Boris Gelfand's opinion

Русская версия

Boris Gelfand's opinion

What do you think about the situation with Fischer receiving the Icelandic citizenship? Is it good, bad or neutral news for chess?

It seems to me that it would be more reasonable to leave the right to solve this issue to the law. As I understand the situation, it is not a question of a prosecution from the part of the US. The USA have another problems that are much more serious than the pursuit of an old ex-chessplayer... The utterances of Fischer do not offer any sympathy. It’s a pity that a man who was a cult figure for many people had slid into such state. It makes especially sad the older generation of Western players, for whom he was the idol at the time, and not only in chess.

What changes of the present situation with the world championship are the most probable from your point of view?

My opinion is probably too radical, but I have no illusion about the complete incompetence of FIDE and its unwillingness to work. And the matter even does not concern the facts of the agreements’ breakdowns, the inability to keep theirs word and so on. A very peremptory tone of their decisions (“We’ve decided and you should obey”) underscores that they are living in their secluded world and are ignoring the chess world. Let’s recollect their attacks on the organizers of the strongest tournaments (Linares, Wijk aan Zee, Dortmund). The most prominent example is the time control acceleration that was undertaken contrary to the wish of the majority of the players. By the way FIDE has proposed the classical control for the unifying match-tournament – a prospect of gathering of all the champions under the FIDE aegis had seemed so tempting for its board that they had to recall the interests of the players...

On the whole I evaluate the capability of FIDE to be very low. If Kirsan Ilyumzhinov had left the FIDE several years ago, he would have been considered the most generous sponsor of chess who was supporting it in its hard times, and not as the destructionist of the world championship system. This is similar to the situation that has happened with Fischer. If there were no news about him since 1972, he would be considered an icon now, but all his further steps were only destroying the legend.

I hope that the ACP will manage to realize their plans but in spite of all my respect to my colleagues, I do not see how and at which cost they can find sponsors. It is really hard to do it while there is an aggressive destructive power that has an official status.

I think, if the idea of the unifying competition is not carried out, no one will organize the knock-out championships regularly. Kirsan Ilyumzhinov has lost the interest in chess and the capability to cope with the situation. And the vice-presidents (the members of the World Championship Committee) are only discrediting the chess world. Perhaps once in 4-5 years FIDE will manage to organize some events like the Libyan one... However, I can not agree with an opinion that chess has no future. Provided the organization of the world championship is transmitted to the competent team of professionals, everything can change for the better.

Who of modern young players could in your opinion feel Kasparov's shoes in the future? Who could break to the elite?

Recently I had a chance to play almost with all the young talents. I think that no one of them could occupy the place of Kasparov. Indeed, Kasparov was the strongest player in the world for 20 years, and sometimes he even seemed to be head and shoulders above his pursuers. A player like him can not appear in today’s situation. At least because the system of the world championship that allowed Kasparov to become first a candidate and then a world champion is now destroyed.

I would like also to mention that Kasparov possessed a quality that is hardly developed by training. He was playing almost every game as the decisive one. One cannot say that other strong grandmasters cannot brace themselves at the right time or usually play carelessly, but no one can reach the level of Kasparov’s motivation. In my encounters with Kasparov I always felt this kind of pressure.

I really like the play of Karjakin. I had no chance to meet with Carlsen at the board. I think, Karjakin has enough potential to become one of the strongest in the world. It is extremely hard to achieve something more. Because the chess has changed, and the title of the world champion is devaluated owing to the lack of a proper competition for the last 10 years. Moreover, the set of qualities that influence one’s success is expanding nowadays.

What kind of new qualities appear?

The availability of the information and the means of its processing changes the very process of training, and the chess becomes more intense. The purely practical skills become more important. One can see this in the games of Anand. He has brilliant talent and deep understanding of chess, but he is also a splendid practical player. And this brings the results.

Nakamura is also considered a good practical player...

Nakamura is a player of a new generation. He does not hide, he shows off that he has not read a single book and does not know the endgame theory. Instead of studying the works of Tarrasch he prefers to be 24 hours on the ICC. However, he has convincing competitive results. This is a very interesting phenomenon.

Other young talents – Karjakin, Harikrishna,Volokitin – are playing normal classical chess. And the play of Nakamura is another dimension. I cannot judge his prospects. As I understand, at some point such a player stops progressing and it is already late to learn again. On the other hand, if one can bring to perfection the concrete play, “move by move”, maybe such an approach to chess turns out to be more effective?