When and how did you learn how to play chess?

I learned to play chess in Seattle in the summer of 1972. I got caught during the Bobby Fischer boom years.

Did the game captivate you right away? If not, how did the “love affair” happen?

No, I was actually very bad. My redeeming quality was my competitiveness. A motto was, “Those who never admit defeat are seldom ever defeated.” I persevered despite my many losses. I think I really got bitten after I learned to appreciate certain sacrificial mating patterns. The Smothered Mate in particular caused an explosion of my cranium.

Many beginning players get depressed when they are outgunned. How did you deal with early losses as you learned your stuff?

I never learned to deal with my losses. I hated to lose! At one point, I was certainly convinced that chess was not for me. This probably happened after 80 consecutive losses and I’m not exaggerating. I was really awful. At the time, as a 12 year old, it was just nice to be involved in an “adult” activity. I was getting a lot of attention from folks who were much older than me and I had an excuse to be in their presence.

When did you seriously decide to be a professional player?

Upon graduation from High School in 1977. In 1978 I represented the U.S. in the World Junior Championship in Graz, Austria. I really enjoyed the experience enormously and decided to give myself a “few years” before pursuing a college degree.

At what point in your career (perhaps that point hasn’t come yet!) did you accept that you would never be world champion?

In 1990 I lost a Candidate Match to Jonathan Speelman and felt that I would come back stronger then ever in the next cycle. But FIDE changed the qualification cycle rules and I didn’t qualify for the following cycle. In that, 1993 cycle, Garry Kasparov and Nigel Short split from FIDE and the World Championship cycles seemed to blow up in confusion. When FIDE imposed the Knockout system in 1997, the title of World Chess Champion lost a lot of its meaning for me. The goal of becoming the best player in the world waned. So it was in the 1990-1999 period that a slow dawning was taking place that my best chances had passed.

Many young male and female players dream of devoting their lives to the game. At what point (strength and age) should a player make a real run at chess professionalism?

The “point” your question refers to is a moving target. It all depends on the financial opportunities. Chess is not a lucrative vocation for even the very best players in the world. I note today for instance that MBA graduates start with an $87,500 salary. That figure is earned by just a dozen of the world’s very top players. In nearly every other endeavor the financial opportunities for the very brightest of a chosen field make millions if not tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars. Join a longshoreman union and it is a virtual guarantee that an annual income of $200,000 could be earned.

It may sound severe but to my mind, if a player isn’t a grandmaster by eighteen years old, I would advise against becoming a chess professional. By all means remain an enthusiastic amateur but a chess professional career, reaching the top ten, is not in the cards.

Women’s chess has made enormous strides. Any comments on the future of women’s chess?

Considering how poorly Women have been compensated, the future can only get better. Women have only been limited by the lack of opportunities. Judit Polgar has been a trailblazer breaking into the world’s top ten. She is the first and will not be the last.

What is the difference in understanding between a USCF senior master and a solid International Master? What is the difference between an IM and GM?

Obviously, stronger players have greater understanding of the game. They know more about endgames, have greater insights into a wider variety of middlegame positions, calculate variations better, have greater pattern recognitions and have a sense when critical opportunities arise. Stronger players are more opportunistic and adjust better to sudden swings in the game.

What is your greatest chess achievement(s)?

I became a GM at 19. Seven years after learning the game. I became the 1979 World Junior Champion, twice became a Candidate, four times the U.S. Champion, ten-time U.S. Olympiad Team member, was America’s top rated player for about a decade. I’m particularly proud of my tournament record against World Champions and Challengers. Having played over 100 games against this elite group, my score is even or possibly in my favor. My favorite opponent, Mikhail Tal, rewarded me with a 4.5 - .5 score in my favor to help boost my tally. Despite having a +2 -4 score with Karpov and a dozen or so draws, I’m proud of this record as I played against him in his peak years at a time that he was really clocking everyone very badly.

What was your worst moment as a chess professional?

Too numerous for mention! Certainly my failures in the various FIDE and U.S. Championships were the most hurtful. Strangely enough I was particularly vulnerable to losses from lower rated players. While I built myself up for the “big games” and invariably did well in them, lower rated players who were gunning for me scored better then they should have. Smile.

What are your other (non-chess) interests?

Perhaps this is my great fault as a chess professional, my dedication was less then loyal and Caissa is a jealous mistress. Sports, movies, music, travel, reading and writing all take the lion’s share of my interest.

What are your top five movies of all time?

Ben-hur, The Godfather Trilogy, To Sir With Love, Witness for the Prosecution, W.C. Fields movies are the ones I’ve enjoyed the most.

Are there any specific genres that attract you?

I love martial arts movies, obviously some of the worst movies ever made. But the good ones are inspiring! I loved Bruce Lee movies, Japanese Samurai movies such as the Lone Wolf and Cub series [Click HERE to see the site’s discussion of this famous series – Ed.]. The first movie, “Best of the best,” was quite good and highly recommended.

What are your favorite pieces of literature?

My tastes are rather eclectic. I’ve enjoyed the classics but am more susceptible to the popular novel writers, Grisham, Kellerman and Steven King. I particularly enjoy science fiction and think that Frank Herbert’s Dune series is absolutely magnificent as is Asimov’s Foundation series.

What are your favorite places you’ve ever visited during your chess travels?

Asia and South America have been so very enjoyable!

What is your most interesting chess adventure?

Being the second for Victor Kortchnoi during the 1980-81 cycle. I could write volumes about the experiences we shared.

Do you feel that being a chess professional has been a rewarding experience?

Yes! Absolutely fantastic. I’ve had a rich, varied life. While financial rewards have not been great, I’ve met thousands of marvelous people and have enjoyed myself very much.

Who are your chess heroes? Have your chess gods changed as you’ve grown older?

Heroes and gods have not played their roles. I have admired many: Kortchnoi, Larsen, Timman, Karpov, Kasparov, Spassky, Fischer, Nunn, Beliavsky, Christiansen are just a few names for whom I feel a deep admiration. I could add many others to this list. My closest chess friends include Minev, Donaldson and Silman.

What are a professional players peak years?

Hmm. Awkward question. I’m not sure but the 20’s and 30’s were my best years. Chessplayers seem to find a second wind. Kortchnoi and Smyslov played some of their best chess in their 50’s and beyond! Nowadays, the teenagers have been making outstanding strides. I would have lost a lot of money betting that Bobby Fischer’s record of youngest GM would ever be broken. Now it is being done regularly!

Capablanca said that one should study endgames first. Others insist that tactics are all that matters. Positional concepts for beginners are more or less ignored. And most seem to be addicted to memorizing opening moves. What do you think a beginning player should study? A class “C” (1400-1599)? An expert (2000-2199)?

Capablanca is right. Endings for everyone. Memorizing openings is a serious waste of time. Only with endgame knowledge can one have chess understanding. A good endgame player will recognize the long-term deficits and advantages of any opening variation. Why study the Zaitsev Spanish if a player plays the Exchange Spanish and beats you every time in an equal ending? The problem is that studying the endgame has been so dry and sterile that players would rather stop playing chess then study the ending. Teachers who can make endgame study sparkle and hold interest are rare and vital. I was quite fortunate in that my earliest chess teachers made me enjoy this facet of the game. Consider that my admired players include Kortchnoi, Timman and Minev, all great endgame specialists.

How important is the study of chess history?

History is important. I’m not sure that chess history is important in the sense will it make you a better player or not? The modern players of today know far more about chess then the historical players of 80 plus years ago. Chess history is fun! I just read, Ruben Fine’s, LESSONS FROM MY GAMES and thought it remarkably appropriate for our time.

What do you feel are the five greatest instructive chess books of all time? The five greatest game collections? The five greatest endgame books? The five greatest opening books? The top three chess books ever?

Really, this isn’t my best suit. I tend towards writers. My favorite writers include Tal, Bronstein, Nunn, Timman, Miles, Keres and Silman! I like virtually all their works and feel I can’t steer a reader wrongly by recommending them.

What is your list of the top ten players of all time (putting them in order of strength)?

Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer, Kramnik, Anand, Spassky, Smyslov, Capablanca, Alekhine and Bronstein. Of this list, I consider Kasparov and Bronstein the most creative players of all time.

What is your view of the concept of drug testing in chess?

Absolutely ridiculous.

Do you like the trend towards faster time controls, or do you long for the good old days when 40 in 2 was the norm?

I strongly dislike the faster time controls. I prefer Blitz, Rapid and Classical controls. For the latter, 40/2, 20/1, 15 + 30 seconds is best. 90+30 seconds, the time control used in Bled is an abomination. It completely ruins the endgame and hence the whole quality of the games. Unfortunately, this fast time control of 90+30 is ideal for organizers as the rounds end quickly and efficiently. Unless the players revolt and explain that the games are being ruined, the organizers will contentedly keep this time control. There are very few memorable games played at this time control.

Chess professionals often have no medical insurance and no retirement fund. Should FIDE or the USCF do something about this unfortunate situation?

Yes. The USCF has such a Player’s Health Fund but this program is not known and seems to be inactive.

How would the best players of the 50s and 60s done against the finest players of the present (everyone from both time periods being in their prime)? For fun, the old-timers “team” would consist of: Fischer, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Petrosian, Spassky, Tal, Keres, Korchnoi, and Larsen. The team from the present would be: Kasparov, Karpov, Kramnik, Anand, Shirov, Topalov, Adams, Kamsky, Leko (everyone from one team playing four games against everyone from the other would be an ideal fantasy format).

Today’s players would have won.

Who are the most colorful people in chess – your favorite chess personalities?

Fischer, Donner, Kortchnoi, Kasparov, Miles, Timman and Tal all come readily to mind. In the Northwest, our own Suttles, McCormick, Pupols are a lot of fun.

Does chess have a future and, if so, what visionary insight can you share?

Chess has a great future. It is a marvelous tool of the mind that transfers skills such as reasoning, planning, strategic thinking, responsibility and discipline to everyday life. Chess players are more aware of when their brains are working and whether they are having productive mental storms or not. Chess players understand the need to invest their time to improve their game and when they don’t put in the required work their results will suffer. This is true for all things, whether building a house or a business. Planning is key. Things don’t just happen. An idea is conceived, nurtured and brought into being. Theory and practice go hand in glove. As teachers become more aware of how chess can positively impact the lives of children, chess will become an elective class for schools.

What are your present chess and non-chess goals?

Most of the time, I’m working to raise the awareness level of chess in the United States. Whether it is from writing, lecturing or helping folks get organized. A lot of time is spent helping those already doing the good work. I’m a volunteer at America’s Foundation For Chess (www.af4c.org) and enjoy working with the board members and staff trying to make the U.S. Championships the best event in the nation. Our focus is on children and our goals are very lofty. I like that! The most challenging part of this work is fundraising. Today’s economy is very challenging and convincing folks that chess is an important tool requires a lot of convincing. Sometimes it goes very easily, other times after a lot of pursuit the effort fails. I’d say my batting average is one hit in twenty. That won’t get me into the majors!

Would you like to talk about any books you’ve written, or intend to write?

I’m considering a series of works of my own games and I’ve been planning to write a book, Winning Chess Combinations, the 7th in the Winning Chess series. I’m having a hard time juggling my time so these works are still in the planning stages. I like the books I’ve written on great chess matches, FIVE CROWNS and NO REGRETS [Click HERE to see Silman’s review of this book – Ed.] but these are lesser-known works.

What is the best game you’ve ever played (Please give us a copy…notes would be nice, but the bare score is also fine.)?

Sorry, I can’t comply. I’ll leave that to others.

If there is an important question(s) I have failed to ask but you would like to answer, please fill in the blank!

I think that the golden age for chess was the period that the Grandmasters Association (GMA) was in existence. If the top players are interested in boosting the prestige of the game, improving their pocketbooks and making chess an important sport, they will have to get their act together and unite in a union of players. Everyday that they fail to do so is a day and an opportunity lost. Chess players are very individualistic and find it hard to agree on such structures. Without their motivated support chess will remain in the hands of FIDE and federation officials whose interests are far more varied and hardly focused upon top chess players. Top chess players must rely upon themselves. If they don’t do it, others will not. Similar examples include the world of tennis, where the top players put aside their own narrow interests for the greater good. Chess players will have to do the same. Complaining that FIDE or the USCF or other federations are not doing a good job is a waste of time. The players should make change themselves and stop complaining! The responsibility for top chess rests in the hands of top chess players. If they abdicate their responsibility, too bad for them!

I note the hard work and dedication performed by many in the scholastics chess field. Despite the lack of promotional tools, financial resources and a vibrant national structure, these folks are making outstanding progress by working hard towards their goals. I truly admire their efforts and feel if the top players would work half as hard they would surprise themselves by their success.

My best chess move was marrying my chess-playing wife Yvette.

Thanks for taking part!