The Open File - Interviews
Submitted by
Zug on Sun, 08/03/2008 at 11:10am.
We've had such a great response to "The Open File" that we've decided to make it a weekly column instead of monthly. So, enjoy the now-weekly "The Open File" by Life Master Mike Petersen.
The Open File
by Life Master Mike Petersen (Zug)
Interviews
Since there was such a nice response to my first column on Simuls last week, I thought I'd follow it up with what often happens after it has ended. In my time I have given more than my fair share of simultaneous exhibitions. Although I’ve enjoyed each and every one of them, there is something that invariably happens after each one that always gives me pause. It's because of the possibility of being interviewed by the local media! Why do I not look forward to that? It's because of the questions I get asked by the reporter doing the interview. The problem is they always send out someone who knows absolutely ZERO about chess. Based upon my memories of all these interviews, I’ve decided to give you a typical example of all the dumb questions I've been asked over the years. Trust me, I’ve been asked each question below more than once. I have added my comments in parentheses.
Reporter: Hello, Mr. Petersen. How did you manage to win all these games so fast?
Me: Well, I’ve been playing chess for so long that many types of positions have become second nature to me, so I generally know what to do after just a glance at the game.
Reporter: But how do you remember all the moves? (Sigh.)
Me: I don’t remember the moves of all the games as I go. Based on my experience, I just do a quick evaluation of the position and make a reasonable move. I do this quickly because I want to make sure the participants don’t get bored waiting for me.
Reporter: How long have you been playing chess?
Me: A long time, almost 40 years.
Reporter: And how many games do you play a day? (Uh, oh - here we go.)
Me: It isn't a matter of how many games a day I play, but how much I study.
Reporter: Then how many games do you study a day? (Expected that, didn't you?)
Me: Well, it isn't a matter of how many games I study, but the types of positions I go over and analyze. This makes me familiar with what to do in most situations.
Reporter: Oh, I see. (Sure, you do.) Well, you are a chess master. How did you get to be a chess master?
Me: By scoring well in tournaments against strong opposition. One can lose the master title by having bad results. It's kind of like a batting average. Over a certain amount, you're a master. Go under it, you're not.
Reporter: So have you ever lost your title? (Always going for the dirt.)
Me: Right at the beginning I did, but after a while, no. I’ve been a master since about 1980.
Reporter: Mr. Petersen, how many moves do you look ahead in a game? (Ugh...I knew this one would come.)
Me: (Smiling) Only one, but it's always the BEST one. Seriously, most of the time, only three or four moves. What separates a master from the average player isn't how far he looks ahead, but how he judges the positions reached after looking ahead in several different ideas. The master knows which positions are more favorable, the club player sometimes doesn't.
Reporter: You mean you can't see ahead 20 moves like they do in the movies? (Are you beginning to get the idea, here?)
Me: No, chess masters don't look ahead 20 moves. We look ahead 3 or 4 moves, but in each of 5 or 6 different variations. We keep all of them straight in our heads, and can judge the quality of the position at the end of each different variation much better than the average player. So, if you want to multiply the 6 variations by the 4 moves in each, then I guess you could say chess masters look 20 moves ahead, but not consecutively.
Reporter: How do you prepare for tournaments? Is it like a boxing match? (Egad!)
Me: Well, usually, I don't. I just go and play and enjoy myself.
Reporter: You mean you don't prepare at all? (This question is usually asked with an unbelieving attitude.)
Me: That's right. If I don't know enough about the game by the time the tournament comes up, then all the last minute studying isn't going to help. You can't cram for a tournament, since you never know who your opponents will be.
Reporter: It’s long been held that you really have to be smart to be a chess master. Is that true? (Now, for the clincher, and the small measure of satisfaction I allow myself after being subject to stupid questions.)
Me: Oh, yes. It takes a lot of intelligence. One has to be quite intelligent to be a chess master, if not a genius.
And the myth lives on...
==========================
Click here for links to Mike's other work on Chess.com
|
1004 reads | 23 comments |
2 votes: