In Belgrade, Serbia, you have Chess Department (on Belgrade Sport's Academy
at DIF University). I know some of the lecturers on it. One of them, first
graduated on the Chess University, and after that got master degree on
pedagogy. He implemented his project "Chess - potent medium for children
education" in Moscow. He got special Olympic diploma from the MOK president
Huan Antonio Samaran (more than 15 years ago). After that he become lecturer
on Chess Department in Belgrade. By the way he is active FIDE master.

Regards,
Goran Tomic



"Chess One" wrote in message
...

"Goran Tomic" wrote in message
...
Mr. Brennen,
thanks for the explanation.

I'm in good relation with some of the writers you mentioned, and I
believe
them. I didn't want to insult you in any way, but in my country
(Yugoslavia
or Serbia and Montenegro), and in Russia too, there is Chess Department
on
University (DIF University).

Regarding Mr. Spinrad, I enjoy to read his articles, too. He likes to
write
the texts about chess history, and I would like to see his
qualifications
for it. Several months ago he enmeshed in explanation about Morphy's
family...

Goran, it would be of even greater interest if we could persude a
gentleman,
a descendent of Paul Morphy, who once wrote here, and there followed
private
correspondance, to share anecdotes of his family.

But to your other text, can you please tell us something of the activities
of the chess department at DIF?

Cordially, Phil Innes

Goran Tomic

Since there are no degree programs in chess history, NO chess
historian has his title granted to him by a university. I was
appointed Historian for the Pennsylvania State Chess Federation in
2000. I

Few people realize exactly what a professional historian does. Some primarily
write about past events, others are in the historical preservation field,
others act as archivists for orginazations and governments, others find
employment as educators and museum curators still others are interested in
methodology such as numerical quantification and and applying scientific
methods to historiography.

"Goran Tomic" writes:


Svetozar Gligoric: While I played in Zurich in 1953, I didn't know any
doings in Soviet chess camp. I remember that on the Final ceremony of the
Candidate Tournament Reshevsky had the tears in his eyes. He couldn't
overcome his emotions because he didn't succeed to get the right to
challenge Botvinnik. I forced myself too much, in the last five rounds, so
I spoiled my average placement. I was under the pressure of our well -
intentioned public opinion who expected an impossible sensation.



Mr Tomic,

It is good to hear something from GM Gligoric, a great player
and fine writer on the game - his columns in "Chess Life and
Review" were among the best things that magazine ever published
even during its golden age.

Should you care to pass on any news from him I would
welcome it. Any pointers to English (or German or French)
language articles by Gligoric would also be welcome.

By the way, on which University Mr Neil Brennen got the title "Chess
historian"? On History University" or "Chess University"? The same question
for Mr Spinrad.

They are chess historians because they research/preserve/expand
the history of chess. Edward Gibbon ("Decline and Fall of the
Roman Empire") was not a professor of history, either.


William Hyde
EOS Department
Duke University

Mr Tomic,

It is good to hear something from GM Gligoric, a great player
and fine writer on the game - his columns in "Chess Life and
Review" were among the best things that magazine ever published
even during its golden age.

Should you care to pass on any news from him I would
welcome it. Any pointers to English (or German or French)
language articles by Gligoric would also be welcome.

Here is the whole article. It was published on Chess Today and in my column
(Strike a light) on Pakistan Chess Player http://www.pakchess.com/ too, so
some members of this newsgroup read it before few days:


INTERVIEW WITH GRANDMASTER SVETOZAR GLIGORIC

by Goran Tomic, via e-mail

I have a great pleasure to ask our famous grandmaster, Svetozar Gligoric,
the legend of our and world chess for comments about actually chess doings
and big chess events during the twenty century.

First, I would greet grandmaster Gligoric and thank him for his time for
this interview by e-mail.


Goran Tomic: Which of your many successful tournaments you think is the
best?

Svetozar Gligoric: In contrast to Fischer and Larsen, too high percents were
not "specialty" of my career, so my results in Varsava (8 points from 9
games, 2 points ahead Smislov and Boleslavsky), then in Mar del Plata 1953
(16 points from 19, and my new variant against Najdorf and Eliksases), in
Leningrad 1957 (6 points from 8 games with top Soviet grandmasters), on
Chess Olympiad in Munich 1958 (the gold medal on the first board, ahead
Botvinnik, with 12 points from 15 games) - I consider "lucky exceptions". I
had the most self discipline and invested the most effort for sharing the
second place on the Interzonal tournament in Sousse in 1967 (I was the only
undefeated player with 7 wins and 14 draws), although my result in Portoroz
was a bit better (I was placed alone, the half point behind Tal).


G.T: You played the first board on the Chess Olympiad in 1950, in Dubrovnik,
when Yugoslav team won the gold medal. What are your memories of that Chess
Olympiad?


Svetozar Gligoric: We were not aware of the worth of the result. I'm the
only member of the Olympic national team, (which had six members) who is
alive now . The President Tito surprised all of us when he sent two planes
in Dubrovnik (for the all teams) and we had an audience with him in Beli
dvor, his residence, which was not planned before.


G.T: Who of the grandmasters you played with remained as the best, and why?


Svetozar Gligoric: I had many friends among the famous grandmasters -
Botvinnik, Smislov, Petrosian, Spassky etc, but the longest friendship was
with Fischer. All of them were splendid correct, and the first in the World
by their strenght.


G.T: One of the tournament which we can read a lot about even after fifty
years is Candidates' Tournament in Zurich. Grandmaster Bronstein published a
book about that tournament, and it is considered as one of the top ten chess
books ever written. However, in the recent time grandmaster Bronstein
exposed a different view on that tournament. He said that Soviet Committee
for Sport operated active in purpose of obstruction GM Reshevsky to become
the challenger of the World Chess Champion, Botvinnik. What are your
memories of that big tournament in which you took part?


Svetozar Gligoric: While I played in Zurich in 1953, I didn't know any
doings in Soviet chess camp. I remember that on the Final ceremony of the
Candidate Tournament Reshevsky had the tears in his eyes. He couldn't
overcome his emotions because he didn't succeed to get the right to
challenge Botvinnik. I forced myself too much, in the last five rounds, so
I spoiled my average placement. I was under the pressure of our well -
intentioned public opinion who expected an impossible sensation.


G.T: The first time Fisher came in Yugoslavia at the end of the fiftieth.
What's your memories of Fischer from that time?


Svetozar Gligoric: The first time Fischer came in Yugoslavia in 1958. just
before the tournament in Portoroz. Although I was twenty years older than
he, and I was in the top of the chess world, I was his pleasant host in
Belgrade. I saw his openhearted and his deeply devotion to chess.


G.T: Which were Fischer's advantages, and which faults in his no played
match against Karpov? What's your opinion about his playing in the match
against Spassky in 1992?


Svetozar Gligoric: I have not idea about it. It was a big lost because FIDE
clumsy spoiled the chance for Fischer-Karpov match. When he played against
Spassky in 1992, though near, I followed Fischer's playing with not enough
attention, because of the general situation in our country and illness of my
wife. Fischer believed that he played excellent after the twenty years
pause.


G.T: You were the chief arbiter in Karpov -Kasparov match in 1985. After the
exhausted fight, and after 48 games which were played, Karpov was leading
with results 5:3, the match was broken by the decision of the FIDE
president, Campomanes. It was agreed to play a new match. What's your
opinion about that match?


Svetozar Gligoric: That marathon match stopped to be a good propaganda for
chess when the record series of draws and dragging began, which were allowed
by gallant rules in Moscow.


G.T: What can be done, by your opinion, to improve the chess situation in
Serbia and Montenegro?


Svetozar Gligoric: I haven't the right answer, because there is a certain
general crisis in the world chess. There are many young people who want to
play, but also there is less number of sponsors.


G.T: Could you give the advice to young chess players? What's the right mode
to work on chess? Which book do you recommend?


Svetozar Gligoric: The importance for preparing each game has greatly
raised, as the role of the computer, which allow getting great possibility
for information (earlier you had not that possibility). In a number of
materials, and the work in cabinets every day, it is necessary to economize
by time and to direct on analyse the games of the strongest players.


G.T: It could be heard the opinions that the classic chess reaches its end.
What do you think? In which way the chess will develop in the future?


Svetozar Gligoric: I wrote a book, in English, "Shall we play Fischer's
chess?" which was published in London, year and a half ago, and I considered
that problem more detail in it. In each case, the classical chess and
Fischer's chess could be used parallel without disturbing each other, and
the time will decide about the future of the "best game which created the
human brain".


G.T: You took part on the tournament "Rilton Cup" in Stockholm recently. The
veterans Mark Taimanov and Viktor Korchnoi played on that tournament, too.
What's your impressions from that tournament?


Svetozar Gligoric: I was a "honorary guest" so I was led to play, although I
didn't plan it. I didn't repent because hosts were very pleasant. I had some
health problems which bothered me, which I didn't talk about, but some think
that my result is (+3) satisfying.


G.T: At the end of the interview I would ask you to name your game which you
consider the best.


Svetozar Gligoric: Among hundreds of games I can't choose the "best".


I thank grandmaster Gligoric who found the time to answer the questions in
this interview by e-mail.


GORAN TOMIC

Svetozar Gligoric: Among hundreds of games I can't choose the "best".

Well heck I'll choose. How about his win over Petrosian in a King's
Indian Defense at a time when everyone thought Petrosian was
invincible as white against the Kings Indian. Also his win over Tal
in the candidates. Just my opinion.

EZoto

"EZoto" wrote in message
s.com...

Svetozar Gligoric: Among hundreds of games I can't choose the "best".

Well heck I'll choose. How about his win over Petrosian in a King's
Indian Defense at a time when everyone thought Petrosian was
invincible as white against the Kings Indian. Also his win over Tal
in the candidates. Just my opinion.

EZoto

I agree, and I would add some more in selection for the best Gligoric's
game: Najdorf - Gligoric (Mar del Plata, 1953), Gligoric - Keres (match
USSR-Yugoslavia 1958, 27. moves), Smyslov - Gligoric (Warsaw, 1947)...

Goran Tomic

EZoto wrote in message ws.com...
Isn't this old news. Everything about Reshevsky is well known isn't
it? Even Tal said that Botvinnik was a guy who spoke as if he was the
world champion in everything. Sounds arrogant to me. By the way the
russians feared Reshevsky. I repeat " FEARED " Reshevsky because they
knew he was a genuine talent. Reshevsky didn't become world champ
because because of his practical views on life more than anything
else. If Reshevsky devoted his life to chess he would have become
world champion. Not probably.......he would have become a world
champion.

EZoto

Reshevsky didn't go to the Budapest 1950 tournament because Americans
were then forbidden to go to Hungary. His next chance was Zurich
1953, following the three-year World Championship cycle that was then
in effect. Reportedly Reshevsky demanded an appearance fee that was
considered (by post-war European standards) to be rather high. Other
players brought seconds to Zurich. Reshevsky's appearance fee
doubtless covered trans-Atlantic travel and loss of income. It could
not be stretched to cover another player's expenses.

In the subsequent USA - USSR matches, Reshevsky played first board
against Botvinnik and he scored a success that was even featured in
the magazine Sports Illustrated.

David Ames

(David Ames) writes:

EZoto wrote in message ws.com...
Isn't this old news. Everything about Reshevsky is well known isn't
it? Even Tal said that Botvinnik was a guy who spoke as if he was the
world champion in everything. Sounds arrogant to me. By the way the
russians feared Reshevsky. I repeat " FEARED " Reshevsky because they
knew he was a genuine talent. Reshevsky didn't become world champ
because because of his practical views on life more than anything
else. If Reshevsky devoted his life to chess he would have become
world champion. Not probably.......he would have become a world
champion.

EZoto

Reshevsky didn't go to the Budapest 1950 tournament because Americans
were then forbidden to go to Hungary.

I don't know what to make of it, but Reshevsky himself
later denied this. He was quite adamant about it.


His next chance was Zurich
1953, following the three-year World Championship cycle that was then
in effect.

He was seeded into this despite not playing in the
qualifier, which makes me think his non-appearance
at Budapest was really involuntary. But then, we have
his statement to the contrary. Euwe was also seeded
into Zurich.

Reportedly Reshevsky demanded an appearance fee that was
considered (by post-war European standards) to be rather high.

I'm somewhat surprised to hear that he got any appearance
fee at all. I don't think there were appearance fees at
any FIDE event. The prize for winning the championship
was only a couple of thousand dollars.


In the subsequent USA - USSR matches, Reshevsky played first board
against Botvinnik and he scored a success that was even featured in
the magazine Sports Illustrated.


Alexander also beat Botvinnik spectacularly in a
USSR-UK match.

William Hyde
EOS Department
Duke University

wrote in message ...
(David Ames) writes:


Reshevsky didn't go to the Budapest 1950 tournament because Americans
were then forbidden to go to Hungary.

I don't know what to make of it, but Reshevsky himself
later denied this. He was quite adamant about it.

There has got to be some source on the government's position.

Keep in mind that Raoul Wallenberg was arrested in Hungary in 1945
even though he was a Swedish diplomat. Nothing was known of his
whereabouts. If the national government cannot guarantee the safety
of an accredited diplomat, then the United States government would
have presumably been unable to secure the safety of our citizens
there.

And, if I recall correctly, Cardinal Mindszenty, a Hungarian
churchman, was secured in the United States embassy in Budapest.
Given what was then known about Soviet-bloc governments, it would not
have been inconceivable to take Reshevsky hostage in exchange for
Mindszenty.

If Reshevsky meant that it was his choice not to go to Hungary despite
our government's position, I would not doubt him. But his passport
would have been lifted if he went; of that I am quite sure.

David Ames