On Karpov-Kasparov and Carlsen’s missing rival

Russian Grandmaster Sergei Makarichev has a unique perspective on the chess world, having seconded both Anatoly Karpov (1984-6) and Garry Kasparov (1991-4) during World Championship matches. In a recent interview he talked about the clash between Karpov and Kasparov, noting that some of the antagonism may just have been for show. He also talked about what makes World Champion Magnus Carlsen special, and why we need a great rival for him to restore interest in chess.

61-year-old Makarichev was a strong grandmaster in his own right, but switched his focus to coaching at a young age. As well as training two of the all-time greats he also led the Soviet and Russian teams to five Olympiad gold medals. Since 1996 he’s been producing a popular weekly TV chess show on Russian television alongside his wife Marina.

Here are some of the highlights of Sergei Makarichev's interview with Kirill Blagov for sports.ru:

On the dangers of working for top players

Working with great players you essentially turn into a “creative appendage”. If you treat the activity seriously, putting everything you’ve got into it, you’re forced to abandon your own play and sporting ambitions entirely. Working with a great player you realise that sitting next to you is not simply a person but a unique phenomenon and you feel an inner need to help him realise his full potential, while your personal ambitions very much have to take a back seat. That’s very tough mentally, and even self-destructive, because you have to suppress or get rid of a lot of yourself. And that’s why it can’t go on too long.

On what most surprised him about the Karpov-Kasparov matches

The most remarkable moment of that confrontation occurred in the London to Leningrad plane in which the great champions flew together. The first half of the 1986 match took place in London and the second in Leningrad. So then, Karpov and Kasparov - who by all accounts were engaged in a fierce conflict, not only at the chessboard but also trading regular insults in the press - calmly sat next to each other in the plane… and played cards. Not only that, but since it was two against two and the teams would switch they often found themselves in the same pair, and you could sense they made a well-oiled team.

Of course there’s a view that at some point they agreed not to take offence if they criticised each other, since mutual criticism was essential to maintain additional interest in the clash. Perhaps that was the case. After all, there was a strong political element to their matches: Karpov was considered the favourite of the party leadership, while Kasparov was supposed to hold entirely different views. As a result their matches gained attention even from those who were previously indifferent to chess.

On facing Kasparov

Kasparov immediately made it clear to his opponent: on the chessboard I’m the boss, and you’re only sitting opposite me so I can beat you. As a result, the majority of his opponents immediately found themselves not only under tremendous chess but also mental pressure.  There were very few who were immune to that aura, and all things considered only one, Vladimir Kramnik. Vishy Anand, for example, simply couldn’t play against Kasparov after some point. He just kept on losing to Kasparov, although he wasn’t so much weaker – psychology had its say.

On Kasparov and Topalov “bluffing”

In both purely chess and sporting strategy Kasparov quite often bluffed – within reason, of course. Veselin Topalov also strove to play in a similar manner. He often went for positions which his opponent couldn’t properly understand, though at the same time Veselin himself almost totally lost control over the course of events, relying only on his composure and sporting qualities. Kasparov, meanwhile, almost never lost control. Reckless risk is absolutely against his creative credo, with the wise scholar almost always reining in the daring gambler.

On what makes Carlsen stand out

Why does Magnus Carlsen play chess better than the rest? Players who face him in major tournaments are often asked what makes him unique. The answer is frequently something like the following: sit down opposite him yourself and move the pieces. You can understand that reaction. After all, sitting opposite Carlsen in tournaments and matches his opponents really do very often blunder. The Norwegian’s style is to play not against the pieces but against his opponent’s personality – against whatever human weaknesses he has. He’s brilliant at maintaining the tension in positions and creating conditions in which stereotypical chess behaviour by his opponent will lead to blunders. It sometimes happens that Magnus seems to have a magical gift for provoking those mistakes. Meanwhile it’s extremely rare for him to make stupid blunders himself, although at times he does go too far in trying to create a position that’s as unclear as possible. Such a style doesn’t particularly appeal to me personally, but of course that’s a matter of taste. It can’t be coached – you can only develop and improve it. Karpov acted in a similar style, though many say Carlsen has surpassed even him.

On the need for a rival for Carlsen

At some point it seemed as though Fabiano Caruana could compete with Magnus. Last year in St. Louis he won seven games out of ten, beating Carlsen in the first half and coming close to him on the live rating list. However, the gap has once again grown very large, and Fabiano’s play has become a little disjointed.

There’s no longer such interest in chess, of course. In order for that situation to change for the better a truly dangerous opponent for Carlsen needs to emerge. Chess needs a trademark confrontation of the kind Karpov-Kasparov was in its day. So far that doesn’t exist, but we can remain optimistic.

---

See also: 

• Full interview at sports.ru (in Russian)
  
• Aronian: “Magnus’ main secret is his composure”
• Carlsen rampage ends… with a brilliant interview
• Spassky: “I still look at chess with the eyes of a child”