The Rediff Interview - Viswanathan Anand

'You really want to defeat Kasparov'

'I have a lot of chess left in me'

Rediff on The Net
Tuesday, January 13, 2004

It is always a pleasure to interview
Viswanathan Anand. The Grandmaster
was nursing a sprained back when
Special Contributing Correspondent
Shobha Warrier met him. After an
extremely hectic fortnight in India
he was preparing to leave for Spain
the next morning. Despite the pain,
despite having given umpteen
interviews, he was relaxed and
patient, and spoke for nearly an
hour.

2003 has been an amazing year for
you. Mainz Classic, World Rapid,
Corsica Rapid... the list of titles
you collected is quite long. Do you
consider it the best year of your
career?

It is a very difficult choice.
Generally I don't compare. I don't
say this is the best and this is the
worst.

You are forced to compare when people
like us ask you questions...

Yes, okay, 2003 has been a very
important year. If I look back, I
would say '97, '98, 2000, 2002 and
2003 have all been very good years.
During 2002, at least the first half
or the first three months of it, were
not good. But the remaining nine
months were excellent. Same was the
case with 2000. But 2003 was more or
less good throughout.

So, yes, 2003 has been quite good. I
have a feeling that this is a year I
should remember very fondly.

You are now described as the 'King of
Rapid chess.' Was it a conscious
decision on your part to play more
rapid chess?

You don't prepare for one or the
other [types of play]. Most of the
time, my preparation is simply chess
preparation, which can then be used
either in a rapid tournament or in a
classical one. What happens though is
in rapid tournaments you can take
more risks, speculate a little bit
more, as there is less time [for both
players]. But I don't actually make a
conscious decision only to play rapid
tournaments or something like that. I
would be happy to play classic
tournaments also.

Sure, I like the rapid format. It is
over in an hour. Nowadays, the chess
world is evolving that way. If you
look at the number of new tournaments
in classical chess, there are hardly
any; maybe two new tournaments. I can
say Linares and Dortmund are the
mainstay of classical chess. But if
you look at rapid chess, many new
ones have come up.

Corsica started six years ago and is
now well established; Mainz is one of
the leading events; there are a
couple of tournaments in Iceland.
The number of new rapid tournaments
is increasing very fast.

Is it because it is more spectator
friendly?

Yes. I think it is more spectator
friendly; and with computers, people
are able to prepare so much more. And
they want more games played in the
same amount of time. Then, rapid
chess becomes a big advantage. It is
a sign of the times. Everybody is so
rushed nowadays.

Can we compare it to cricket where
spectators prefer one-day tournaments
to Test matches?

Exactly. I don't remember ever
watching a Test match. It is just too
long. Normally, one watches only one-
day matches. Yes, it [chess] is very
similar in that sense. Like the tie-
break made a difference in tennis
when it was introduced.

I think you need to keep
experimenting with formats. People
don't like monotony.

You said you don't make any special
preparation for rapid chess as such.
You also said you take more risks and
speculate more in rapid chess. Does
that mean mental preparation is
different in the case of rapid chess?

Not too much. In classical chess, you
have so much more time. What happens
is switching from one to the other is
difficult. It is easier to switch
from classical to rapid, but not the
other way round, because from
classical to rapid you have to go a
little bit faster, which I find easy.
The other way is tough because your
hand is itching to move and you have
to keep telling yourself, no, no.

The second thing is: in classical
chess, in the last half an hour or
one hour, you have to be absolutely
sure what you are doing is correct or
very close to that. It is very
difficult to bluff. Having said that,
they [the two forms of play] are so
different in another sense that in
classical chess most of the games are
decided in the time scramble, from
move 30 to move 40, when they [the
players] are running out of time;
they make some mistakes.

That's where the decision happens.
Or, in move 60, that's where the
decision happens. So, even those who
say classical chess is the best, must
admit that all the mistakes come in
the time scramble.

But there's no alternative. People
want decisions; they don't want
perfect games. They want excitement;
it is a sport.

So it is much more difficult for me
to slow down than go faster! So I
prefer this switch. It has worked
well for me too, because normally the
year starts with Wijk Aan Zee (Corus
tournament -- January 9 to 25), then
comes Monaco (March 19 to April 2)
and then there is a break. I play
some rapid tournaments after that,
and then comes Dortmund, and then
Mainz, where I have to go faster.

This year's Mainz Chess Classic,
where you had a see-saw battle with
Judit Polgar, was one of the most
exciting tournaments from the
spectators' point of view. Do you
also consider Mainz as one of the
most interesting tournaments of this
year? Or was the World Rapid
Championship more exciting?

Mainz was very interesting. The World
Rapid also was interesting. True,
there were more draws, but there were
a lot of very interesting and
exciting games. I have seen what
excites spectators is when moves come
out fast and the advantage keeps
swinging back and forth.

Yes, Mainz was exceptional, because
neither of us could control anything.
We had no control over the results.
We would play and suddenly one person
would win. Three days in a row, I had
to win the second session. I was
lucky I managed to shut her [Polgar]
out.

You lost the first game but finally
managed to defeat her 5-3. Was that
one of the toughest tournaments?

Yes. I didn't expect to have such a
tough battle. Already, the number of
decisive games is going up. If I
remember correctly, I didn't win a
single game with black in 2001 and
2002. I always won with white. But
this year it has been nice and mixed.
In Wijk Aan Zee, I had two wins with
black; in Monaco, I had several; in
Denmark, I had several. In Dortmnund,
I won two with black and only one
game with white. In Mainz, again,
quite mixed. In general, I started to
win more black games, against
[Ruslan] Ponomariov, [Anatoly]
Karpov, [Peter] Leko, so on...

This year I am playing more
aggressively, losing a few more games
but winning many more. My style is
becoming a bit sharper. Still, I
didn't expect eight decisive games at
Mainz Classic.

Finally, when you won, was it a big
relief, or you were just satisfied?

Well, 4-3 was a big relief for me.
When I won 4-3, I felt things are
under control. I was quite sure that
if I didn't provoke her or try to
make the position unnaturally sharp,
I would win. I wouldn't say I was
completely in control; I felt
confident. The first game worried me.

Was it unexpected of Polgar to play
that well?

I think this year she has impressed.
What happened against [Boris] Gelfand
was she kept pushing too much and
lost 6-2. She thought she was the
favourite and overdid it. And
Gelfand, in fact, can be very
dangerous. But at Mainz, she was more
cautious and not under pressure. We
were playing in Germany whereas she
played against Gelfand in Hungary
(Polgar is Hungarian). So, she might
have felt the pressure.

Gelfand was very alert tactically,
and whenever he got a chance he
pounced on it. I was not able to do
that in Mainz. Many days I was
winning and then I slipped away and
lost. I tried to somehow imitate
Gelfand's play. I was trying to
follow a strategy to play sharp
openings in both colours, but it
didn't work for me.

Then, in the final round, I tried
some flexible positions and it
worked. If you play the sharp
openings, you have a responsibility
to play them very accurately. Gelfand
has that accuracy. In other
tournaments I had that accuracy, but
in Mainz it just wasn't there! It
happens sometimes.

Was beating Vladimir Kramnik at the
World Rapid, Cap d'Agde, in the final
sweet for you? He's ranked No. 2 and
you are No. 3…

Yes, it was. Vladimir and I get along
very well. We are quite good friends.
So it's not like I feel some sort of
unhealthy rivalry; it's quite
healthy.

It's not like the kind of rivalry you
have with Kasparov...

Exactly. With Kasparov it is
different. You really want to defeat
him, but with Kramnik, both of us
like to do well. I would be lying if
I said I don't want to finish ahead
of him. We fight quite hard also, but
if I beat Kasparov, I would savour it
even more. With Kramnik, it's more
easy going. That's because we are
good friends.

There's nothing personal in beating
Vladimir. Nonetheless, he's a very
good player and I won the game in
very good style also. All along it
was a beautiful day! That day I had
not prepared very well for the match.
I had prepared for black, not for
white. Suddenly I had to do something
with white. I just decided to play
something spontaneously and it worked
out brilliantly. It was one of those
days when you feel you had done a
good day's job!

It just happens?

Yes, it just happens! You feel
somehow the creative juices are
flowing and you play a good game;
afterwards you think, that's nice!

Your rook sacrifice against [Viorel]
Bologan at Dortmund is described as
the novelty of the year. Was it a
spontaneous move or, did you plan it
in advance?

The position we had was what I had
against Ponomoriov, but with the
opposite colours, the previous year.
I think it was move 12. I had to add
more spice to this. Ponomoriov's
second was Bologan. Now I was in the
place of Ponomoriov and Bologan where
I was. We had the same position
again. And I remember the move that I
most feared when I was playing black,
and used it as white, and then he
understood that he was completely
busted. The funny thing is, during my
game with Ponomoriov I saw the move
only at the board, because it was not
published or even mentioned anywhere.
It simply doesn't exist in chess
knowledge.

In fact, before this game with
Bologan, I had mentioned it only to
two people: one was [Krishnan]
Sasikiran, and the second one was my
second. After the fourth round, I
told my second, I think Bologna is
going to go for my game against
Ponomoriov, and let's keep this for
him.

So that move was not spontaneous at
all. It was total home preparation.
The game also was equally good; it
was a brilliant game.

Now it is said it will win the year's
best game...

I hope it will win either the best
game or the novelty of the year!

Which was the toughest tournament of
2003?

Linares (Anand was joint third with
Garry Kasparov there) was tough, I
would say. Two times I had a chance
to finish first and both the times I
lost positions that I could draw in
my sleep. Sometimes the tournament's
tension makes people do such things.
At home, if you look at it, you will
never make such a mistake. I was
getting quite tired also. In the
sixth round, I had played 80 moves
and it had gone to six hours and 45
minutes. Next day, the fatigue caught
me. The same thing happened at the
end of the tournament.

If I had half a point more I would
have been joint first! I didn't feel
it was a big disaster, but it was a
slightly bitter aftertaste! Right
after that, I went to Monaco and won.

You won the titles for the fourth
year in succession at both Corsica
and Mainz Classic. Which was the
sweetest, the hat-trick or the fourth
one?

Ha! If I can make it fifth at both, I
can become Lance Armstrong! [laughs]
So that will be the sweetest!

Aready you are being described as
Lance Armstrong.

If I can do the fifth, it will be the
sweetest, and if Lance doesn't plan
to do his sixth! [laughs]. Okay, five
in a row will be nice.

I like both the tournaments. I feel
at home in both places. You can't
describe it. You land in a place and
feel you belong there, and you play
well.

Let me ask you about the chess world
ranking system. World number one
Garry Kasparov has played only a
couple of games this year, and he was
joint third with you at Linares. You
defeated Kramnik, the world No 2, at
the World Rapid Chess Championship.
Moreover, you have won the maximum
number of titles this year. Still you
are only world No 3. Don't you feel
there is something wrong with the
ranking system?

Yes. The ranking system only takes
into account the seven-hour games.
Nowadays, you have three seven-hour
tournaments of five in total, and you
have about 30 or 40 rapid chess
tournaments. Which means only one-
eighth of your tournaments will count
in a calendar year, and it doesn't
make any sense.

What I suggest is that we can create
a second ranking system; a ranking
system for the year. Then, you give a
certain number of points to the super
tournaments, like Linares, Mainz,
Dortmund, etc, very similar to
tennis.

The rating list we have now is not
designed to be a rating list; it is
some sort of a mathematical system.
In this system, it is enough for me
to do the bare minimum; that is, to
play one game every two years or
every year-and-a-half, and then I
stay on the list. So in my best
performances of 1973 and 1974, if I
reached 2850 in 1985, and after that
if I played one game a year, I could
stay in the ranking list forever. It
doesn't make any sense!

Now, Kasparov is frozen at the top,
and he doesn't play. Kramnik is
frozen almost at second. Kramnik and
I are playing similar number of
tournaments, but what happens is, we
are frozen at 2 and 3 for the next
six months.

I am not complaining that I can't go
up. People below me also can complain
that they cannot catch up with me. If
I have a 60 point lead, it takes four
years for them to catch up. So, it's
not a very accurate system.

It is like [Pete] Sampras turning up
and playing an exhibition game
somewhere and remaining the number
one in the list forever!

The rating system is a good
mathematical system, which is valid
because it gives us a good chess
history. But it should not be used to
name the best player of the year or
who is number one at a certain
moment.

Who will be able to change the
system? Who can pressurize the
authorities?

I don't think we need the
authorities. The players association
can do this privately. We have
elected the office-bearers, and at
some point I will make this
suggestion.

Now, we have computerized all the
games and they are floating around in
the Internet. You just download them,
list them by year, and you can name
the best player of this year...and so
on. You can say, from January to
June, this man was leading, and this
man caught up, etc. It is much more
exciting.

These days everybody writes that your
chess has become more aggressive. Do
you agree?

Actually, it is quite funny to read
this. I always felt I was quite
aggressive. Again, I read in a few
places, where Anand used to agree for
a draw, he now fights. Where I agree
for a draw before, I agree for a draw
even today.

What has changed, I think, is I try
not to prepare too much before a
game. In Linares, I made the mistake
of preparing too much before the
game. Two o'clock, I was preparing
for a four o'clock game. I don't want
to do this again. I have noticed that
if I go there unprepared, it works
out better; you are more spontaneous.
What is happening now is, I am not
over-preparing during a tournament.
That's why my game has gone up and
not because I was taking unjustified
risks.

Some also write that had you been
this aggressive earlier, you would
have had different results in your
games against Kasparov. What do you
say?

Possible. Against Kasparov, my
mistake was I had prepared very
rigidly, and that was not correct. I
should have prepared in a slightly
different fashion. We did quite a
good job in the first World
Championship that I played. Maybe, I
should have paid more attention to
the psychological aspect and so on.
Nowadays, I am able to do that
better.

The other day you said you were the
oldest player at most tournaments.
Some players were not even born when
you started playing international
chess. How do you feel to be the
oldest in a tournament?

It's a very funny feeling! I am sure
every chess player goes through it! I
am sure players like Karpov might
have felt the same. When they were
just going for their Grandmaster
title, I was born. Now it's my turn.
When I became the World junior
champion in 1987, (Teimour) Radjabov
was, maybe, a month old! [Sergei]
Karyakin (the world's youngest
Grandmaster) was still not born for
five years! He was born in 1991, I
think. Some other guys like
Ponomoriov were born in 1983, 1982...

I am the old guy, but I don't feel
old at all. At 34, I still feel I
have many more years of chess left in
me. At the same time, it is quite
remarkable to see people who are
still teenagers. When I associate
with them, I feel I am also a
teenager! Sometimes I have to
remember my age! [laughs]. It's just
funny for me to see their viewpoint.

Is their viewpoint any different from
what it was when you were a teenager?

I think it is a very similar to what
I said when I was a teenager. Every
top tournament they play is a first
one or the second one for them, and
they are still excited. Now I look
forward to tournaments for different
reasons.

What excites you these days when you
go to play a tournament?

The social aspect! I like to go to
these tournaments and meet all the
chess colleagues. I love competition,
tension and the feeling of wanting to
play. It is boring to sit at home and
analyze chess all the time.

In places like Wijk Aan Zee or other
places, you have memories associated
with the event. In Wijk Aan Zee, it
is cold and I cherish the walk along
the beach road. Then, you go to Monte
Carlo and look forward to something
else. Finally, I just have to go
every few months and start playing
again! Generally, I don't tend to get
excited about tournaments because I
want to win! I don't think along
those lines at all. I prefer to go
one round or two rounds at a time.
Only after the 9th or the 10th round
I start thinking, what are my
chances?

Which tournaments have given you the
most pleasant memories?

Different tournaments give me
different pleasant memories.

Any unpleasant memories?

There are some disasters. If you are
going back to those tournaments, you
make an effort to find some other
angle. For instance, at Dortmund, my
worst performance was two years ago.
When I was going back there, I was a
little bit nervous, but I was very
happy because we stayed in a
different hotel in a different part
of town, and I felt it was a new
city. I felt much better. These small
things do matter.

The funny thing is, after three
rounds, the old memories came back
and I thought, what the hell is this?
I had not won a game in two
tournaments! After round 5, when I
won, I knew I had broken the jinx.
Then, I won the sixth, the seventh
and ended beautifully. Actually, I
have pleasant memories of Dortmund
too. I have played there many times,
and played very well. But nowadays,
when I mention Dortmund, everybody
looks at me funnily. One year changed
the way I look at it.

A few years ago you spoke about your
early days as a chess professional.
You said many people couldn't accept
the fact that chess was a profession
for you. How much has everything
changed over the years?

There are 30 or 40 professional chess
players in India now who make a
living from chess. That gives you an
idea. When I started out, there were
only six or seven. It was tight. Now
things are getting better and
improving. Still, you have to work
hard. There are many sports that are
fighting for space or sponsorship in
India. Obviously, cricket is well
ahead. But you have a big group of
other sports that attract sponsorship
now. Definitely, there are more
people now who can earn a living from
chess.

How bright are the young players of
India?

The national championship which
finished just now gives a pretty good
picture. [Koneru] Humpy could have
finished higher. Sandipan [Chanda],
[Pendyala] Harikrishna and [Surya
Sekhar] Ganguly did well. [Ravi]
Kunte was the only undefeated
participant. He is very solid. That
means we have a very good Olympiad
team. I am seriously considering
playing next time. If I play, there
will be me, Sasi, Ganguly, Chanda,
Harikrishna and Kunte. When our six-
board is this solid, it will be quite
interesting.

Do you interact with them on a
regular basis?

Yes, I do. I am not the grandpa of
the team; at least [I am] the uncle
of the team! I think I am at least 10
years older than the next. It will be
funny but I get along well with all
of them.

More at:
http://in.rediff.com/sports/2004/jan/13inter.htm

Jai Maharaj
Creator of newsgroups alt.jyotish, alt.language.hindi, alt.religion.hindu
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

Panchaang for 22 Paush 5104, Tuesday, January 13, 2004:

Shubhanu Nama Samvatsare Uttarayane Moksha Ritau
Dhanush Mase Krshn Pakshe Mangal Vasara Yuktayam
Uttaraphalguni-Hasta Nakshatr Atiganda Yog
Vanij-Vishti Karan Shasthi-Saptami Yam Tithau

Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust

Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org

The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate

o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the
educational purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of
this post may not have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent
the opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by copyright law
and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name,
current e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others
are not necessarily those of the poster.

Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:

snipped

Yawn, yawning, yawnnnnn!

It is like [Pete] Sampras turning up
and playing an exhibition game
somewhere and remaining the number
one in the list forever!

It is not & tennis is not chess..

The rating system is a good
mathematical system, which is valid
because it gives us a good chess

snipped

Yawwwnnnnnnnnn!..

this room needs airfreshner.


"michael adams" wrote in message
...
Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:

snipped

Yawn, yawning, yawnnnnn!

It is like [Pete] Sampras turning up
and playing an exhibition game
somewhere and remaining the number
one in the list forever!

It is not & tennis is not chess..

The rating system is a good
mathematical system, which is valid
because it gives us a good chess

snipped

Yawwwnnnnnnnnn!..

In article ,
"harmony" posted:

"michael adams" wrote in message
...
[...]

this room needs airfreshner.

A disinfectant, perhaps.

Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

The Rediff Interview - Viswanathan Anand

'You really want to defeat Kasparov'

'I have a lot of chess left in me'

Rediff on The Net
Tuesday, January 13, 2004

It is always a pleasure to interview
Viswanathan Anand. The Grandmaster
was nursing a sprained back when
Special Contributing Correspondent
Shobha Warrier met him. After an
extremely hectic fortnight in India
he was preparing to leave for Spain
the next morning. Despite the pain,
despite having given umpteen
interviews, he was relaxed and
patient, and spoke for nearly an
hour.

2003 has been an amazing year for
you. Mainz Classic, World Rapid,
Corsica Rapid... the list of titles
you collected is quite long. Do you
consider it the best year of your
career?

It is a very difficult choice.
Generally I don't compare. I don't
say this is the best and this is the
worst.

You are forced to compare when people
like us ask you questions...

Yes, okay, 2003 has been a very
important year. If I look back, I
would say '97, '98, 2000, 2002 and
2003 have all been very good years.
During 2002, at least the first half
or the first three months of it, were
not good. But the remaining nine
months were excellent. Same was the
case with 2000. But 2003 was more or
less good throughout.

So, yes, 2003 has been quite good. I
have a feeling that this is a year I
should remember very fondly.

You are now described as the 'King of
Rapid chess.' Was it a conscious
decision on your part to play more
rapid chess?

You don't prepare for one or the
other [types of play]. Most of the
time, my preparation is simply chess
preparation, which can then be used
either in a rapid tournament or in a
classical one. What happens though is
in rapid tournaments you can take
more risks, speculate a little bit
more, as there is less time [for both
players]. But I don't actually make a
conscious decision only to play rapid
tournaments or something like that. I
would be happy to play classic
tournaments also.

Sure, I like the rapid format. It is
over in an hour. Nowadays, the chess
world is evolving that way. If you
look at the number of new tournaments
in classical chess, there are hardly
any; maybe two new tournaments. I can
say Linares and Dortmund are the
mainstay of classical chess. But if
you look at rapid chess, many new
ones have come up.

Corsica started six years ago and is
now well established; Mainz is one of
the leading events; there are a
couple of tournaments in Iceland.
The number of new rapid tournaments
is increasing very fast.

Is it because it is more spectator
friendly?

Yes. I think it is more spectator
friendly; and with computers, people
are able to prepare so much more. And
they want more games played in the
same amount of time. Then, rapid
chess becomes a big advantage. It is
a sign of the times. Everybody is so
rushed nowadays.

Can we compare it to cricket where
spectators prefer one-day tournaments
to Test matches?

Exactly. I don't remember ever
watching a Test match. It is just too
long. Normally, one watches only one-
day matches. Yes, it [chess] is very
similar in that sense. Like the tie-
break made a difference in tennis
when it was introduced.

I think you need to keep
experimenting with formats. People
don't like monotony.

You said you don't make any special
preparation for rapid chess as such.
You also said you take more risks and
speculate more in rapid chess. Does
that mean mental preparation is
different in the case of rapid chess?

Not too much. In classical chess, you
have so much more time. What happens
is switching from one to the other is
difficult. It is easier to switch
from classical to rapid, but not the
other way round, because from
classical to rapid you have to go a
little bit faster, which I find easy.
The other way is tough because your
hand is itching to move and you have
to keep telling yourself, no, no.

The second thing is: in classical
chess, in the last half an hour or
one hour, you have to be absolutely
sure what you are doing is correct or
very close to that. It is very
difficult to bluff. Having said that,
they [the two forms of play] are so
different in another sense that in
classical chess most of the games are
decided in the time scramble, from
move 30 to move 40, when they [the
players] are running out of time;
they make some mistakes.

That's where the decision happens.
Or, in move 60, that's where the
decision happens. So, even those who
say classical chess is the best, must
admit that all the mistakes come in
the time scramble.

But there's no alternative. People
want decisions; they don't want
perfect games. They want excitement;
it is a sport.

So it is much more difficult for me
to slow down than go faster! So I
prefer this switch. It has worked
well for me too, because normally the
year starts with Wijk Aan Zee (Corus
tournament -- January 9 to 25), then
comes Monaco (March 19 to April 2)
and then there is a break. I play
some rapid tournaments after that,
and then comes Dortmund, and then
Mainz, where I have to go faster.

This year's Mainz Chess Classic,
where you had a see-saw battle with
Judit Polgar, was one of the most
exciting tournaments from the
spectators' point of view. Do you
also consider Mainz as one of the
most interesting tournaments of this
year? Or was the World Rapid
Championship more exciting?

Mainz was very interesting. The World
Rapid also was interesting. True,
there were more draws, but there were
a lot of very interesting and
exciting games. I have seen what
excites spectators is when moves come
out fast and the advantage keeps
swinging back and forth.

Yes, Mainz was exceptional, because
neither of us could control anything.
We had no control over the results.
We would play and suddenly one person
would win. Three days in a row, I had
to win the second session. I was
lucky I managed to shut her [Polgar]
out.

You lost the first game but finally
managed to defeat her 5-3. Was that
one of the toughest tournaments?

Yes. I didn't expect to have such a
tough battle. Already, the number of
decisive games is going up. If I
remember correctly, I didn't win a
single game with black in 2001 and
2002. I always won with white. But
this year it has been nice and mixed.
In Wijk Aan Zee, I had two wins with
black; in Monaco, I had several; in
Denmark, I had several. In Dortmnund,
I won two with black and only one
game with white. In Mainz, again,
quite mixed. In general, I started to
win more black games, against
[Ruslan] Ponomariov, [Anatoly]
Karpov, [Peter] Leko, so on...

This year I am playing more
aggressively, losing a few more games
but winning many more. My style is
becoming a bit sharper. Still, I
didn't expect eight decisive games at
Mainz Classic.

Finally, when you won, was it a big
relief, or you were just satisfied?

Well, 4-3 was a big relief for me.
When I won 4-3, I felt things are
under control. I was quite sure that
if I didn't provoke her or try to
make the position unnaturally sharp,
I would win. I wouldn't say I was
completely in control; I felt
confident. The first game worried me.

Was it unexpected of Polgar to play
that well?

I think this year she has impressed.
What happened against [Boris] Gelfand
was she kept pushing too much and
lost 6-2. She thought she was the
favourite and overdid it. And
Gelfand, in fact, can be very
dangerous. But at Mainz, she was more
cautious and not under pressure. We
were playing in Germany whereas she
played against Gelfand in Hungary
(Polgar is Hungarian). So, she might
have felt the pressure.

Gelfand was very alert tactically,
and whenever he got a chance he
pounced on it. I was not able to do
that in Mainz. Many days I was
winning and then I slipped away and
lost. I tried to somehow imitate
Gelfand's play. I was trying to
follow a strategy to play sharp
openings in both colours, but it
didn't work for me.

Then, in the final round, I tried
some flexible positions and it
worked. If you play the sharp
openings, you have a responsibility
to play them very accurately. Gelfand
has that accuracy. In other
tournaments I had that accuracy, but
in Mainz it just wasn't there! It
happens sometimes.

Was beating Vladimir Kramnik at the
World Rapid, Cap d'Agde, in the final
sweet for you? He's ranked No. 2 and
you are No. 3…

Yes, it was. Vladimir and I get along
very well. We are quite good friends.
So it's not like I feel some sort of
unhealthy rivalry; it's quite
healthy.

It's not like the kind of rivalry you
have with Kasparov...

Exactly. With Kasparov it is
different. You really want to defeat
him, but with Kramnik, both of us
like to do well. I would be lying if
I said I don't want to finish ahead
of him. We fight quite hard also, but
if I beat Kasparov, I would savour it
even more. With Kramnik, it's more
easy going. That's because we are
good friends.

There's nothing personal in beating
Vladimir. Nonetheless, he's a very
good player and I won the game in
very good style also. All along it
was a beautiful day! That day I had
not prepared very well for the match.
I had prepared for black, not for
white. Suddenly I had to do something
with white. I just decided to play
something spontaneously and it worked
out brilliantly. It was one of those
days when you feel you had done a
good day's job!

It just happens?

Yes, it just happens! You feel
somehow the creative juices are
flowing and you play a good game;
afterwards you think, that's nice!

Your rook sacrifice against [Viorel]
Bologan at Dortmund is described as
the novelty of the year. Was it a
spontaneous move or, did you plan it
in advance?

The position we had was what I had
against Ponomoriov, but with the
opposite colours, the previous year.
I think it was move 12. I had to add
more spice to this. Ponomoriov's
second was Bologan. Now I was in the
place of Ponomoriov and Bologan where
I was. We had the same position
again. And I remember the move that I
most feared when I was playing black,
and used it as white, and then he
understood that he was completely
busted. The funny thing is, during my
game with Ponomoriov I saw the move
only at the board, because it was not
published or even mentioned anywhere.
It simply doesn't exist in chess
knowledge.

In fact, before this game with
Bologan, I had mentioned it only to
two people: one was [Krishnan]
Sasikiran, and the second one was my
second. After the fourth round, I
told my second, I think Bologna is
going to go for my game against
Ponomoriov, and let's keep this for
him.

So that move was not spontaneous at
all. It was total home preparation.
The game also was equally good; it
was a brilliant game.

Now it is said it will win the year's
best game...

I hope it will win either the best
game or the novelty of the year!

Which was the toughest tournament of
2003?

Linares (Anand was joint third with
Garry Kasparov there) was tough, I
would say. Two times I had a chance
to finish first and both the times I
lost positions that I could draw in
my sleep. Sometimes the tournament's
tension makes people do such things.
At home, if you look at it, you will
never make such a mistake. I was
getting quite tired also. In the
sixth round, I had played 80 moves
and it had gone to six hours and 45
minutes. Next day, the fatigue caught
me. The same thing happened at the
end of the tournament.

If I had half a point more I would
have been joint first! I didn't feel
it was a big disaster, but it was a
slightly bitter aftertaste! Right
after that, I went to Monaco and won.

You won the titles for the fourth
year in succession at both Corsica
and Mainz Classic. Which was the
sweetest, the hat-trick or the fourth
one?

Ha! If I can make it fifth at both, I
can become Lance Armstrong! [laughs]
So that will be the sweetest!

Aready you are being described as
Lance Armstrong.

If I can do the fifth, it will be the
sweetest, and if Lance doesn't plan
to do his sixth! [laughs]. Okay, five
in a row will be nice.

I like both the tournaments. I feel
at home in both places. You can't
describe it. You land in a place and
feel you belong there, and you play
well.

Let me ask you about the chess world
ranking system. World number one
Garry Kasparov has played only a
couple of games this year, and he was
joint third with you at Linares. You
defeated Kramnik, the world No 2, at
the World Rapid Chess Championship.
Moreover, you have won the maximum
number of titles this year. Still you
are only world No 3. Don't you feel
there is something wrong with the
ranking system?

Yes. The ranking system only takes
into account the seven-hour games.
Nowadays, you have three seven-hour
tournaments of five in total, and you
have about 30 or 40 rapid chess
tournaments. Which means only one-
eighth of your tournaments will count
in a calendar year, and it doesn't
make any sense.

What I suggest is that we can create
a second ranking system; a ranking
system for the year. Then, you give a
certain number of points to the super
tournaments, like Linares, Mainz,
Dortmund, etc, very similar to
tennis.

The rating list we have now is not
designed to be a rating list; it is
some sort of a mathematical system.
In this system, it is enough for me
to do the bare minimum; that is, to
play one game every two years or
every year-and-a-half, and then I
stay on the list. So in my best
performances of 1973 and 1974, if I
reached 2850 in 1985, and after that
if I played one game a year, I could
stay in the ranking list forever. It
doesn't make any sense!

Now, Kasparov is frozen at the top,
and he doesn't play. Kramnik is
frozen almost at second. Kramnik and
I are playing similar number of
tournaments, but what happens is, we
are frozen at 2 and 3 for the next
six months.

I am not complaining that I can't go
up. People below me also can complain
that they cannot catch up with me. If
I have a 60 point lead, it takes four
years for them to catch up. So, it's
not a very accurate system.

It is like [Pete] Sampras turning up
and playing an exhibition game
somewhere and remaining the number
one in the list forever!

The rating system is a good
mathematical system, which is valid
because it gives us a good chess
history. But it should not be used to
name the best player of the year or
who is number one at a certain
moment.

Who will be able to change the
system? Who can pressurize the
authorities?

I don't think we need the
authorities. The players association
can do this privately. We have
elected the office-bearers, and at
some point I will make this
suggestion.

Now, we have computerized all the
games and they are floating around in
the Internet. You just download them,
list them by year, and you can name
the best player of this year...and so
on. You can say, from January to
June, this man was leading, and this
man caught up, etc. It is much more
exciting.

These days everybody writes that your
chess has become more aggressive. Do
you agree?

Actually, it is quite funny to read
this. I always felt I was quite
aggressive. Again, I read in a few
places, where Anand used to agree for
a draw, he now fights. Where I agree
for a draw before, I agree for a draw
even today.

What has changed, I think, is I try
not to prepare too much before a
game. In Linares, I made the mistake
of preparing too much before the
game. Two o'clock, I was preparing
for a four o'clock game. I don't want
to do this again. I have noticed that
if I go there unprepared, it works
out better; you are more spontaneous.
What is happening now is, I am not
over-preparing during a tournament.
That's why my game has gone up and
not because I was taking unjustified
risks.

Some also write that had you been
this aggressive earlier, you would
have had different results in your
games against Kasparov. What do you
say?

Possible. Against Kasparov, my
mistake was I had prepared very
rigidly, and that was not correct. I
should have prepared in a slightly
different fashion. We did quite a
good job in the first World
Championship that I played. Maybe, I
should have paid more attention to
the psychological aspect and so on.
Nowadays, I am able to do that
better.

The other day you said you were the
oldest player at most tournaments.
Some players were not even born when
you started playing international
chess. How do you feel to be the
oldest in a tournament?

It's a very funny feeling! I am sure
every chess player goes through it! I
am sure players like Karpov might
have felt the same. When they were
just going for their Grandmaster
title, I was born. Now it's my turn.
When I became the World junior
champion in 1987, (Teimour) Radjabov
was, maybe, a month old! [Sergei]
Karyakin (the world's youngest
Grandmaster) was still not born for
five years! He was born in 1991, I
think. Some other guys like
Ponomoriov were born in 1983, 1982...

I am the old guy, but I don't feel
old at all. At 34, I still feel I
have many more years of chess left in
me. At the same time, it is quite
remarkable to see people who are
still teenagers. When I associate
with them, I feel I am also a
teenager! Sometimes I have to
remember my age! [laughs]. It's just
funny for me to see their viewpoint.

Is their viewpoint any different from
what it was when you were a teenager?

I think it is a very similar to what
I said when I was a teenager. Every
top tournament they play is a first
one or the second one for them, and
they are still excited. Now I look
forward to tournaments for different
reasons.

What excites you these days when you
go to play a tournament?

The social aspect! I like to go to
these tournaments and meet all the
chess colleagues. I love competition,
tension and the feeling of wanting to
play. It is boring to sit at home and
analyze chess all the time.

In places like Wijk Aan Zee or other
places, you have memories associated
with the event. In Wijk Aan Zee, it
is cold and I cherish the walk along
the beach road. Then, you go to Monte
Carlo and look forward to something
else. Finally, I just have to go
every few months and start playing
again! Generally, I don't tend to get
excited about tournaments because I
want to win! I don't think along
those lines at all. I prefer to go
one round or two rounds at a time.
Only after the 9th or the 10th round
I start thinking, what are my
chances?

Which tournaments have given you the
most pleasant memories?

Different tournaments give me
different pleasant memories.

Any unpleasant memories?

There are some disasters. If you are
going back to those tournaments, you
make an effort to find some other
angle. For instance, at Dortmund, my
worst performance was two years ago.
When I was going back there, I was a
little bit nervous, but I was very
happy because we stayed in a
different hotel in a different part
of town, and I felt it was a new
city. I felt much better. These small
things do matter.

The funny thing is, after three
rounds, the old memories came back
and I thought, what the hell is this?
I had not won a game in two
tournaments! After round 5, when I
won, I knew I had broken the jinx.
Then, I won the sixth, the seventh
and ended beautifully. Actually, I
have pleasant memories of Dortmund
too. I have played there many times,
and played very well. But nowadays,
when I mention Dortmund, everybody
looks at me funnily. One year changed
the way I look at it.

A few years ago you spoke about your
early days as a chess professional.
You said many people couldn't accept
the fact that chess was a profession
for you. How much has everything
changed over the years?

There are 30 or 40 professional chess
players in India now who make a
living from chess. That gives you an
idea. When I started out, there were
only six or seven. It was tight. Now
things are getting better and
improving. Still, you have to work
hard. There are many sports that are
fighting for space or sponsorship in
India. Obviously, cricket is well
ahead. But you have a big group of
other sports that attract sponsorship
now. Definitely, there are more
people now who can earn a living from
chess.

How bright are the young players of
India?

The national championship which
finished just now gives a pretty good
picture. [Koneru] Humpy could have
finished higher. Sandipan [Chanda],
[Pendyala] Harikrishna and [Surya
Sekhar] Ganguly did well. [Ravi]
Kunte was the only undefeated
participant. He is very solid. That
means we have a very good Olympiad
team. I am seriously considering
playing next time. If I play, there
will be me, Sasi, Ganguly, Chanda,
Harikrishna and Kunte. When our six-
board is this solid, it will be quite
interesting.

Do you interact with them on a
regular basis?

Yes, I do. I am not the grandpa of
the team; at least [I am] the uncle
of the team! I think I am at least 10
years older than the next. It will be
funny but I get along well with all
of them.

More at:
http://in.rediff.com/sports/2004/jan/13inter.htm

Jai Maharaj
Creator of newsgroups alt.jyotish, alt.language.hindi, alt.religion.hindu
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

Panchaang for 22 Paush 5104, Tuesday, January 13, 2004:

Shubhanu Nama Samvatsare Uttarayane Moksha Ritau
Dhanush Mase Krshn Pakshe Mangal Vasara Yuktayam
Uttaraphalguni-Hasta Nakshatr Atiganda Yog
Vanij-Vishti Karan Shasthi-Saptami Yam Tithau

Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust

Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org

The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate

o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the
educational purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of
this post may not have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent
the opinion of the poster. The contents are protected by copyright law
and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name,
current e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others
are not necessarily those of the poster.

Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:

In article ,
"harmony" posted:

"michael adams" wrote in message
...
[...]

this room needs airfreshner.

A disinfectant, perhaps.

Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti

The Rediff Interview - Viswanathan Anand

'You really want to defeat Kasparov'

'I have a lot of chess left in me'

Rediff on The Net
Tuesday, January 13, 2004

snip yonish idea

Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnn!..

Yawwwnnnnnnnnn!..

Yes I agree. I read a lot of it though. The one thing that surprised
me was that he and Kramnik were real good friends. I thought they
weren't.

EZoto

EZoto wrote:


Yawwwnnnnnnnnn!..

Yes I agree. I read a lot of it though. The one thing that surprised
me was that he and Kramnik were real good friends. I thought they
weren't.

EZoto

That's ok Ezeroto, that they are friends Vishi. & Kram. etc. Anand is
vegan, it is recorded..