Larsen's interview 1974

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Vlad sent me PDF files, I converted to txt. The article has several picture. Later I'll include them too.
There will be two posts as too many characters for one post.
If anybody wants original PDF scans let me know.

CHESS CANADA INTERVIEWS...
BENT LARSEN



Bent Larsen has long been one of the world's top grandmasters. In fact, when the USSR played the rest of the world in a team match, Larsen was the world team's first board - ahead of Fischer!
Larsen was born in Copenhagen on March 4, 1935. He won the Danish Championship in 1955 at the age of nineteen and repeated as Champion in 1956, 1959, 1963 and 1964. He is one of the world's most successful tournament players winning such notable events as Palma de Majorca, Lugano 1970, Sousse Interzonal 1967 and equal first at the Amsterdam Interzonal in 1964.
Larsen's tournament victories can be attributed to his fighting style - he plays to win and disdains grandmaster draws.
In match play he was the first foreigner to defeat a Soviet grandmaster when he bested Geller 5-4 in 1966. His other match results have been good (beating Ivkov, Portisch and Tal while losing one earlier to Tal and one to Spassky) except for one notable exception - his loss in 1971 to Fischer when the American grandmaster was masquerading as a steamroller.
Larsen is also a fine author and his Selected Games is a very popular collection. Besides writing books, he also writes newspaper columns and contributes feature articles to Chess Canada magazine.
Larsen was in North America for a simultaneous exhibition tour but besides graciously consenting to give this interview he also took time out to win the World Open in New York and finish 3rd in the Canadian Open in Montreal.


Chess Canada: Was there a reason that you did not play in the recent Olympiad in Nice?

Larsen: Yes, of course. I am against the rating of individual results of a team tournament.

CC: Why is that?

Larsen: Well, it destroys the team element. The Olympiad is a team tournament, so you must play for the team. The rating of your individual result is ridiculous. Many others agree with me, they say "You are right, but you should play anyway".
But the Olympiads will continue to rate the play individually as this is the only way small countries can get international ratings for their players.

CC: Did the Danish team do as well as you expected, considering your absence?

Larsen: Actually they did much better than I thought they would. [They finished 10th in the B Finals-Ed.] You must realize that this was not our strongest possible team as many of our top players did not have time to participate. If you go you must want to play — look at Mecking; he did not play a game because he wanted to watch a soccer match — his own federation had to call him home.

CC: What do you think about the decision to bar South Africa and Rhodesia until apartheid is lifted?

Larsen: People don't realize that this decision was actually made a few years ago when FIDE passed its new statutes. Then they could not help but bar these countries. Norway had held this up with their threat to try to bar the Soviet Union because of the Czechoslovakia invasion.

CC: Won't FIDE now have to start barring many countries including the USSR since they restrict free immigration?

Larsen: No, the statutes stipulate countries that discriminate — the Soviet Union does not discriminate; they apply their rules to everyone. Euwe had visited South Africa where he has many friends and so he tried to defend them by saying "They do not discriminate, they even had a black team in a tournament." Of course that was the last straw - 'What no mixed teams, then out'.
Twenty years ago discrimination meant nothing, but now.... I think I'm for the FIDE decision.

CC: What prompted FIDE to get into politics?

Larsen: FIDE has always been a political instrument. In many countries chess is important enough that governments want a say in chess politics.

CC: Is it true that FIDE will accept any group with a flag and a chess organization?

Larsen: Yes, but you must have a flag, that's important to them.

CC: There has been talk in Quebec about joining FIDE separately. Would they be accepted?

Larsen: Yes, the Canadian Federation would protest but still FIDE would make Canada a zone. Any of the provinces could join, just as Wales is a separate FIDE member.

CC: You mean for instance Manitoba could join FIDE?

Larsen: Why not? When I was in Winnipeg in 1967 I could not call Denmark because Manitoba had not signed a treaty with them. If they are independent in national telephone then why not chess? Of course, it would be ridiculous, but it would be good.

CC: Any predictions on the Karpov — Korchnoi match?

Larsen: Karpov should win. Korchnoi will lose a game 3r two in time pressure. He gave up smoking but not time pressure.

CC: Has Korchnoi given up drinking?

Larsen: Why should he give up drinking? There are some dangers, it is true, like the time Tal got beat up in a bar. The USSR was upset with him, but actually Korchnoi was there and should have protected him. CC: Will Fischer play? Larsen: I never believed as far back as 1972 that Fischer would play.

CC: Why?

Larsen: Well you see, before Reykjavik Bobby almost had a nervous breakdown. I'm sure he doesn't want to go through that again.

CC: Why did Fischer play Spassky?

Larsen: Because Nixon and Kissinger asked him to. Bobby likes chess to be on that level. Now, it would take the Shah of Iran or President Marcos of the Phillipines to get Fischer to play. And only if they organized the match personally.

CC: Are Fischer's demands for rule changes just a ploy to avoid playing, then?

Larsen: Most likely, or else why did he not speak up in 1972 about these rule changes. It is amazing that FIDE even bothered about his demands. Bobby has done this before when he asked Hilton Hotels for $10 million to play — just his way of saying no. This demand for a two game advantage [Fischer wants to play for 10 wins in the World Championship with the incumbent champion winning if the score is 9-9 thus the challenger must win by two eg. 10-8 - Ed.] is very out of character for Fischer and the first unethical thing he has done. It is his way of saying no to playing.

CC: Were you surprised when Fischer accepted second board under you in the USSR versus the rest of the world match?

Larsen: No, not really, because I knew he was very afraid of playing. He had not played in a long time. He gets more nervous by not playing.
As a chess player he knows himself, but away from the board he is very indecisive.

CC: What is Fischer's approach to chess?

Larsen: To Fischer, chess is a sport — a place where you can beat the other guy.

CC: How about Karpov; what is his attitude''

Larsen: Karpov is like no other chess master — he collects stamps and weak pawns.

CC: And Korchnoi?

Larsen: I cannot imagine Korchno' - collecting stamps; really I just don't understand Karpov.

CC: Could Karpov beat Fischer?

Larsen: I cannot imagine Karpov beating Fischer. Hort thinks he can. In a match to ten wins Fischer should win 10 lose 2 and draw 30.

CC: How does Karpov's style compare to Capablanca's?

Larsen: Capablanca had several styles but like Botvinnik grew into a simple style when he got old. Botvinnik was very complex when he was young. Capablanca was also complex but not to the same extent as Botvinnik. When Capablanca got over forty his style simplified. I would compare Karpov with the older Capablanca. People compare Petrosian and Karpov but Petrosian is much deeper.

CC: It has been said that Karpov wins many games that other grandmasters give up as drawn. Why is that?

Larsen: Karpov, like others who try to win, does so just because he tries.

CC: Who has had the greatest influence on your style?

Larsen: Nimzovitch, if anyone. I was 12 days old when he died in 1935.,Petrosian and I are the most direct followers of Nimzovitch but we are very different. As it should be because Nimzovitch's style was a great paradox.

CC: How did you learn to play well?

Larsen: I read a great deal early; I worked through My System when I was sixteen.

CC: Any suggestions on how to improve?

Larsen: Well, you must study but don't study the Najdorf or Closed Sicilian — study rather good games with good notes and learn strange openings. Study something you don't have in your own style.

CC: How much time should one spend studying?

Larsen: About 2 hours per game or half an hour if it is familiar material. You should always look up anything you don't know. Most people don't study endings but they should. When I was young I studied Fine's Basic Chess Endings

CC: Most players seem to get to a point in their games where they don't know what to do. Is there any way this can be overcome?

Larsen: Every master also reaches a point in his games where he doesn't know what to do. Chess is very difficult — you cannot expect to play the whole game like memorizing eight o- pening moves.

CC: Why then do we have so many opening books?

Larsen: Because people want them. They are not aware enough. Opening books are not good for you.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

(Part 2)

CC: Does chess require innate talent?

Larsen: Yes, some, but much of chess is learned.
It is very important to be open- minded. Dogmatic teachers like Tarrasch and Euwe can make C players into B players but then these players have trouble going any further because of their dogmatic rules. They have difficulty finding the exceptioa That is why Nimzovitsch is better, because he is paradoxical.

CC: How do you feel about chess in schools? Should it be taught there?

Larsen: Chess clubs are natural at schools but chess must come after ordinary lessons as an extra-curricular activity.

CC: What is the best method for teaching a child to play chess?

Larsen: Teach them how to use one piece at a time. But, children five or six years old would not learn much — they are not yet capable enough. I know this from my own teaching experiences.

CC: Is being a chess professional now feasible?

Larsen: Yes it is — for people who can expect to be an International Master by 24 years of age. But to support himself, the person would also have to write.

CC: Are you yourself writing a book at this time?

Larsen: As a matter of fact, I am. I'm writing about rook pawns. I was asked to do so because people feel I often use the rook pawns in my games.

CC: Why is the USSR so dominant in chess?

Larsen: Well, the amazing thing to me is that they don't have more grandmasters. Twenty or thirty years ago chess was very, very attractive there because of all the special priviledges. Botvinnik had many priviledges as he brought the USSR much prestige. Now there is new emphasis on scientific careers but chess still offers advantages.
Also, the USSR is very good at rehabilitating their grandmasters. They whip them into line. For example, Kotov [a party member and overseer of the Soviet gm's. Ed.J claimed Spassky did not do his duty in Reykjavik so Spassky had to work harder. But after Spassky won the Soviet Championship, Kotov had no qualms about changing his mind and accepting Spassky again. That Spassky could redeem himself was psychologically beneficial for him.

CC: A few years ago Fischer claimed the Russians were cheaters — has this appraisal any accuracy?

Larsen: Well, I don't think there is a "Russian conspiracy", but I will say that Kotov himself admitted the Russians cheat. They discuss their games while they are in progress. In Think Like A Grandmaster Kotov's book, he relates that he was told during a game that he had a difficult position. No discussion at all about the game is allowed.

CC: What do you think about the Swiss system?

Larsen: One should stay away from too many weekend Swisses, but then what else is there, here?
You don't learn a thing from beating patzers — except beating patzers. In effect, the Swiss prizes are to pay the better players for giving lessons to the weaker ones. There is an expert in New Orleans who won't play anyone rated below expert. This is much better for improving but he can't play very often. Swiss tournaments are just a less serious form of chess as opposed to an international tournament in Europe. The time control in a Swiss is much too fast — I think forty in two and a half would be the optimum time. Of course, this would be too slow for spectators so tournament organizers speed up the time control.

CC: Can chess then be a spectator sport?

Larsen: Why not? I have played fifteen minute chess on T.V. in Iceland. I think chess needs special rules for television, though. Perhaps a twenty minute time control. Or else, the games could be played beforehand, and edited.

CC: Where was the best organized tournament that you have played in?

Larsen: I have never seen a well organized tournament. The playing halls are often bad and many tournaments are organized by rich people who are Avery Brundage types — they want chess players to be amateurs, so there is no money in these tournaments.

CC: Who are the best tournament directors?

Larsen: There aren't any. Many directors do nothing until they have a bad problem. They do nothing to prevent problems.

CC: It is pretty hard to believe that there aren't any good tournament directors.

Larsen: Well, there are several competent tournament directors in Yugoslavia with unknown names.

CC: Do you think chess in Canada has improved?

Larsen: You cannot tell; it seems though that chess players everywhere have improved.

CC: How can a chess player cope with pressure?

Larsen: Some people jump up and down and make faces to relieve their pressure. That's not necessary. I feel less pressure than many C players.

CC: Why is that?

Larsen: It is because their egos are too much on the line.

CC: What is your chess philosophy?

Larsen: I like to win.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

2 pictures


The magazine had more pictures - the cover, a thumb of the cover, one more in the article (low quality, barely can recognize B.L).

[Vlad Dobrich]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Thank you, Egis, for transcribing the copy of the interview.
I will add here my original posting on ChessTalk titled >>>>

'Another Bent Larsen Book'

Someone mentioned recently that it might be of interest to chess players to have, in book form, the complete array of chess columns written by Bent Larsen. To follow up on this idea, I went back to an interview with GM Larsen as it appeared in the original Chess Canada in 1974. Reading through the interview I was reminded what an easy man Larsen was to talk to. In fact, the entire interview took the form of a casual conversation – there were no previously prepared questions which would have made the interview stiff and artificial. What we ended up with was a friendly living-room chat – and in fact it took place in my living-room at Chess Canada, 170 Wychwood Avenue.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Thank you both for that interesting article.

[Larry Bevand]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Most chessplayers in Canada today do not realize all you did for chess in the 60's and 70's. I would eagerly await my copy of Chess Canada in those days.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Most chessplayers in Canada today do not realize all you did for chess in the 60's and 70's. I would eagerly await my copy of Chess Canada in those days.

A highlight on the local chess calendar would be Walter's simul at the Devonshire mall every year.

[Vlad Dobrich]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Interesting that Larsen didn't mention simuls as a revenue source for a chess professional. For several years simul revenue kept the magazine going - all the money went to pay for the printing. This is probably an overlooked source of cash for today's chess pro - i would assume that shopping centers would still pay well for a three day promotion. In the 70's they would pay $150 to $200 a day for the simul while the players would pay a token $1 - the $1 going to a charity.
I remember one simul in London where I arrived for the Saturday morning session and the mall was crammed with people. There must have been well over a thousand in the space where the simul was to take place. I guessed that the simul would be cancelled as they would not want to displace the shoppers. Still, I proceeded to the appropriate area only to find that at least a thousand spectators were there to watch me play chess! At that point the mall management could easily have been sold on simuls for at least once a month!
So all you budding chess masters, all you need is a good manager/agent to sell your show to various malls and you'll both make some money (but don't spend it all on printing a chess magazine :) )

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Larsen stated:

When I was in Winnipeg in 1967 I could not call Denmark because Manitoba had not signed a treaty with them.

I don't understand this. Long distance communication has always been a federal matter ("Trans-Canada Telephone System").

[Laurentiu Grigorescu]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Great interview, thanks for posting! I liked the political discussion during the interview and Larsen's strong views. Today players are asked if they have a girlfriend, or something of this sort.

[Wayne Komer]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

A new low in interview questions today when Carlsen was asked at the press conference in Shamkir what position he was most comfortable sitting in on his chair!

[Hans Jung]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Interesting that Larsen didn't mention simuls as a revenue source for a chess professional. For several years simul revenue kept the magazine going - all the money went to pay for the printing. This is probably an overlooked source of cash for today's chess pro - i would assume that shopping centers would still pay well for a three day promotion. In the 70's they would pay $150 to $200 a day for the simul while the players would pay a token $1 - the $1 going to a charity.
I remember one simul in London where I arrived for the Saturday morning session and the mall was crammed with people. There must have been well over a thousand in the space where the simul was to take place. I guessed that the simul would be cancelled as they would not want to displace the shoppers. Still, I proceeded to the appropriate area only to find that at least a thousand spectators were there to watch me play chess! At that point the mall management could easily have been sold on simuls for at least once a month!
So all you budding chess masters, all you need is a good manager/agent to sell your show to various malls and you'll both make some money (but don't spend it all on printing a chess magazine :) )

Revenue from the malls dried up in the late 1990's. I did several blindfold simuls in malls in the years 1992 - 1996 and was well paid. Robert Hamilton was on the scene with his company and in the highlight years brought in Boris Spassky and other celebrities and continue into the late 90's but the malls stopped paying and decided to go in another advertising direction.

[Vlad Dobrich]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

Thanks, Hans,
I have noticed that simuls at clubs are not as popular as they used to be.
And of course Boris Spassky would be a hard act to follow!

[Roger Patterson]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

yes, simuls do not seem to be much of a draw at all anymore. They used to be a big deal. Even expert level players could expect to get a full house for a simul and now they are a hard sell for GMs. We didn't even sell out the Nakamura simul at the Canadian Open in Victoria.

I remember reading the article when it came out. Probably still have a copy of the magazine issue.

[Vlad Dobrich]

Re: Larsen's interview 1974

FRESH OFF THE PRESS!

I have just reproduced 10 copies of the Larsen issue with full-colour cover, just like the original. One was presold, so there are nine left @$20 each. This issue includes the Lublin 1974 tournament won by Tal with 12 1/2 - 2 1/2 (undefeated with 5 draws) as well as a piece by Bent Larsen : 'Blame it on the Computers'.
Also in this issue, the 1974 Canadian Open in Montreal with 634 entries - X-table The event was won by Lubojevic
with 10 - 1, ahead of Suttles 9 1/2 then Larsen, Amos 9 followed by a slew of top Canadians - some dozen annotated games.
To obtain a copy, email me at vladdobrich(at)gmail(dot)com
The reprints will be numbered 1 thru 10 and signed (if you wish).