Kind: captions
Language: en
you and Magnus played a private game 40
games of Blitz in 2010 in Moscow at a
hotel
this sounds and just feels legendary the
reason that I probably should not have
agreed to play this match and Y very
often times reference it as one of the
biggest mistakes in terms of competitive
trust that I made is specifically
because it gave Magnus a chance to
understand my style of Chess are you and
Magnus friends enemies Frenemies
um what what's the status of the
relationship yeah I think with all the
rivalries and chess everybody tries to
Hype it up like everyone hates each
other but the thing is at the end of the
day yes we're very competitive we want
to beat each other whether it's myself
or Magnus or other other top players but
we also realize that it's a very small
world like a lot of us are able to make
a living playing the game as
professionals and as I alluded to
earlier the top 20 to 30 players can
make a living so even though we're
competitive against each other we want
to beat each other there is a certain
level of respect that we have and there
is a sort of Brotherhood I would say
um so all of us are I would say
fronomies
the following is a conversation with
Hikaru and the Gamora a chess super
Grandmaster he's one of the greatest
chess players in the world including
currently being ranked world number one
in Blitz chess
he's also one of the most popular chess
streamers on Twitch and YouTube which
you should definitely check out his
Channel's name on both as GM Hikaru
this is the live streaming podcast to
support it please check out our sponsors
in the description and now dear friends
here's to Karo Nakamura
you and Magnus played a private game 40
games of Blitz in 2010 in Moscow at a
hotel
this sounds and just feels legendary
final score was 24 and a half to 15 and
a half for Magnus where'd you find out
the score I'm actually curious I don't
think it was publicly set or it was very
briefly said but it wasn't ever like
mentioned in a serious way so I think
it's a deep dive based on a few links
that started as at a subreddit which is
how all great Journeys start
yeah so this is kind of a crazy story
there this was not pre-planned at all I
remember this quite well
um I went out to dinner that final night
with someone who was actually very high
up within the internet chess club at
that time I went out for a nice dinner I
think I had like a couple of drinks and
it was wine beer I don't know what it
was and I think towards the end of the
dinner somehow they got word of this and
they they relayed the information to me
that Magus wanted to play a private
match now I agreed to play this match
probably I should not have and actually
has nothing to do with like the state of
having been out had a few drinks
anything of that nature but the reason
that I probably should not have agreed
to play this match and Y very oftentimes
reference it as one of the biggest
mistakes in terms of competitive trust
that I made is specifically because it
gave Magnus a chance to understand my
style of Chess and at the time I
actually had pretty good results against
Magnus I think maybe he was up one or
two games but there were many games
where I'd been pressing close to winning
against him prior to that match and so
when I went and played that match there
were a few things that happened first of
all Magnus really started to understand
my style because we played all sorts of
different openings and so I think he
understood that at times I wasn't so
great in the opening and there were many
openings where I would play slightly
dubious variations as opposed to the
main lines and then secondly from my
standpoint the problem that I realized
since we were playing with an increment
there were many games where I was close
to winning and he would defend end games
amazingly well he would defend what our
technical technically drawn end games
but where I would have like an extra
pawn it would be like rook and Bishop
versus rook and Knight say I have four
pawns he has three pawns end games of
this nature now if you aren't super into
chess you might not understand what I'm
referring to if you are you will but
their end games where one side might
have extra material and extra Pawn say
extra two pawns but theoretically it's a
drawn so can you give an example of the
set of pieces we're talking about five
six seven pieces like so okay like a
very basic one would be rook in four
pawns against rook and three pawns so
that would be nine total pieces on the
board four pawns on one side three pawns
on the other side wide but it's on the
same side of the board now this is a
technical draw it's been known for
probably let's just say 70 years roughly
give or take that this is a theoretical
draw no matter the position of the pawns
it's just all the pawns are on one side
of the board so like but like where they
are so it's like let's just say they're
let's just say they're four pawns right
here they're just four pawns and black
is three pawns so your pawns are on H6
G6 and F6 and there are no other pawns
on the board something like this and you
both have Rooks and it's a draw no
matter what the next next like 50 moves
of the game are we know that it's a
drawn end game
um with perfect play and so it was
things like this where Magnus actually
saved I want to say like five or six of
these and I remember it quite well
because I think the score was very very
close up until probably the last like 10
games of the match and then at the end
he started winning he started winning in
Spades but there were a lot of
situations where he was up like one game
or maybe two games in the match and I
had some end game like this and I was
not able to win the end game and so for
me after that match it wasn't even so
much that I lost the match with a margin
I lost by but it was the fact that I
realized how hard it was to beat him
even once you got the advantage and I
think for Magnus he learned that my
weakness was the openings I remember
because I actually I don't remember the
game itself but there was a game we
played in the Sicilian night or um and
he played this variation with Bishop G5
on move number six I'm sure you can you
can insert a graphic later I can show
you and I think it's a type of opening
sicilian's the opening night orifice
variation it was played by Bobby Fischer
the form world champion Gary Kasparov as
well and so we played all sorts of
different openings because of course
it's not as serious it's it's a serious
match but it's not serious where it's
going to count for the ranking so you're
trying to fill out where your opponent
is strong versus weak and so there was
one game I remember this very clearly he
played the bishop G5 variation in the
night or and I think I played E5 or I
played Knight bd7 and E5 which is
dubious it's not the best response and
that's just one example where I was
playing things that were a little bit
dubious and I was not playing the
absolute main line with 20 moves of
theory so I was trying to get outside of
Theory and I think Magnus learned from
that that even though it appeared that I
was very well prepared in in these
openings I wasn't quite at that level
couldn't you have a different
interpretation of you going outside of
the main line that you're willing to
experiment take risks that you're
chaotic and that's actually a strength
not a weakness especially when you're
sitting in a hotel room at late at night
this is past midnight
playing chess I mean why do you
interpret that that's your weakness
because Magnus going forward was able to
figure out the lines where you have to
be super precise you cannot deviate at
all and I got punished out of the
opening in many games so it was like it
wasn't about the night or if the the
opening or the variation specifically
but he knew what my repertoire was and
we'd pick lines where I had to play the
absolute best lines in order to equalize
um or I would be much worse and he was
very effective at doing that but
nevertheless it's pretty legendary that
the two of you you're one of the best
chess players in the world throughout
the whole period still today
that you just
sat down in a hotel room and played a
ton of Chess like what was that like I
mean what's the there's a I think
there's a there is a little here there
is a little video of it sure I mean this
is like epic right how did this video
Exist by the way I think there was one
journalist uh Macaulay Peterson who's
who's able to um film parts of it so it
was it was in a room it was me Magnus I
think Henrik was there I think Macaulay
was there and that was it people can go
on YouTube and watch it's on chess
digital strategies Macaulay Peterson
channel for people just listening to
this there's a a dimly lit room with the
yellow light emerging out of the
darkness of the two faces
I mean and the deep focus here and what
time is this this is must be this is
probably like one in the morning this
was uh I believe the day of day after
the fun this was the day that the final
round occurred and the closing ceremony
so we're playing afterwards I mean are
you able to appreciate the epicness of
this many of my favorite memories are
actually similar to this another memory
that I really have that I recall very
fondly was after the US Championship it
was called the 2005 U.S Chess
Championship was held at the end of 2004
and I believe it's in La Jolla and San
Diego I won that event and after that
that event I was playing Blitz probably
for like four or five hours in the lobby
of the hotel so it's the same kind of
situation where you're just playing for
the Love of the Game as opposed to
anything else of course nowadays
um I think both are Magnus and myself
just playing a dimly lit room like this
would almost certainly not happen there
would probably have to be um certain
Stakes involved for for us to play but
you know if you go back in time these
are the sorts of uh memories and moments
that would happen all the time so is
there a part of you that doesn't regret
that this happened you know I think it
comes back to my general philosophy I
feel like everything happens for a
reason and so because I have that that's
one of my core beliefs like I don't
really look back on it as mistakes I
feel like everything has happened and
things have transpired the way they have
for a reason if I look at in terms of
potentially like World Championship
aspirations I think certainly it was a
big mistake because from a competitive
standpoint Magnus figured out what my
weaknesses were at the time and he
exploited it for many many years in fact
I think if you look at the match I
played against him in the Melt water
tournament at the I think that was in
June or no it was later it's like
September of 2020 we played this epic
match it was the finals of the tour and
it went all the way to the seventh match
Magnus won in Armageddon and in that
match my openings were much better I was
able to match him in the openings I was
not worse out of the opening of most the
games and that made a huge difference
but for many years he was able to
exploit my openings and I mean that's
why the score I mean it's not the only
reason but it's one of the reasons the
score is so long opsided the way it is
is there any of those games that you
mentioned seven games that are
interesting to look at to analyze the
ideas and then you remember that are
interesting to you I mean the whole it
was actually so to set it up and this
probably will come into play in terms of
world championship format
um it was seven matches of four games so
we played a four game match and after
four games Sam up two and a half one and
a half I win match number one then then
it's so it's like you're doing four
matches of four games do you remember
how you won there were a couple of
Berlin games uh in the sixth sixth match
I believe in the seventh match as well
where Magnus actually made some mistakes
and I won some critical games you're
gonna have to explain some Basics here
so Berlin is the type of opening what's
that the Roy Lopez or Spanish uh opening
it actually existed all the way back in
the 60s but it really became popular in
2000 and one I believe it was when Gary
Kasparov and Vladimir kramnik play their
world championship match sparov had been
the world champion for a very long time
I think it was close I think it was
about 15 15 years roughly maybe a little
bit more than that um and he lost the
match because when Gary had the white
piece as far was not able to effectively
get an advantage a lot of those games
were very quick draws and in chess you
want to put pressure on your opponent
when you have the white pieces so kaspar
was not able to do anything with the
white pieces and kramnik was able to
beat him when the colors were reversed
Kramer when I game the groin felt he won
a game and wanted the Queen's Gambit
declined slash nimso variations as well
and um that was the reason Gary sparov
lost the world championship title was
because of this this variation can you
teach me the Berlin opening absolutely
so the opening starts let me just move
this microphone up a little bit starts
with E4
and then it goes E5
Knight F3
Knight C6
yeah there should be five
and now Knight to F6
and uh at which point is this the
standard like this is the the Berlin
yeah this is the Berlin this is the
starting position of the Berlin defense
and white has many many options here now
it's interesting because I did work with
Gary at a certain point and I remember I
I had access to his database and he had
something like 220 files on the Berlin
defense because what happened is as
Gary's somebody who the way that he
learned chess it's very much like there
are certain openings that are okay there
are other openings that are not okay
yeah and so this was considered dubious
at the time and so Gary basically
decided to go into this end game with
castles Knight takes Pawn was the
castling and then game so I'll show you
Knight takes Pawn all these moves are
very uh very forced
he got ponded what does it mean they're
very forced that means like those are
the optimal things that you should be
doing exactly these moves are um I think
they're almost at least for black
they're absolutely forced or else you
end up in trouble you said Knight takes
D4 Knight to D6 oh okay so this attacks
the bishop on B5 got it white takes
black takes back with the pawn in front
of the queen
Pawn takes Pawn
Knight to F5
and then it goes Queen takes Queen what
king takes Queen very aggressive yeah so
you get this position where we're in an
end game
you just ruined uh all the normal
conventions I guess right on the other
hand for kramnik it was quite brilliant
because Gary what he was known for was
opening preparation and getting the
advantages of very tactical very
aggressive player and you're playing an
end game right from the start now Gary
basically thought that this was better
for white and he tried to prove it and
he was unable to prove it I think up
until maybe it was game game nine or
game 11 actually maybe the order wrong
because I think he was white in the even
number games basically he spent four or
five games with white pieces trying to
win this end game and he was not able to
win in fact he didn't even come close to
proving an advantage so he kept wasting
the white pieces in that match and
cranwick basically took advantage when
he had the white pieces and Gary the
black pieces he was able to win some
games
um in very nice style and that was the
difference so that's kind of brilliant
so he had this is a new problem
presented in that match and Gary's gut
says white is better white is better and
so in white I'm going to push with this
position and I'm going to not change
anything from Mash to match I'm going to
try to find a way that this is better so
it's that kind of stubbornness and what
do you think about that like what that
that's that's the way of Chess right
that's not a mistake that's that's the
way you should do it if your gut says
this this position is better you should
capitalize right I think that's an old
school way of thinking and Trust because
before computers it basically is up to
humans your intuition your calculation
process really determined
um whether whether a position is better
and so like if in Gary's time if
openings were dubious they're dubious it
means somebody is better but as we've
learned with computers now even small
advantages generally that doesn't mean
anything and a position is defendable
where you won't lose the game if you
play optimal moves even if the advantage
is like half a pawn for example like
0.50 with optimal play a computer will
still prove that that position you can
hold it and not lose the game and so for
Gary he learned it where like if an
opening's not right you like he knows
it's not correct he has to prove it now
finally towards the end of the match he
tried to switch but it was already way
too late and he didn't have time to to
win with the white pieces he did come
close in one of the later games uh but
he spent the whole match trying to prove
that this Berlin defense is not playable
so this position the computer would say
uh that black is better it would say
that White's very slightly better
because black has moved the king you're
unable to Castle the king and it's kind
of open in the center of the board oh so
wait so stockfish or Daniel would agree
with Gary's intuition yes but at the end
of the day when you go like five moves
deeper in any number of the sequences
it's gonna go to 0.00 which means draw
yes correct and that's a bad thing
because white should be winning well you
want to put pressure on your opponent
when you have the white pieces into any
tournament any match got it so if the
engine says zero zero that means you're
not doing a good job of playing white
correct you should be putting pressure
that doesn't mean you're to win there
are going to be a lot of draws because
the game of chess has Josh Tendencies
but you want to try normally the the
general approach these days because of
computers is you try to put pressure on
your opponent when you're white and when
you're black you try to be solid make a
draw that's the general approach now
when Gary was actually at his Peak it
was quite the opposite Gary was trying
to win games with the black pieces as
well by playing openings like the
Sicilian night or but with modern
technology and I I did a podcast
recently where I also spoke about this
computers are so good and players can
memorize so many lines that nowadays
trying to take risks with the black
pieces it almost always backfires or if
you're very lucky you might make the
draw but you never get the winning
chances so from a risk reward standpoint
you have to play almost perfectly just
to make the draw but you're never going
to have any winning chances where in the
old days generally you might lose the
games but you're gonna have chances to
win as well but now it's very much
um one-sided so a lot of players try to
be very soft this is by the way the c
squared podcast correct yes yeah this is
an amazing podcast so shout out to those
guys I'm glad that they started a thing
that seems to be a good thing and I hope
they keep going with this good thing
that was a great interview that I did
with you in that podcast I talked about
Sicilian night or very aggressive
opening the problem is white is the one
who has the choices
um on after after the first five to six
moves white has the choices what do you
want to do can you show them sure so
it's for example that would be E4
I'll just set it up E4
foreign
Pawn to D6
Pawn to D4 trade
Knight to F6 Knight to F6 and now Pawn
to A6
so this is a night orph um Bobby Fisher
really popularized it and has run run up
to becoming the world champion Gary
played it for probably the last 15 to 20
years of his career so it's a very solid
solid um opening defense what are the uh
sorry to interrupt what are the the
what's interesting about this so there's
a uh for people listening on the white
side there's a couple of nights out and
uh so black has many options um black
can play for B5 here to develop the
bishop to B7
because the pawn on A6 guards the pawn
on B5
you can also play other setups like
potentially G6 and putting the bishop on
G7
okay so bringing uh doing different
things and bringing out you can also
push the pawn to E5 or push the pawn to
E6 okay so there are many different
setups and it's very very flexible but
white is the one who who has the choice
here in terms of what to play and there
are many moves there's this move that I
mentioned before Bishop to G5 which
Magnus played against me there's also
Bishop to E3 Bishop to C4 and now
they're also moves like H3 H4 Rook G1
um even moves like A3 and A4 so they're
basically are nine or ten moves that
white can play here but the move that
white plays sort of dictates the
direction of the game and you have to be
extremely precise if you're black so if
white plays something like Bishop G5
this is very sharp and aggressive but
you can also play something like Bishop
to E3 Pawn to E5 and something like
Knight to F3 here and it goes in a
positional Direction
so the again this is very Advanced these
are very Advanced um sort of setups and
and what I'm explaining is not not at a
basic level but why does it want to
choose as a type of game is it very
aggressive very sharp or both sides of
chances is it something very positional
where if you're black you're probably
okay but you have to play the best moves
in order to equalize or you can end up
worse okay so you're always responding
as black in this situation correct so so
how different are all those different
variations so like with the bishop with
a different you said you you bring out
the bishop to this position to this
position or to that position like how
are those fundamentally different
variations like I I just wonder
from uh AI computational perspective
like a single step yeah well I'll make
it even simpler here if you put the
Knight here it's very positional if you
put the Knight on this Square it's very
aggressive because normally white is
going to push this Pawn uh from F2 to
either F3 or F4 and potentially a pawn
to G4 later so even here based on where
you go it changes whether it's a
positional game or it's a very tactical
it's just those little and that those
are the choices you're constantly making
am I going to be standard and basic
compositional or am I going to be
aggressive and I can actually give you
another example so psychology plays a
big role and in the candidates
tournament which I played in June of
this past year in Madrid Spain I
actually I had the white pieces against
alireza farusia who is a rising Junior
originally from Iran representing France
and I knew that he wanted very
aggressive games so he doesn't normally
play the slain Idol and he chose to play
it in this one tournament so I knew that
he wanted these very sharp positions
where he can lose but he can also win
and so when I played him I intentionally
played this very Asian because I knew
that he was going to be unhappy he
wanted these sharp exciting games and
here I am playing something very boring
where if he plays it correctly it's
going to be a draw but he's not going to
be happy and so he actually did
something dubious because he wanted to
create tension he wanted to create chaos
so you knew by being boring you would
frustrate him and then he would make
mistakes exactly yes yeah so the
ultimate troll at the highest level yes
of Chess Yeah you mentioned psychology
and taking us back to the Magnus even in
2010 the magnus games but Reddit said
that you've spoken about losing to
Magnus being a hit on your confidence uh
is there some truth to that so is there
some aspect about that 2010 match that's
not just about Magnus figuring stuff out
but just a hit on confidence like how
important is confidence at that level
when you're both young and like firing
at all cylinders well it's not just a
problem with me this is the problem
everybody against Magnus because what
happens is is is on a broader level when
you're playing on somebody no matter who
you're playing against but when they're
somehow able to save positions where
they're much worse almost in miraculous
ways the way that Magnus is done against
everybody he's done it against me done
against aronian many times done it
against cramming just about everybody
when when someone's able to save games
it really starts to affect you because
you don't know what to do and more and
more the more and more times that
happens it starts adding up and it just
affects you in a way that it's very very
hard to overcome and I think every top
player has that issue where if they've
played against Magnus more than like
five times they've seen things happen in
the game that don't happen against
anybody else and then psychologically it
becomes harder and harder to overcome it
which is why I think a lot of the junior
players they don't have this long
history and it does affect them as far
as myself directly
um certainly after that match though it
was not the same playing against Magnus
because I viewed him completely
differently too after all those games
where he was saving these these end
games I sort of thing like this guy is
superhuman but you can't really have
those thoughts when you're playing
competitively but in the back of your
mind it's always there and I think every
toddler has that issue is there a way to
overcome that because you have to I
don't know if I'll necessarily do better
against Magnus going forward but I felt
that when I started playing against him
more than just a game here there in
classical chess during the pandemic I
played in these online tournaments it
seemed like every month
um I came very close I beat him in one
event I think I lost and two others and
then the two are final but when I was
playing against them more and more if he
didn't feel superhuman it felt like as
I'm playing more and more and learning
about his style
um that I was doing better so I think
for me the weird thing is that I just
wasn't playing against him that many
games but when I started playing as like
20 30 games during the course of a year
I actually started feeling more
confident because I feel like I can
compete whereas when I was only playing
him like three or four times in
classical chess in the previous couple
of years
it was I wasn't doing great and then you
don't have you don't have those glimpses
of you don't have those moments where
you feel like you're going to be able to
win against them but when you start
playing 20 30 games and you get these
opportunities even if you don't convert
you feel like you have the chances when
you play three or four games and they're
you might lose one draw three you never
have those opportunities and so you feel
very negative about what's going on when
you were able to beat them or not
necessarily win the game but win
positionally something uh what was the
reason like
technically speaking
the matchup between the two of you what
like where where are the holes that you
were able to find I mean the the answer
I think is actually quite simple I think
it's all psychological actually more
than anything else
um
because I didn't it didn't I didn't feel
like I was doing anything differently
but I was also not making the mistakes
that I was making before
um so I think it was more psychological
than on your part versus his part it's
it's very weird because when you when
you think about Chess it's a mental game
um you know but we we all are capable of
beating Magnus all of us but we all have
very very bad scores against him and I
think people underestimate how much of a
role that plays
um and for me when I played him in these
online events in 2020 specifically I
felt like there there was really nothing
to lose which also ties into everything
else that happened um during the
pandemic as well but I just feel like
there was nothing to lose and I felt
like I was playing very freely unlike
unlike before now that's not to say that
Magnus isn't a better player that like
somehow I expect to beat him but I felt
like I wasn't making the same mistakes
that I was making in the previous years
if we dig into the psychological
preparation is there something to your
mental preparation that you do that
makes you successful like what are the
lessons over all these years that you
learned what works what doesn't do you
drink a bunch of whiskey the night
before is there is there some is there
some small hacks or major ones about how
you approach the game it's really hard
sort of in a way because I feel like I'm
two different people I was one person up
until the pandemic as a professional
chess player solely where I earned all
my income everything was derived from
that and from the pandemic on I'm sort
of a different person because that is
not where where I'm making my income
from and so the whole psychological
profile that I had before is completely
different from now uh there's this this
joke about the I literally don't care
the phrase that I've used and
in a sense what that means is not that I
don't care obviously I'm competitive I
want to do well but if I lose the game
or I don't do well in a tournament it's
not the end of the world in the same
kind of way that I felt it was before
because that pressure of needing to
always perform was very very high
um and so I think before before the
pandemic what I would try to do more
than anything is just not think about
the previous game for the most part like
say I had a bad game I'd go out for a
walk that evening just clear my mind
these sorts of things now they aren't
really hacks per se but it's trying
essentially to have short-term memory
loss so
so I literally don't care it's not just
the meme it's a it's a philosophy in a
sense it's a way of being I mean it's
it's basically that yes like I do want
to perform well I'm going to give it my
all but it's not like it if I lose a
game it's not the end of the world that
should be the title of your
autobiography and it should be uh
like uh I I know you're probably
Immortal but if you do happen to die
this should also be on YouTube so uh
Charles Bukowski has uh don't try on his
Tombstone yes which which I think
emphasizes a similar concept but
slightly different more in the artistic
domain which is uh well a lot of people
have different interpretations of that
statement but I think it means
don't take
things too seriously yeah I I mean I I
agree with that completely I think that
um if you if you look at my career prior
to the pandemic I put huge amounts of
pressure on myself because
I really want to be as good as I could
be but but it was the way I was earning
a living and one thing that's very
difficult about Chess is that only the
top 20 maybe 30 players in the world
make a living from the game now you make
a very good living
um in no way am I diminishing chess but
the problem with it is it's not secure
at all so if you don't get invitations
to the absolute top tournaments which
have prize funds from anywhere from
maybe a hundred thousand up to
potentially half a million dollars if
you don't get those invitations it's
very very hard to earn a living you can
go from earning maybe two hundred
thousand three hundred thousand dollars
a year to earning like fifty thousand so
it's very very unstable and I think
um for myself I really put a lot of
pressure on myself and in a way that it
affected me and not not in a good way
not in so in part it was also Financial
pressure so like once you're able to
make money elsewhere it it makes you
more free to take risks to play the the
pure game of chess yeah it makes yeah
exactly it makes it made me it took all
that pressure off and I kind of I'm just
trying to play as well as I can and I
don't really worry like if I lose the
game it's not the end-all be-all and
maybe that's just like psychological
stuff that I should have tried to sort
out before I mean I did it some period
of time like do certain things along
those lines but
um I I just yeah I became became free
and I think it it definitely it was not
about the chess and that's one of those
things that's also very hard because
when I look at myself and when I had
these periods where it seemed like I
played better or improved one of these
periods um was in 2008 where I basically
I dropped out of college I was about
26.50 ELO so I was roughly top 100 in
the world and for the first probably
half part of 2008 I played very little
almost not all I went up to Vancouver I
was living on my own for the first time
and I was not studying that much and
then after that period I started playing
and I actually improved very quickly and
I broke 2 700 shortly thereafter so it
had nothing to do with chess when you
moved to Vancouver uh and weren't doing
much what were you doing exactly oh I
was enjoying nature I was going outside
hiking mountains um like going and
kayaking all these things that I was not
uh that I had not done for many years
I'm glad I asked because I was imagining
something else I was imagining you like
in a dark room drinking and playing
video games and uh okay cool that that's
good that that that's an interesting
break so dropping out of college and
then giving taking a break and then
giving everything to chess in terms of
preparation and so on
uh maybe actually if you can rewind back
to the to the beginning you've said
about yourself that you're not a
naturally talented chess player uh your
brother was but that's really
fascinating because what would you say
was the reason you're able to break
through and become one of the best chess
players in the world having been not a
naturally talented chess player yeah I
think that this applies to actually
chess or any number of sort of basic
games actually for that matter is that
I'm not naturally talented but if I
don't get something I'm I try to figure
out why don't I get it what am I doing
wrong over and over and over again and
um I mean there are many games like this
uh there's this funny game on the phone
I'll just use it as an example there's a
game called Geometry Dash
um now I'm not like I'm not world class
or anything at it it's just a silly
silly little game on the phone that you
play just tap and it goes up and down
um people people will probably know what
that is um but like I played that for
maybe like an hour or so I just randomly
placed for one hour and I was terrible
at it and I kind of forgot about it
about it for a week and then then I came
back I saw it on my phone like okay what
am I doing wrong like why am I not good
at this game so I spent like probably
like 100 hours over the following month
just playing it non-stop over and over
and over again to get to get better at
it and again I'm not like world class or
anything but I'm pretty good at the game
and so with chess is the same thing as
like when I started out it's like why am
I not good what am I doing wrong and I
basically refused to accept that I
couldn't be good at the game and so
um you know at the start I actually I
played for a couple of months I did very
poorly
um and then my parents stopped me from
playing for about six months they just
said no you're not playing your brother
your brother's quite good and my brother
was one of the top ranked players in his
age group in the United States so you're
not playing then after about six months
they relented and they let me play in
the first tournament back I actually it
was four games I was playing against
other kids and I won the first three
games so it was really good and I lost
the form of Checkmate in the fourth game
um which is of course quite ironic
um how did you yeah oh I guess this is
how old were you at this time I would
have been about eight years old seven or
eight so an eight-year-old future top
ranked chess player has so it's great to
know that that somebody has lost to that
Checkmate so it's possible to lose that
Checkmate yes I I remember that game
quite well yeah was it I mean at that
time did you know that that Checkmate
exists obviously I mean I think I
probably knew it existed but I didn't I
was just playing like it's a completely
different world than now if a kid goes
on their computer they can immediately
figure out what are the basic checkmates
all these different things at the time
that didn't really exist you'd have to
find it in a book yeah so this is just a
basic blunder yeah exactly cool yeah so
it's like I came back it was a very good
start and then I Then I then I lose like
this but I stuck with it I improved very
very quickly thereafter
um and yeah it was very straightforward
what was the secret to that fast
Improvement so you said
you said like this very first important
step which is saying like what am I
doing wrong like I have to figure out
what I'm doing wrong but then you
actually have to take the step before
figuring out what you're doing wrong
yeah I think it was just I I just I
played as much as I could like it wasn't
like I was consciously thinking about as
an eight-year-old you're not really
thinking about those sorts of things or
the big picture so I just basically kept
playing as much as I could whether it
was online whether it was against my
brother reading these chess books as
much as I could I just devoured as much
information I was like so you were
studying chess books you were I I was I
mean I wasn't studying them cover to
cover though it's like you just study
certain diagrams certain positions the
openings and stuff like that you were uh
mostly tactics actually openings were
not other than top level chess openings
were not a thing probably I want to say
for players below maybe Master Level in
a serious way until maybe like the early
2000s so for people who don't know chess
what what kind of tactical ideas are
interesting and basic to understand that
once you understand you
you take early leaps in Improvement yeah
so it's things like forks for example
where you attack two-piece at the same
time discovered attacks like checkmates
and again winning like a queen or other
material those are probably two most
important ones
um batteries or batteries and pins
things of things of that nature how many
how rich is the world of and by the way
discovered attacks are when you move a
piece and you you put a king in check to
win like a rook for example or other
material and forking pieces is when
you're attacking two pieces so obviously
the other person can't move two pieces
at a time they're gonna have to lose one
of them okay so how big is the world the
universe of forks and discovered attacks
like
um you know I I I I I myself know so
there's like Knights attacking like uh
what is what is their Forks Knight
attacking like a queen in a rook for
example like a pawn attacking a queen in
a rook um or like a rook in a Bishop
it's innumerable they're I mean but I
will say that I think that with chess
the more of these patterns you see the
quicker you catch them and that's how
you improve I think the the most is by
learning these basic tactical themes at
the beginner levels are you when you're
discovering those patterns are you
looking at the chess board are you
looking at some like higher dimensional
representation of the the relative
position of the pieces you know so
basically something that's disjoint of
the particular absolute position of the
piece but like you're seeing patterns
like this kind of pattern but Elsewhere
on the board like yeah are you thinking
in patterns or in like absolute
positions of the pieces both I think
that at the higher levels you're always
thinking about like you're thinking
about the patterns on one side of the
board specifically but then also what
happens is you play more and more if
you're a very strong player you will be
able to remember say Pawn structures
where the pawns are on certain squares
from games that you've played like 15 20
years ago even potentially so it's a mix
I think a lot of it is more subconscious
than actively thinking about and like
figuring it out like that um the only
thing for me that I definitely am doing
very frequently when I play is is trying
to look at my pieces are they place on
the optimal squares are there better
squares and then once I get past that
like using the basic logic I start to
think about okay what pure calculations
like what are the moves that make a lot
of sense and start calculating direct
moves but one of the most basic things
that I think that I do that a lot of
people actually should do that they
don't do is looking at the piece
placement trying to figure out what
pieces look like they're on good squares
versus bad squares
so am I for each piece asking a question
am I my happy place am I am I like
optimally happy place I think that's
very important like if we look at this
position on the board right now as a
good example who's not in their happy
place on the board right now I think
both both sides are actually pretty
happy right now but the thing is if
you're playing with a black because
there's what is what is a move that
sticks out to you to like follow basic
principles
basic principles probably bring out the
bishop and then Castle the king and
Castle the King right exactly that's
correct and and that's what you should
do that's the best way to play the
position
um now once you do that by the way I
have a vibrating device inside you right
now so I knew that right and so my
rating is 3400 which is what I believe
stockfish is higher it's like 3 800
actually is it 38 I think it is I'm
using an earlier version of stockfish
okay anyway sorry you were saying so
like that's that's very basic but then
if you move the bishop out and you
Castle the king let's just say Bishop B7
play this you Castle
okay so now you've done everything with
the pieces on the king side so what
would be the next set of what's the next
way to try and develop the pieces
so it everything here is pretty strong
except maybe this Pawn I don't know okay
but think about the pieces so by piece I
mean everything except the pawns Okay I
accept the pawns okay uh
probably
[Music]
either either bishop or Knight right on
the other side yeah that and that is
correct you want to bring out the bishop
in the night let's say you go Bishop E6
yeah
all Castle
now you can move the knights either
Square it's somewhat irrelevant but just
move the Knight
I'll just play Knight to C6 what what
was your random movement okay oh well
yeah what's your unhappy place okay so
let me move the queen to just follow
some base principles okay because I want
to bring my Rooks to the center of the
board yes so like in this position
you've pretty much developed all your
pieces they're only two pieces that you
haven't brought into the game
the the queen and the Rock and The Rook
and this you consider to be in the game
because
um I wouldn't say it's it's in the game
but there isn't really a great Square
for that Rook right now
um but in this position you would
probably move your Rook to C8
and then the middle game begins after
that got it so here because now you've
gotten your piece to all the optimal
squares and now you have to look for a
specific plan but you have gotten these
pieces developed
um out of the opening yeah and that's
that's like a very basic thing that I
think a lot of people don't think about
is like what are the optical placements
for the pieces so you're constantly
thinking about the pieces that are not
in the optimal placement as you're doing
all the other kind of tactics and stuff
like that but that's a basic thing that
people can follow actually doing pure
calculations like look moving five or
ten moves in your head that's not
realistic but trying to use basic logic
to figure out what pieces look what
pieces are on squares that look correct
it's something anybody can do what about
looking at the other person's pieces and
thinking about the optimal placement of
them like if you see a bunch of pieces
not in their optimal placement for the
opponent what does that tell you I mean
that's a higher level concept of course
that like I'm trying to give a beginner
example um that is something that I do
think about as well like I try to think
about my opponent's pieces like that
that is basic logic I think a lot of
people these days at the upper levels of
Chess they look at the game as something
of pure calculation and you lose that
human element you're trying to just
calculate all these different sequences
of moves and you don't think about the
the basics
um and it's something it'll be
interesting to see what happens with the
next generation of kids who become very
strong because that is really how they
approach the game they learn with
computers whereas like I learned with
computers at a certain point but I did
not start off with computers from the
get-go so human element still exists in
my game actually Magnus I think has said
this too where he did not use the
computer I think until he was maybe like
11 years old something something around
there and so we have that human element
to our game that I think the newer
generation won't have now it doesn't
mean they aren't going to be better than
us but it's going to be a completely
different approach what do you mean by
human elements just basic logic versus
Raw calculation so it's like anybody now
will use the computer from the time they
start the game and and you use the
computer you look at the evaluations
after the game to see how you're doing
but you if you don't really ever have
those moments where you're just it's you
or it's just you and your opponent one
thing that was great in the old days
before computers simply became too
strong is that you would actually do
analysis with your opponent after the
game and that's very much this two
humans analyzing game it's you and your
opponent two peers and you come up with
these human ideas it's not automatically
run back to your room look with a
computer on oh I should have played this
move and it's just like winning the game
so that is kind of something that has
that no longer exists um in the game of
chess because as I said there's no
reason to analyze with your opponent
after the game other ideas that the
engine tells you that you can't reverse
engineer with logic why that makes sense
and you start to just memorize it that's
good
um yes so in the opening for sure there
are certain positions where moves are
playable and I can even give you an
example actually in this night or if we
can just set the position up a few moves
earlier yeah night over I'm ba Bushman
see it
and just move the king back to Center
Bishop back to f8
and pawn to E7
so the pawn in front of the king just
push back two squares so
like here's an example there's a move
here that nowadays humans will play
which is this move Pawn to H4
um and this this is a move that 20 years
ago if someone showed this move to
Kasparov he would just laugh at them no
matter who you were he would basically
say you're an idiot what is this move
like you're pushing a Pawn on the edge
of the board it does nothing and this is
something that's it's playable but even
if you were to ask me or any other top
Grand Master why it's playable or why
it's why it's a move that makes sense we
wouldn't be able to say why it makes
sense because it doesn't we just know
that it's fine because the computer says
it's fine it's fine or is it good it's
just fine it can it probably like
everything else is equal with perfect
play but it definitely if you're not
careful with black you can be worse for
sure but if you ask me I can't say why
it's a good move I can say okay maybe
I'm gonna expand on the king side I'll
push this Pawn here and push the pawn
forward uh maybe maybe I can put the
bishop on G5 and in some position the
pawn guards the bishop but I can't give
like an actual good explanation for why
it's a move that makes sense because it
doesn't make sense it's fascinating that
young people today kids these days would
probably do that move much more uh
nonchalantly you'll see that a lot more
because they know it's safe at least
right because I know the computer says
it's fine but I grew up without
computers and so to me as you're pushing
a Pawn on the edge it's the opening
phase you don't do things like this it's
just it looks ridiculous now of course I
have worked with computers long enough
that I know like I'm not I I know the
computers are um computers prove that
that everything is fine but still to me
it does feel wrong yeah well I think as
computers get better they'll also get
better at explaining which they
currently don't do at basically being
able to do
of so first of all simple language
generation so a set of chess moves to
language conversion explaining to us
dumb humans of why this is an
interesting tactical idea they currently
don't do that you're supposed to figure
that out yourself like why what's the
Deep wisdom in this particular Pawn
coming out in this kind of way let me
ask you uh a ridiculous question
do you think chess will ever get solved
from the opening position to where we'll
know the optimal optimal level of play I
highly doubt it
um without major advances in Quantum
Computing I don't think it's realistic
to expect chess to be hard solved I just
I don't think that will happen
um but I I don't know it could happen 20
30 years maybe but I think in the near
future it's not not realistic well then
let's go up with the pothead follow-up
question suppose it does get solved what
opening do you think will be the optimal
well everything will be a draw for sure
after for sure after move one yes for
sure absolutely you're absolutely sure
of that yes yeah that's what why are you
so sure I'm so sure because when you
look at the computer games you see these
decisive results it's because they
played the openings are set generally
they can't they can't for move one they
Place set opens like you might play the
Knight or you might play the Berlin
defense normally it's set openings as
opposed to
um as opposed to computers being able to
do whatever they want I