM Yuri Averbakh!

Pretty much every person in the world can teach you something. This is especially true of the very best chess players. Still, a common mistake amateurs make is focusing too much on the shortcomings of the elite GMs.

The reasoning goes like this: “They are rated much higher than me, yet they do this. Hence, I can also afford not to work on this problem.” True? Not really.

All of us have individual virtues and shortcomings, as well as personal preferences. One should be careful when imitating the habits of top GMs. For example, if one of them doesn’t work on the opening much, the other – on the middlegame, and the third one dislikes endgames, then you might end up not doing any chess studies at all by combining all the three approaches! 

Nevertheless, I often hear people saying something like: “Magnus Carlsen doesn’t study the opening much, so scrap it” (this is an outdated myth, by the way!); “Hikaru Nakamura trash talks people after losing, so why can’t I do it?”; “Alexander Khalifman used to show up for the round on shaking legs with a hangover, so what is so bad about drinking alcohol during an event?”. The flaw in this logic is that one should focus on the numerous virtues of the top players instead of trying to copy their few weaknesses. For example, a much more feasible attitude would be to say: “I want to be such an amazing practical player as Carlsen, knowing how to set problems for my opponent at every stage of the game”; “I will learn from Nakamura how to excel at speed chess”; “Khalifman is a supreme example of a hard-working, self-made chess player and a top-notch theoretician.”

Most of us are “privileged” since we have so many chess weaknesses that the potential for improvement is enormous. However, even the best players in the world have to reinvent themselves from time to time to remain on top of the circuit. Here are a few examples.

No matter how self-confident and dominant Garry Kasparov was, he didn’t pass up the opportunity to invite players who were of interest to him for a training session. For instance, when Kasparov lost in the 2004 European Club Cup to Sergey Rublevsky, Garry offered him to participate in a training camp together. Apparently, the idea was to see if there was something special about the Russian Grandmaster that Kasparov could add to his arsenal. Needless to be said, this was by far not the only case of this sort.

Garry Kasparov, arguably the greatest chess player of all time, found a worthy successor in Magnus Carlsen. Image from 2009, ChessBase.com. 

It is common knowledge that Magnus Carlsen has at some point cooperated with most of the world’s top players. Since he is the forerunner when it comes to extending the human limits in chess, every little step forward at his level requires a tremendous number of effort. Magnus keeps an eye not only on his direct competitors but also on the promising juniors. This way, he had worked with Wesley So and Anish Giri before they became part of the top-10. Carlsen is also generous in the sense that his training partners have more to learn from him than he can rub off them. Still, he is willing to make this trade as long as he becomes a better player because of it. Another curious point is that in his junior years, Carlsen was more willing to learn from the experience of seasoned pros, such as his former mentor, Garry Kasparov. Nowadays, as Magnus has become a middle-aged man, he seems to be more interested in cooperating with junior players to not miss out on innovative trends. 

Viswanathan Anand and Anish Giri sharing a laugh during the Candidates-2016

In a Chess.com interview in May 2019, Anish Giri said the following about Vishy Anand, who as of this day remains a member of the top-20 at the age of 52:

His main advantage compared to others of his age is that he’s truly young at heart. For example, many people of his age don’t welcome change. They stop downloading the latest software versions of things or don’t update their apps, like young people do. But Vishy is the kind of guy who I am sure updates all the apps on his phone. The fact that he’s accomplished what he has and remained there for so long is because he’s able to reinvent himself, and change the way he works, the way he approaches things, just like a younger person does.

Vishy was quite entertained by this assessment and, when meeting Giri for the next time, showed him his smartphone, proving that he does keep all his apps updated! Another competitive advantage of Anand is that he has always been tech-savvy. The people who have worked with him attest that he is always on the cutting edge when it comes to squeezing the most out of chess databases and engines. This is a stark contrast to some other players of his generation, who like to make excuses about being “veterans” and prefer to work exclusively with real chess boards and books, leaving the computer analysis to their seconds or mainly ignoring it. 

Bottom line: you should pinpoint the very best qualities of the top players and try to replicate them instead of gloating over their imperfections. 

On a more general note, this tip works with respect to celebrities. A common mistake is to focus all the attention on their missteps, copying the worst in them. However, one should keep in mind that most of the world’s most prominent influencers became successful not due to their drinking habits, home violence, or promiscuity, but some serious achievements that require both enormous talent and sustained hard work for years and years. 

Finally, are there any exceptions to the rule formulated above? Well, of course, if you are inventive enough, you can come up with some. There are people, especially perfectionists and players with low self-esteem, who could use a confidence shot from time to time, getting it from looking over the top GMs’ most terrible games and realizing that even the chess stars are only human. Also, if you are specifically preparing against one of those players, it could also make some sense to pay a significant amount of attention to their weaknesses and ways to exploit them. Even then, you will need to form a balanced picture, giving due credit to your opponents’ strengths along with their soft spots. 

Wondering how to invite all these super GMs to your home for a training session? This is no easy task. However, since Magnus Carlsen has kindly done this work for you, there is a shortcut. Download our apps at a discounted price and let the World Champion and his team of world-class experts share some valuable insights with you!

When studying top chess players, be forgiving for weaknesses and focus on their strengths. 

Learning from the Best – Focus on the Virtues

Since chess players typically spend a lot of time at the chessboard playing tournaments, let me share some tips on how to do it more efficiently:

1.     Take care of the lighting. Sometimes it is not sufficient. In such cases, it makes sense to consult the arbiter in advance and to fix the problem somehow.

Mikhail Botvinnik was known for having a stern character and standing up for his rights. When he played in Wijk aan Zee in 1969, he already had poor eyesight and requested an additional lamp stationed on his table. As a result, the 57-year old former World Champion shared first place there with Efim Geller. 

2.     Grab a nice chair. For the World Chess Championship match against Boris Spassky in 1972, Bobby Fischer famously flew to Iceland a chair that he used earlier during his match in Buenos Aires against Tigran Petrosian. Generally speaking, the players meticulously check the chairs before important matches, ensuring they are comfortable enough. I am not suggesting you carry a chair with you wherever you go. Also, unless you are a top player, the organizers are unlikely to do you special favors. Still, if, for instance, you, as a big guy, find yourself seated on a tiny chair suited for kids, you may as well call the arbiter and see if this can be fixed. Don’t suffer unless there is no alternative! 

3.     Keep an upright, confident, yet relaxed posture. It is good for your back, neck, and general well-being. If you are accustomed to “half-asleep” or “hook back” postures, fix it by developing your back muscles via appropriate physical training, massage, and improving your bedroom. Sometimes finding the right pillow or mattress can work magic for your body. 

On the header image of the post, Magnus Carlsen demonstrates an example of how you should sit at the chessboard. 

You may want to experiment. On the image, you can see Judit Polgar at the Chess Olympiad in 1988. According to her, putting legs like that helped her concentration. You can challenge Judit Polgar at that age (12) in the Play Magnus app! 

4.     Breathe deeply and try to find a way to gain access to fresh air whenever possible and needed.

Even though you need a medical permit to play chess events in some countries, the regulation is often neglected. After all, most people don’t treat chess as “a real sport” and don’t perceive it as bearing any risks for your health. An old (and rather silly) joke goes that chess is a dangerous game since you can fall asleep during a match and land with your eye on one of the bishops! In reality, players experience severe increases in the heart rate and blood pressure during intense matches, especially in time trouble. Some Grandmasters have died over the board or shortly after the round – Vladimir Bagirov, Vladimir Simagin, Vitaly Tseshkovsky, to name a few. 

I recall playing the Chigorin Memorial in St. Petersburg. One of the players stood up from the board to take a routine walk around, made a few steps…and collapsed on the floor, losing conscience! The doctors had a hard time convincing him to take care of his health; the gray-haired veteran was eager to return to the board and play on at all costs! This is just a friendly reminder that regardless of how much you love chess and care about the result of the game, prizes, and rating points, your well-being is of more importance.

5.     Don’t get frozen over the board unless you are in extreme time trouble. Relax a bit by taking a walk while your opponent is thinking. This is good both for your nervous system and your body. 

This tip is easy to get across nowadays since this is what pretty much all the top players are doing. However, in the past, there were examples of a different kind. For instance, Bobby Fischer was famous for enduring the tension for hours, sitting over the board as if he was glued to it. However, this is detrimental to your health, and most players don’t have the physical and mental stamina to keep concentrating for so long. Even though on the surface it may look appealing to spend every minute of your time wisely, not getting up from the board at all, this is a poor idea. 

6.     Do some basic stretching exercises when away from the board. There are books that offer quite sophisticated lists tailored specifically at chess players, e.g., “64 Recipes of Success” (in Russian) by Simkin, Bodnarchuk, and Shtatnov. However, there is no need to memorize special techniques. Common sense is good enough. Don’t be shy; just find an uncrowded spot in the playing hall and get started!

I was a bit surprised when the commentators began mocking Vidit for his “dance moves” while he was following the basic guidelines. He got up from his chair on his opponent’s turn and made some simple moves that are good for your body!

7.     Make sure to bring a drink and some snacks with you. In this blog post, we won’t be discussing the important subject of optimal nutrition for chess players. Moreover, it is not possible to give universal advice. For instance, some of us have low blood pressure and could benefit from increasing it during the round. Others, in contrast, have high blood pressure and need to run like the plague from anything that can pump it up even higher. Since our focus is behavior over the board, it is worth noting that you can drink freely during the round (unless it is a prohibited beverage, such as alcohol or some sort of forbidden doping). With food, the situation is more complicated. Common sense and experience tell us that you can’t probably open a lunch box and start munching it in front of your opponent. That being said, at some tournaments, especially local ones, the arbiters will close their eyes on you doing something relatively innocent, such as eating a banana or some chocolate. However, according to official FIDE rules, you are not allowed to eat over the board since it could be potentially distracting for your opponent. What I have been advised to do in such cases was, for instance, to take the banana from your plastic bag and leave the board, walk freely around the playing hall, and enjoy your snack. 

8.     Quit smoking. The pseudo-romantic times when Mikhail Tal could smoke a few packs of cigarettes during a long game, shortening both his and his opponent’s expected lifespans, are long gone. If you consider the modern chess elite, Alexander Grischuk seems to be the only top GM left who has to bother wasting time leaving the playing hall for a smoke break. Smoking is hazardous for your health and a distraction during the game, making you essentially offer a time handicap to your partner.  

When you are not playing tournaments, how about taking advantage of a training program designed by Magnus Carlsen and his team of world-class experts? Check it out now! 

When it comes to sitting at the chessboard, every small detail counts!

In part, this blog post was inspired by the movie “The World Champion” that is in theatres in Russia right now. It is based on the World Chess Championship match between Anatoly Karpov and Viktor Korchnoi, held in Baguio, Philippines, in 1978. I haven’t seen the film yet and don’t have high expectations based on what I have read about it. Still, I will check it out since movies about chess are a rare species. Anyway, Anatoly Karpov is a 6-time World Chess Champion and one of the best match players of all time. Interestingly enough, he was introduced to matches early in his chess career. For example, Anatoly fondly recalls a “serious” match he played in the city championship final when he was still a kid. 

Most of us will never get to participate in the World Chess Championship title, the World Cup or any other event where the match system is used. One might wonder: is there any reason for playing a match at all if you may never have to do it in your competitive practice? 

Here are the top-9 arguments why you may want to give this format a try:

Take your game to the next level. Matches improve your fighting spirit and help you learn more about yourself and your potential opponents. If the partners are of more or less equal strength, they are likely to discover the Achilles’ heels of each other, hence providing a plan for future improvement. Also, the matches themselves are beneficial for the chess development of the players since they help develop those chess muscles as you play in an intense environment. 

Find out who is the better player. Quite often, there is some friendly rivalry between peers if their chess expertise is similar. One game is not enough to find out who is the better player. A way to prove one’s superiority is to beat the opponent in a match spanning a relatively long distance. Of course, nowadays, such matches are more often played in blitz or even bullet, but good old matches with a classical time control are more indicative of a player’s true strength! 

That being said, many users of the Play Magnus app believe that beating Magnus Carlsen at a certain age once means that they have “passed the test.” However, to show true dominance, you had better not get a single win and run away with it but crush Magnus in an actual match! Actually, he should be happy to take on you since his Instagram profile states explicitly: “Beating someone once isn’t revenge!” 

Eliminate a specific weakness. This approach was advocated by Mikhail Botvinnik, who was known for playing serious training matches as part of the preparation for his World Chess Championship duels. For example, he suggested that someone who often gets into time trouble should play a training match, exclusively focusing in each game on time management. He also recommended using the method to get rid of other chess shortcomings.

Stay in shape. By far, not all of us play tournaments regularly enough. Training, playing blitz games, and other such means of staying in shape are not nearly as effective as real-life sparring.

Polish your openings. Let’s say you want to master a new opening. It will take a while until someone plays it against you. Also, you will not be prepared well enough due to a lack of practical experience. That’s why most of the pros use matches to test out new lines and get a feel of the opening. Of course, if you are aiming for this goal, you should discuss it in advance with your partner to know what type of positions will pop up on the board. 

Have fun. Chess matches are quite entertaining and memorable. You can hold your own “World Championship” and fight valiantly for the title against your friend! Just make sure you don’t spoil your personal relationships this way!

I remember how back in the day, we played a self-proclaimed “Chess & Poker World Championship" match against one of my friends in Moscow. First came the chess portion, and then the Texas Hold’em. As far as I recall, it was a tense battle that I eventually lost on the combined standings, but being the runner-up of such a “prestigious” event didn’t hurt! 

Roleplay. This takes the “have fun” principle to the next level. You and your opponent may consider dressing up for the occasion and recreating one of the legendary historical matches, including the ones that never took place. For example, let’s say you are a fan of Bobby Fischer, while your friend likes Anatoly Karpov. You don’t need a time machine to travel back to 1975 and see how the match between Fischer and Karpov would have unfolded! Just play it out yourself. 

Mark time. In the pre-smartphone age, chess has been known to be a popular time killer. Even though it is a less relevant pastime these days, it is still there. People still play chess with their companions when traveling by train, even though you have to choose your partners with caution. Also, in certain prisons, playing chess is an activity allowed for convicts. On a separate note, this practice could potentially lead to some controversial rating manipulations.  

Spice up your relationship. Growing up, I noticed some strange figures on my favorite chessboard. Something like 12.5-7.5 and so on. I asked my parents what this was all about. Even though they were by no means professional chess players and couldn’t be called ardent fans of the game, they still managed to play a reasonably large number of games between themselves in their youth. Of course, this tip has many limitations. First of all, the gap in chess proficiency should be relatively small, or else one might have to introduce a handicap into the equation. Secondly, not all people take chess defeats easily. There have been some grim stories about the loser murdering the victor, not to mention more prosaic outcomes such as quarreling. Nevertheless, it seems to have worked out fine for my parents, as they didn’t break up and are close to their 50th wedding anniversary! 

Last but not least, here comes a warning. Matches require a lot of energy and dedication. It is not a good idea to prepare for a tournament by playing a match if you don’t have a reasonably large time gap ahead. Make sure to end the challenge at least two weeks before the tournament, or even a month in advance, so you have enough time to analyze the games and make adjustments.

Good luck and have fun playing chess matches! 

Have you ever played a chess match? There is always a first time! 

A 2700+ GM once mentioned to me that he often loses interest in the tournament after 5 or 6 rounds. This phenomenon is well-known to many of us. What are the reasons, and how do we make sure we perform well in the last few rounds of the tournament? 

As you probably know already, after five draws, Game 6 became pivotal in the recent World Chess Championship match in Dubai. Magnus Carlsen won a breathtaking marathon battle spanning a record 136 moves, after which Ian Nepomniachtchi collapsed and scored only one point in the following five rounds. 

After adding the fifth World Chess Champion title to his collection, Magnus is smiling like a boss. Image by Niki Riga from the official site of the match.

For a more detailed report about the World Chess Championship match between Magnus Carlsen and Ian Nepomniachtchi, please check out the Magnus Trainer app. 

First of all, during a tournament, you should always be feeling “hungry” for chess. This is typically ensured by taking a proper break between your studies and the following competition or between two events. In other words, if you get fed up with chess due to overworking or playing too much, your performance is likely to drop. This topic has been briefly touched upon in our last week’s blog post. 

In contrast to this tip, Nepo played two exhausting training matches against former Challenger Sergey Karjakin before this year’s WCC. Unsurprisingly, at the very start of the match, Ian already looked tired and weary. 

Secondly, monitor your health and wellbeing. While non-chess-playing individuals often ridicule the concept of chess being a sport, any competitive player will tell you how demanding the game is in the physical sense. The effects of having to sit and keep concentration for a few hours a day are often multiplied by the necessity to travel to the venue, to sleep and eat in an unfamiliar environment, by falling ill, etc. Summarizing, one should be fit and healthy to play well.

Comparing Ian and Magnus in this department, Magnus has a distinct advantage overall. 

Even though Magnus has had some hiccups in his career, his nervous system seems to be much stronger than Ian’s. 

Ian lost a lot of weight and worked on his physical shape a lot before the match. However, Magnus has been doing this for years and is generally believed to be fitter than his ex-Challenger. 

I don’t know for sure what the sleep schedule of the players is like. From what I have heard and read, Magnus occasionally broke the schedule and stayed up very late in his childhood, but in general, his parents have explained to him the benefits of following a sleep routine. Meanwhile, Nepo makes the impression of someone who can easily stay well past midnight playing computer games and such. Once again, don’t take it for a fact; this is just an assumption. 

Magnus has been known to take nutrition seriously, eat healthily and to bring his own cook to WCC matches. As far as I know, Ian is less “professional” in this sense and lives the life of an average person. 

Thirdly, your psychological state often becomes the main culprit of your chess failure.  

For example, suppose you decide to set yourself certain rating or point goals before the tournament, which is not recommended in most cases. In that case, it is remarkably easy to lose motivation once you understand that the aim is not achievable any longer. 

Generally speaking, few of us can handle a rapid change in the narrative we created for ourselves before the event. Let’s stay you act like a typical action movie hero by visualizing your path to success which involves shredding all your opponents’ pieces to pieces. Well, how do you adjust if you lose the very first game terribly? Or if you shake off the defeat and lose again for some reason? This is a sophisticated subject, and it is hard to give universal advice. I am just saying that for some people having no plan for the event (“just play and enjoy every game!”) could be better than a rigid narrative (“I will win 5 games and draw 4, finishing at 7/9”). 

Speaking for myself, I have had those tournaments where I had high expectations for my performance, planning to harvest a lot of rating points there. If things didn’t go according to plan, I would stubbornly try to force the issue and come back without analyzing what exactly went wrong and why. Quite often, such drastic measures backfire and cause even more painful defeats. Then you realize that meeting your goal is already unrealistic, and your mental shape goes from bad to worse! 

Or, another common situation, something unpleasant might happen in your life and overshadow the importance of playing well. Top GMs have been going through lawsuits, divorces, political campaigns, and other distracting activities while competing in strong events. Obviously, their resulting performances tended to be abysmal. Of course, one can’t be insured against all sorts of hazards, but the rule of thumb is to try to adopt prophylactic thinking in life and chess. It will help you prevent some nuisances or abstain from entering a tournament at the wrong moment. 

Ian’s face says it all during the awards ceremony. Image by Eric Rosen from the official site of the match. 

Only Nepo knows what went wrong with his mindset after the catastrophe suffered in Game 6.

Did he start blaming himself for not winning with Black even though he had decent chances at some point? 

Did he lose confidence in his chess abilities? 

Did fear kick in? Everyone knows how tough it is to beat Magnus, and the challenge is almost insurmountable if you are trailing behind. 

Did he fail to readjust his narrative of how the match will unfold? Maybe he hasn’t worked out in advance what he will do should Magnus take the lead. Or, quite possibly, he and his team did consider this scenario briefly, but in real life, everything turned out to be harder than on paper. 

I guess that Ian should take a good rest and then analyze meticulously what went wrong in his head. This is the only way to fix the issue and to decrease the chance of it haunting him in the future. 

Even though it is next to impossible to provide exact solutions to all the issues mentioned above within one article, I hope that the post gave you some tasty food for thought. Before playing your next tournament, make sure to go through the items mentioned in this article and see if you can improve in some areas. 

Last but not least, we wish you a fantastic Christmas! Stay healthy, have fun with your family and friends, and don’t forget about chess should you be looking for some special gifts! 

Play for a Win in Every Game

Rating Inflation in Chess: True or False?

Should You Play Chess When You are Ill?

The Infamous Touch-Move Rule

Happy 100th Anniversary to GM Yuri Averbakh!

Learning from the Best – Focus on the Virtues

How Should You Sit at the Chessboard?

Play a Chess Match

How to Avoid Getting Burned Out During a Chess Event

Is Reading the Biographies of Top Players a Waste of Time?