chess prodigy and genius- an interview with Viktor L Krochnoi

Listen to Victor L. Korchnoi - always interesting. It's like watching a blockbuster movie - what will the plot, you can not guess. Our filmmakers are taking the first steps in this genre, "Night Watch," "Day Watch".Suggest to the readers' Korchnoi: Watch ", which, as usual, the famous Grandmaster (aka Sentinel) does not descend nor the other, or themselves.

Victor L.! For today's interview, I chose the theme: "geniuses and child prodigies in chess." Who would you attribute to the chess genius? How do you think you can define it - a genius in chess?

Well, first of all, myself in that category I'm in no way am not. I recently watched their games in the early years and was not very high opinion of them. I have a general assumption that in chess, if you get hand, it is enough to achieve success, and talent, the more genius - it is not necessary.

Optional, but desirable. Agree that there are players from God, who by fate was destined to become great.

I assume that Capablanca was a brilliant chess player. Rather, his talent was already in childhood. At the same time, I imagine that neither Botvinnik or Alekhine, Lasker or were not geniuses. They - just talented individuals who will power, ability to work made their way among the strongest in the world. I guess the geniuses - a little bit. If we talk about modern chess players, representatives of the Russian Chess Space, it seems to me a very talented Morozevich, I feel that since childhood his talent, and I do not feel for him as he worked on a daily basis natruzhival his toes. When I looked at the players of the West, I liked Anand, I played with him a few times and see how it is changing for the better. The genius - this is a very strong word! Nevertheless, he was close to that definition. I was made a good impression, even Magnus Carlsen. It seemed to me that it's not so much chess - he has very strong mind, and he enjoys playing chess mental strength of his intellect (something like that). I watched as he played the game with Shirov in the tournament, in which he did not shine, and during the game it seemed that he should fight for a draw, it was worse, and suddenly he turned an incredible combination. And I thought that Shirov - really more mentally vulnerable than other strongest grandmasters, and it felt Carlsen, and here he decided to take the risk: Instead of playing the equation, he set such a task Shirov, with whom he did not deliver. Although, objectively speaking, Shirov could manage to win the game. But Carlsen decided that it is against Shirov can afford! He now has one success after another, he is heroic strides forward, and I think it is even strange, because a year ago, he looked not so bright, I played with him in a tournament in Norway - nothing special.But now he is in the Khanty-Mansiysk one another nailed - it's great! Once again, we're not just talking about the chess genius - the power of human intelligence, not just chess. I'm not a psychologist, and I find it hard to find the appropriate term. These people belong to the young Carlsen.

Do you think that if the rate of translational motion Carlsen will continue, when it comes to the first role?

In connection with the issue that you raised, I would like to think of creative ways of Mikhail Tal. Indeed, the brightest talent, and he gave the impression of a hard-working man, but a man with brilliant ideas. He, a man of strong mind, managed to beat almost all modern grandmasters, with rare and obscure exception - he lost Keres me and anyone else in the world. Probably, it may very well be that Carlsen will get a very strong people who do not succumb to the influence of vneshahmatnomu.

A Karjakin, what his future?

I do not open. I'm not too high an opinion of the talent Karjakin. By analogy, I can not understand how Kamsky once lost a tournament under a zero, and showed that he had little talent, and then suddenly came to play a world championship match with Karpov. And just before my eyes playing Karjakin.

Does it follow that in addition to Carlsen is no longer rely on anyone?

I recently wrote an article for the «New in chess» about Nakamura, Carlsen and Harikrishna. I discussed the question of why Nakamura played a queen in the second course of h5. Clearly, if both play just once, a person's head - a circle, and he does not know where that place. But when he plays for the tenth time, man, whoever he was already ready for this, and hope for the surprise effect is not necessary. And it is clear that the course, according to the strict rules of chess, is incorrect. However, Nakamura continued to play well and lose. I even suggested that this move is reminiscent of some images from Japanese mythology. As I said, I argued that Nakamura - not Japanese, it is - an American. No, he's from the Japanese Diaspora, looks like a Japanese. Above all, he never, even accidentally, after winning Fh5, did not explain why he goes there. That's why it seems to me that it is linked to Japanese mythology.

Maybe the course Zvyagintsev Ka3, which he used several times in the Grand Final in Russia, too, is related to Japanese mythology?

No, it's extremely original player. We started talking about the genius, talent at chess. And Zvyagintsev - an unusual vision of the world, which is reflected in chess. 

 What are the abilities to chess? What is their range do you think?

I'm just not sure that I have personally seen those chess skills.

Then what would you have if they did you have?

I thought about it when watching the play Karjakin - it also adds from year to year, but he had no chess skills. Although he could go to the bar, I jumped at one time or tried to do it. A pure chess skills - this is when a descent is possible to see different things. This is probably the rate of assessment. Especially good was Tal, who generally think quickly and, in particular, but not in general terms. It was characteristic of him in chess positions, too. He was a genius. If he had not become a chess player, he would have been a genius in literature, music, or whatever. And there are people other than success in the chess world is nothing else can surprise. And there are a lot of people. And in chess, they just stuffed his hand, rubbed his toes, and eventually succeeded. I would venture to call Botvinnik, Spassky, and I would venture to call, even though the Savior has some talent felt. And if the person is engaged in only chess and wants to achieve success in them, it means he is mediocre, and there is in it, unilaterally, a chess genius. In this sense, the entertaining "The Chess Novella" by Stefan Zweig. He predicted there that there are two types of players: one reached the top thanks to the tremendous chess intelligence, others - due to his absence.He sailed on the ship, which moved from Europe to America and met with GM Kostic, who made a painful impression on the Zweig. Summarizing, we can say that there are geniuses who show themselves anywhere, and can in chess, but it is - the case. They can manifest itself in anything. Special chess talent is not there.

Did your life the way people who, because of passion with something else thrown chess, although they could become outstanding players, and became famous in other activities?

The only one I can think of - is Kama, the truth, I do not think he's too talented chess player. My father wanted him to earn more money, and he went to the surgeon. Then my father wanted him to become a lawyer.

I am referring to the case where a man playing chess at the same time manifests itself in something else: mathematics, physics, literature, ... time to quit chess and become famous in their chosen field.

I think that's possible. Chess - it's like an infection, it is difficult to get away from them. Otherwise, you can imagine: a man, endowed with all the talent and capable of achieving success in chess, of course, will be able to understand everything else.

On the question of contagion. Do you think that we should teach children chess in the world today? And if you teach, at what age do you think, this should start?

I'm on my own experience I feel that children should be given first general education. I was a talented kid, I read a lot ... It only became serious about chess, I stopped reading those books, which are designed for adults, such as Dostoevsky, I have not read, I have not had the time and effort on it. Therefore, you first need to give people education and then teach him chess. Another thing, they say, chess lessons instill perseverance, develop the ability to cover other knowledge of the brain, then there are the benefits of chess. Although little evidence of this.

I want to ask a question relating to the St. Petersburg Chess. How do you explain that in our city that gave the chess world a number of outstanding players, after Svidler, who was born in 1976 - both times in the year you are with Spassky left the territory of the USSR - does not add any world-class chess player?

I think that chess is better developed in a small town, there is less interest, temptations. In big cities there are lots of interesting things, besides chess. Karpov from a very small town, Kasparov (I, incidentally, did not say anything about him as a genius) - not to say that from a small town, but also not of the largest.

The question of Svidler. Do you think that if he could succeed higher than in San Luis?

I think he has a future. He may have psychological problems, and with age his body will solve these problems, and he will be able to achieve even greater accomplishments.

The question of Topalov. His immediate prospects.

Read what the participants wrote about the winner of the tournament in San Luis. So talk about Topalov did not want to.

What places in St. Petersburg, especially the way you are?

Summer Garden. As a child I was walking there with his parents.

And related to chess?

Of course, the chess club at Zhelyabova (now - Great Stables).

Your musical tastes?

I have not developed them. I mean, I love listening to good music, I do not like pop music at all. I do not understand how young people can listen to a crash.

And in the painting?

Then I do not understand.

Today you go for an anniversary Taimanov. There is a reason to return to the issue of geeks.Mark E. in his early youth showed musical ability, starred in the movie "Beethoven Concerto."He's in his 80 years keeps a clear mind, looks good. You in March - 75. You play at the highest level in major tournaments. At the same time, the image of chess literature usually associated with a strange and enormous pressures on the brain and nervous system. Is there a secret to your perfect form?

As for me, I grew as a player for a long time, apparently, it extends the life of my speeches. And Mark E. chess always been easy and for decades has played the same options.

A few words about the prospects for the world championship.

I think the match with Kramnik Topalov will not happen - they are unlikely to agree on who will be under any title to play.

Is there any chance of returning Kasparov at chess?

Chess is interested not so much people, and applaud the strength of Kasparov to a million people. In politics, as applause can be a huge number of people. So he went into politics and. On the return - wait and see!

Asked A.Kentler