AN INTERVIEW WITH 7-TIME WORLD
CHESS CHAMPION ANATOLY KARPOV
During one of Karpov’s visits to Lindsborg in 2002, he generously granted a 45-minute interview to Irwin W. Fisk over lunch. He talked about computers, cheating, drug testing, the Internet, chess psychology, Bobby Fischer, and the state of chess today. The interview was subsequently published in Chess Life in 2003. What follows is a condensation of that interview.
IWF: When you were in Botvinnik’s school, he predicted computers would beat human players. Did you believe him?
AK: I don’t know whether I believed him or not, but one of his students asked, “Well, why are we in your school then?” (laughter) Then Botvinnik very seriously said, “My computer will beat your computer, and you will only manage the computer.”
IWF: Computers are commonplace now in chess. Do you think the computer will ultimately help or hurt chess?
AK: Maybe it’s not bad for promoting chess, but I believe all the encounters between people and computers are not on an equal basis. Computers have a database with all the knowledge, but a human being cannot use books to access the same database. The computer can recall any theoretical variation in just parts of seconds. So, for humans this is a waste of time, energy, and knowledge. Equal conditions would be if you would eliminate the database from chess playing programs. Most chess programmers would not agree with this because the level of the computer would go down tremendously, maybe one or two levels.
IWF: When Kasparov played Deep Blue, did you predict the outcome?
AK: This match was very strange for me from the first game to the last. The first game was a complete disaster for the computer. I predicted then the match would be 6-0, but then Kasparov began to play very strangely, and probably for the first time in his life he resigned in a draw position where he had a perpetual (check). He had three obvious moves and he could see the possibility of the perpetual check, but he resigned. I think the fifth game was a win for him during the first 20 moves. The last game was very strange because Kasparov played an opening he never played with Black, the Caro-Cahn defense, but he knew the theoretical part of this opening because he has played so many games from the White side. When Kasparov made the choice to sacrifice, I said, ‘We will see a great theoretical discovery today because theory says this position is lost, but if Kasparov plays it, it means he knows something.’ After three or four moves I thought Kasparov forgot this was a loss for Black. If the computer sacrifices something the compensation is tremendous.
I think Kasparov terrorized himself with the computer. H was always talking about the computers: “You can never beat them.” I think he was not ready psychologically. He played much better than the computer.
Krammnik was winning and he was playing exactly how you should play a computer, but something also happened near the end of the match. He changed styles; he changed everything. He lost two games in a row and there is no good explanation for me as to why it happened.
IWF: Computers are getting smaller, thus increasing the probability of cheating at tournaments In a recent issue of Chess Life, a player said he believed that tournament play would eventually be limited to one-hour games where the players couldn’t leave the board. Do you see this happening?
AK: No, it is possible to control this. If a person is caught, then he should be disqualified for a long period or their whole life. They are doing stupid things now about doping (drugs) in chess. Nobody knows what doping is, and if a player drinks something it can only make him weaker, not stronger. It is not surprising that many chess players are protesting this. What is real and should be denounced in chess is to have advisors and advice during a tournament. The federation and arbiters should control this like they do in the Olympics.
IWF: You have said that you believe playing in Open tournaments is harmful to a player’s chess development. Why?
AK: The tactics and style when you play in Open tournaments is 100% against the logic of chess and against the normal way to play chess. People who are playing successfully in Open tournaments are not playing their best chess. They habitually take a lot of risk. If you want to become a World Champion you should avoid playing in Open tournaments. This is a big contradiction in modern chess because there are so many Open tournaments, but in general I think this is not good for players. How to solve the problem, I don’t know.
IWF: I know that you have loved to play Blitz chess for many years. Is it a coincidence that your upcoming match with Garry Kasparov is a rapid chess match?
AK: No, this is not for a title or a big prize. This is mostly to promote chess, so we wanted to do something that would not take a long period of time, so that left only the possibility of rapid chess.
IWF: Do you ever see a time when a major chess tournament will be played on the Internet, providing there are assurances there wouldn’t be cheating?
AK: Chess as it’s now played on the Internet is a different thing from real chess. I think there is a possibility, but I believe for top professional play the Internet will not replace what we have today. As for amateur chess, for friendly matches, this is nice.
IWF: As a quick aside, I understand you are a stamp collector. What do you collect?
AK: I started collecting the Soviet Union and chess, then I began to collect seriously after I became a Grandmaster and had my own income. In addition to chess, I collect old Russia and the Soviet Union, but my best collection is Belgium. (A special Karpov postal cancellation was used by the USPS during Karpov’s visit to Kansas.)
IWF: You indicated that you had recently written a book on chess psychology. The East Germans successfully used something called mental imaging in their sports programs. Was it used in chess?
AK: They didn’t use it for chess, but they used it for other sports. It could be used if somebody had some psychological problems after losing or some crazy situation in which he became unstable. They had scientific groups in the Soviet Union, but mostly they developed techniques for saving a person’s energy during heavy competition. I believe it is true in sports and chess that if you have a weak nervous system, you can never be on top. If a player has a weak nervous system, he will need special training, but for us life is special training.
IWF: What is the current state of chess in the countries that made up the Soviet Union?
AK: A lot has changed. People have less time for their hobbies because of a bad economic situation. The economy is improving, but life is still difficult for most people. In general, chess is still very popular, so people are playing in the streets and in chess clubs. In the past, chess clubs normally had facilities in the center of the city, and these were in nice areas that could be easily reached with public transportation. Now many of the cities and provinces want to sell these chess club buildings to commercial interests.
We have a special law in our country where sports and cultural organizations can rent facilities for a low amount from the cities. Chess clubs are now defending themselves in many area of Russia, but in some places we have successfully defended our rights. They are always trying to take the buildings from the chess players.
IWF: The big corporate sponsors, such as IBM and SWIFT have stopped sponsoring major tournaments in Europe. Do you ever see a return of corporate sponsorship to chess?
AK: This has to do with the problems when GMA was in existence. In many cases organizers cheated chess players; some organizers didn’t fulfill their obligations and tournaments were cancelled at the last moment, so this was very bad. But we never talk about the obligations of chess players. Chess players should play with a signed contract, and they have obligations to the organizer. If they agree to play in a tournament, they must be at the opening ceremonies, and even if they have lost interest in the tournament, they should not escape the closing ceremony. This is part of the tournament. I think this lack of mutual obligation is very bad, and companies do not appreciate this behavior.
Chess players are guilty in many cases, so they must be self-disciplined. If you play in a well organized tournament in nice facilities, then you must dress up so you will be respected. Then you can demand something. If you appear like a bum, what company would commit their name to such behavior.
IWF: I noticed when the Soviet team played in Lone Pine, they were always well dressed.
AK: People in Europe spend a lot of money to stay in five-star hotels, and they are normally well dressed. Suddenly you have a tournament with 12 or 14 players, and some of them look like alcoholics from the street. This is a bad image for the hotel. European organizers were complaining that management of the hotels didn’t like this situation.
IWF: Bobby Fischer was recently stripped of his membership in the U.S. Chess Federation because of statements he made after 9/11. What is your opinion of this?
AK: I do not think chess federations should make these kinds of political decisions. Chess federations should be concerned with only chess; if there is a problem with a player, then their government should deal with it.
IWF: You have sponsored a number of chess schools throughout the world. How did you set these up?
AK: The idea came when the time was very bad for Russian chess. We used to have the support of the state and the trade unions. Trade unions were very powerful, financially and in other ways, so they participated in sports, art, culture, and education, but then they stopped everything. When we lost the support of the state and the trade unions, chess education in Russia disappeared for about seven years. I founded an organization, just in Russia, and invited a very famous person to be president. He was vice-prime minister, an honorary professor, and a very famous economist. He was my professor when I graduated from the university in 1978. He called this Chess Schools in Russia, and working together we started 14 schools in Russia, all in different provinces. They are commercial, and I do all of this with the support of companies, but especially the governors. The central government is Moscow doesn’t care what happens in Siberia, so that’s why it was right to go to the governors of the provinces. When I talked to the governors they liked the idea of chess because they can support talent and it’s not expensive. It’s good for them.
When I open a chess school, I have an agreement with the governor. He personally, or the mayor, signs a contract stating the school will exist at least five years, which give us time to show some results. I don’t like it when a school opens for one year then closes. It is bad for my name. It has never happened and I prefer that it never happens.
IWF: Are you thinking of setting up any schools in the U.S.?
AK: Chess is already in the U.S. schools. I think there is progress with chess in schools in New York; I was there for the inauguration of this program in 1996. This program was started by Mayor Dinkins when he introduced chess mostly in the poorer schools. They had fantastic results. One of the poorest schools in Harlem became one of the best in New York. I’m not talking just about chess, but everything. There are several schools like this, including two public schools in Montreal that I visited. They have two chess lessons a week. I know in the United States there is an interest, so we shall see.
IWF: What do you think tournament organizers can do to make their tournaments more attractive?
AK: I think in general there are types of tournaments we could promote to make them more attractive. In general, I’m not in favor of the emphasis on Elo ratings. I believe it creates a strange situation in chess tournaments where chess art is on the backside and Elo points are on the first rank. We should first think about the beauty of chess and the most interesting games. I’ve thought about this problem for a long time and how to improve the situation. I hear players saying they increased their Elo rating or lost some points instead of saying I won the tournament or I was close to winning the tournament. I think in general, particularly the international federations, should think more about making it more prestigious to win the tournament and to play for the fighting spirit. This is the problem with modern chess.
|
