Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 22 May '09 04:13 / 2 edits
    I thought this was a pretty good post tournament interview. I like how Nakamura talks, very intelligent, easy going, and down to earth. However, he talks about how pro players really can't be in it "for the money" and there has to be a love for the game involved since it's very hard to make a good living playing chess. But then when asked if he plays for the love of the game he replies that he can't really say he's totally in love with chess. This principle is why I believe America has trouble producing another World Champion. When Fischer was interviewed during his run for the World title he always mentioned never taking his sight off the title and not resting until it's attained. He was relentless in study and preparation, and I think did truly love the game, but his drive for the title was, IMO, what made him great. Kasparov talks about his relentless study, preparation, and analysis of even won games and that is why he dominated for years. Karpov always said he wanted to be the best. I just don't see any Americans who really have this kind of drive, and therefore I just don't see any American world champions in the foreseeable future. Of course, this can be argued with Capablanca, and maybe even Anand (about chess not being their life).

    Oh yea, here''s the link to the interview :-)

    http://main.uschess.org/content/view/9400/529/
  2. 22 May '09 04:20 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by passedpawn22
    I thought this was a pretty good post tournament interview. I like how Nakamura talks, very intelligent, easy going, and down to earth. However, he talks about how pro players really can't be in it "for the money" and there has to be a love for the game involved since it's very hard to make a good living playing chess. But then when asked if he plays re''s the link to the interview :-)

    http://main.uschess.org/content/view/9400/529/
    You forget max euwe. He probably cared the least about chess (although still quite a bit) out of all the greats seeing as he never played professionally.

    Edit: based on history I believe a great American chess player will pop out of the woodwork. As they say, "history always repeats itself!"
  3. 22 May '09 04:50
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    You forget max euwe. He probably cared the least about chess (although still quite a bit) out of all the greats seeing as he never played professionally.

    Edit: based on history I believe a great American chess player will pop out of the woodwork. As they say, "history always repeats itself!"
    Yea, there are obvious objections to what I said, and I hope you are right about an American Chess Player. It's just that I don't see that "drive" in a lot of players today. Maybe that's why I like Tal so much, he had a great passion for the game. Even though he was only Champ for a year, he still played great high level chess until he died, but most of all he really loved the game, and judging by his books, he loved to analyze every detail.

    It seems that the top Americans right now just seem too "passive" when it comes to winning. Example: Gata Kamsky seems to indifferent about winning the title and he kind of showed that in a recent interview in Chess Life. I mean...I want to see somebody who is in it to win, perhaps a little cocky, but even not so cocky as confident. Actually, I haven't seen or heard any American say in any interviews that they "want" to be world champion (like Fischer did).

    Maybe I'm off on this, and that's ok, please correct me. I'm just in a writing mood right now.
  4. 22 May '09 05:10 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by passedpawn22
    Yea, there are obvious objections to what I said, and I hope you are right about an American Chess Player. It's just that I don't see that "drive" in a lot of players today. Maybe that's why I like Tal so much, he had a great passion for the game. Even though he was only Champ for a year, he still played great high level chess until he died, but most f on this, and that's ok, please correct me. I'm just in a writing mood right now.
    No you are not wrong on that but somebody with the talent and the will power is bound to pop up. Maybe in a few years... Maybe in a few decades but relatively soon. One country can only dominate and event like this for so long. I suspect that when said American player pops up that a Chinese player will take him down and then china will dominate.

    Perhaps it will be you or me?
  5. 22 May '09 10:48 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    No you are not wrong on that but somebody with the talent and the will power is bound to pop up. Maybe in a few years... Maybe in a few decades but relatively soon. One country can only dominate and event like this for so long. I suspect that when said American player pops up that a Chinese player will take him down and then china will dominate.

    Perhaps it will be you or me?
    its my destiny ! even though i am not American
  6. 22 May '09 10:56 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    its my destiny ! even though i am not American
    Well when you feel you are getting close then pop on over, nab yourself a nice woman and get hitched then you'll have an American citizenship.
  7. 22 May '09 14:13 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    You forget max euwe. He probably cared the least about chess (although still quite a bit) out of all the greats seeing as he never played professionally.

    Edit: based on history I believe a great American chess player will pop out of the woodwork. As they say, "history always repeats itself!"
    Actually,Euwe did play professional for 2 or 3 years.He booked the worst results of his career and decided a return to the classroom was best (source: one of my 2 Euwe biographies,don't remember which one).

    He was also president of FIDE for several years.As such he had to deal with Fischer yet didn't quit the job.
    That alone clearly shows a love for the game!