The Tukmakov Interview

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Tukmakov Interview

    The Tukmakov Interview

    May 22, 2018

    On March 4, 2018 Vladimir Tukmakov had a live broadcast interview with Evgeny Surov of chess-news.ru. Subsequently, part of the interview was published by Colin McGourty on chess24, March 9th:

    https://chess24.com/en/read/news/tuk...ce-coaching-so

    Because it touches every aspect of modern chess, I give long passages below:

    Surov – As I promised, I have with me for this live broadcast Vladimir Borisovich Tukmakov. It is just a few hours before his birthday (March 5, 1946). You were born in Odessa?

    Tukmakov – Yes, born and continue to live in Odessa.

    Surov – This day was also known as “the day of Stalin’s Death”.

    Tukmakov – Maybe we can move on from this controversial date to chess?

    Surov – I have heard that you have a new book coming out – tell us about that, please.

    Tukmakov – It is almost ready for publication. I don’t know how long the printing process will take, but I think somewhere around the end of March, perhaps a little later. But, in principle, the book is ready, and we can talk about it as an already accomplished fact. It is in the Library of the RCF and is a continuation of my first autobiographical book called “Profession: Chessplayer: Grandmaster at Work”. This book too, could be called “Job – Chess”, because it is the other side of a chess career. In the first book, I talked mainly about the life of the current chess professional. That book was published in late 2009 and the events described in it, ended in 2004, when the national team of Ukraine, in which I was a captain and head coach, for the first time won the title of Olympic champions in Calvia. By then I had already finished my playing career and became a career coach. In that book I described the times when I was in the role of a second, working with Karpov, Korchnoi and Tseshkovsky (Vitaly). Still, they were episodes in my previous chess life. But, this new book is entirely devoted to my captaincy and coaching.

    Naturally, the emphasis shifted. If the first book tells of the difficulties and challenges I faced in my playing career, here the emphasis is on other people, with whom I worked, and most of them are more talented at chess than I am. I have worked with many wonderful and talented chess players, members of the world elite. I am not observing from the outside, nor involved in the action. Actually, the book is called “Chess Stars and Constellations: Notes of a coach and captain”. The events described in it in fact cover the period up to the end of 2017.

    As I gradually left the practice of chess, suddenly I began to have the idea that my chess pathway might serve as a lesson for young or not so young players. So I packed up and wrote a book. After that I suddenly got the idea for another book, then another. In short, the book we are talking about now is the fourth in a row.
    ________

    1. Profession: chessplayer: grandmaster at work (2012) Russell

    2. Modern chess preparation: getting reading for your opponent in the information age (2012) New in Chess

    3. Risk & bluff in chess: the art of taking calculated risks (2015) New in Chess
    _______

    Surov – But their content and format?

    Tukmakov – The second book, I devoted to the preparation of modern chess, which includes all aspects. The content of the third is told by its title “Risk and bluff in chess”. But the fourth, as it were, is a second series of the first book.

    Surov – Did you write it yourself or have a collaborator?

    Tukmakov – I wrote it all by myself, from the first to the last word, ever letter and every chess symbol!

    Surov – Why don’t you like this format when it is produced by a journalist?

    Tukmakov – Because the journalist inevitably intrudes himself as an intermediary. I wrote mine in the first person, without any intermediaries.

    Surov – Then how do you feel about Garry Kasparov’s books written with his co-author Dmitry Plisetsky?

    Tukmakov – I find it hard to say to what extent they reflect the author’s thought, that is, the outstanding chess player, Garry Kasparov and to what extent Dmitry Plisetsky is there. I do not know and find it hard to judge. But they have continued their cooperation over the years and the main author, Garry Kasparov, is quite satisfied with the cooperation, therefore, who am I to judge?

    The many volumes of his work “My Great Predecessors” is so big, so incredible a work that it was simply impossible to do alone. It’s one thing when you write about your life - what is significant in your eyes may be insignificant in the eyes of others. It is quite another thing when you write about the formation of all chess history. This colossal work was physically impossible to do alone. Moreover, I believe that this work could have only be written with the advent of computer chess. That is because there is in fact a lot of pure chess material and to plow through it at the chessboard, as in the good old days, was simply impossible. Therefore, I am not in any way comparing our books.

    Surov – As far as I know, modern engines “laugh” even over the plowed field that was done, say ten years ago, using the same computer.

    Tukmakov – Yes, of course, I first encountered this when I wrote my first book. It included a description of my life, tournaments and so on. In the second part were my favorite games. These games passed a meticulous inspection. That was in 2008-2009, when the engines were not as sophisticated as they are now. Those games that I chose for the book I had analyzed for publications both Soviet and foreign.

    Later, when I checked with the engine, I got a merciless audit. The games which I thought were the best were imperfect. That was the first time but now I think all professional players take it for granted and live with it.

    Surov – In those four books, have you expressed everything you wanted to say?

    Tukmakov – Four books in nine years is a lot. After I wrote the first book, I was sure that it was the last. Then suddenly I was struck by some idea and began to collect material – and as a result, there was a second book. I was then visited by another idea and the third was born – risk and bluff in chess. Then, I thought that not many coaches had so many outstanding players as I had and it might be interesting to write about them. For example, in the next few days, in the Candidates Tournament of eight players, five were my wards.

    Surov – Then let’s list them!

    Tukmakov – Karjakin, Mamedyarov, So, Caruana and Grischuk. I have also spent no small amount of time with Aronian and Kramnik. I have not been their personal trainer but I have often crossed paths with them at tournaments – talking and discussing. The only person that I have had a limited experience with is the Chinese Ding Liren.

    Surov – Perhaps we can focus on one of the participants in the Candidates – Wesley So? Maybe not everyone knows that you worked with him. Was it a short cooperation?

    Tukmakov – No, it was not short. Formally, it lasted slightly less than one and a half years. But officially it stopped on December 31 of last year.

    Surov – But it should be said that during that year and a half, Wesley So rose almost to the peak of this career.

    Tukmakov – Yes, it worked out that way. When we started working together he was 10th, and at his peak rating he was second on the raking list. If you take his starting rating and his peak rating, then I think he added about 60 points.

    Surov – But still, he decided to end things. Or which of you was it who took the decision?

    Tukmakov – Yes, it was more his decision.

    If we are going to talk about my cooperation with Wesley – then from the very start it was somewhat surprising for me. And from the very start I was quite sceptical about the way of cooperating, since from the very beginning, the moment they got in touch, they talked about working by Skype. That’s quite a popular and widespread form of cooperation between a coach and a student nowadays. Firstly, it’s easier to implement, since such a way of working is easier to organize. Then, of course, it’s significantly cheaper for the person who has to pay for it. And, in many cases, from my point of view, it’s no less effective than working in person.

    But in the given case, when after all we’re talking about a top-class chess player…it’s funny to call him my pupil, or me, his mentor, never mind teacher. What can I teach a chess player who at that moment was tenth in the world? That meant you could only talk about some kind of nuances, but nuances, as a rule, are conveyed verbally, subtly, to extract some kind of resources from a person’s potential. For that, though, you need to spend time together. Moreover, Wesley So of course speaks English, I also speak English, but my English can in no way be described as fluent. Of course I can communicate, but my language isn’t good enough for subtleties.

    And therefore I was quite sceptical about that way of cooperating. Moreover, I learned that Wesley So had actually never had a coach! Or that’s what I was told, in any case. So that meant that essentially I was going to be his first coach.

    Never mind that Wesley is not in the habit of communicating with anyone. He’s used to spending all his time on this own, alone at the chessboard. That was also quite a serious challenge, both for him and for me. Therefore, it was absolutely unclear what to expect from such a cooperation, with which we didn’t have any kind of experience.

  • #2
    Re: The Tukmakov Interview

    The Tukmakov Interview (continued)

    May 22, 2018

    Tukmakov - In general, I was unsettled by many of the circumstances. They were probably unsettled as well, so at first we agreed on ten 3-hour trial sessions. And it turned out, that.. first of all, it all went very well. We both immediately felt pretty comfortable. He liked the sessions. Moreover, somehow, unexpectedly, they immediately converted into results, which is very important.

    Therefore, you might say that lobbied for our continued collaboration, and we simply concluded a fully-fledged contract for the whole of 2017.

    Surov – What went wrong?

    Tukmakov – I describe that in detail in my book, but to sum up, I think it was like this: In modern life there exists the concept of “an internet romance” -when people get to know each other on the internet, start to chat and feel themselves to be almost kindred spirts. And there comes a moment when you’ve acquired almost your closest friend, and things are easy and simple between you. I think that’s quite a widespread story. But, inevitably, sooner or later, the next stage has to come – a face-to-face meeting. And I think the majority of such romances end at that stage, because some kind of relationship chemistry, which existed without direct contact, was destroyed as a result of the face-to face. That’s how it was for Wesley and me as well, it seems to me. I felt that communicating on the internet was nevertheless insufficient and that we should take the next step. And we took that step.

    I took on the role of second – no longer in absentia, but in person – in the Kasparov series of rapid and blitz tournaments in Paris and Leuven last year. In Paris, he played poorly in the rapid, and it somehow turned out that our usual system of preparing for games didn’t bring good results. And at some point he returned to his old, tried and tested system of preparation, where he prepared himself, took decisions himself and implemented his own decisions. And then, when we travelled together to Leuven, things went better for him. Naturally, if things went better, that’s how it stayed. So I was there, we talked, everything was as great and rosy as before, but we didn’t talk about chess. Then we continued to work, going back to the tried and tested system of training sessions, of communication – call it what you will.

    And then he collapsed in the tournament in St. Louis. It was a serious collapse. The history of his appearances in the Sinquefield Cup is very interesting. In 2015 he took last place; in 2016, when we were already working together, he took first place. And in 2017, he again shared last place. And I think that was the sign for him that something had gone wrong, to repeat your question about “what went wrong?”

    Surov - Well, overall it’s very tough (for you as well, I think), to formulate what went wrong.

    Tukmakov - Of course, that’s just my guess. We didn’t have a special meeting devoted to clarifying matters and deciding what we should now do in the future. Our contract came to an end, and that brought an end to our cooperation as well. I hope that our relationship remains as good as before. In any case, we didn’t have any purely human conflicts. It was very interesting to work with him, because as a chess player and as a person he’s very unusual. But everything has a beginning and everything has an end.

    Surov - Do you consider So a real contender for the World Championship title? I’m now asking you not as his coach, but as a coach in general and as a chess specialist.

    Tukmakov - At the current moment?

    Surov - Yes.

    Tukmakov - I considered him one when we were working together, and it seemed to me that we were moving towards that. To be honest, I don’t know if I have a replacement, whether he’s now working with someone else or he’s purely returned to his usual way of working on chess. If he’s working alone as before then I don’t think he has any chance. If he has a serious helper, who he trusts and who can give him something, then it’s a different matter. (…)

    Surov - In general what you’ve said is amazing for me. Someone reaching the level of the world Top 5…

    Tukmakov - No, on his own he got to the level of the Top 10.

    Surov - But nevertheless!

    Tukmakov - I don’t know to what extent it’s true, since it’s impossible for me… I was brought up in the Soviet Union, after all. And although I grew up relatively independently as a chess player, I nevertheless had a first coach, I had some helpers, I had some kind of chess company and I “stewed in that chess pot”. And that Soviet chess “broth” was the main source of nutrition, but he grew up in the Philippines, where there not only wasn’t any broth but there was no hot water either – I mean, of course, in the chess sense. The only case that I can put alongside that, of course an exceptional case, is that of Bobby Fischer.

    Surov – The other big name you mentored was Anish Giri but he did not play in the Candidates. What is your opinion of him now?

    Tukmakov - Once again, returning to Wesley and his similarities and differences with Anish, despite the striking similarity of their chess philosophies they have an absolutely different chess background. Anish is a wonderfully educated chess player. I’m talking now about the pure chess element, not touching on the rest. He’s a very well-educated chess player. He had coaches. He received, you could say, a higher chess education. In that regard Wesley is absolutely self-taught. And therefore, in contrast to Anish, he had gaps in his chess education. He worked on his own and, of course, it was chaotic. Perhaps that’s one of the reasons for our successful cooperation up to a point – it was interesting to him in a chess sense and he learned something new. But since he’s an incredibly gifted chess player and talented by nature, he nevertheless lapped it all up like a sponge. And naturally all of that was reflected in his results at some point, because with my help he filled in some gaps in his chess education.

    Surov – Who is the most talented player of modern grandmasters?

    Tukmakov – Talent is very subjective and hard to measure. In modern chess it is very difficult to single out natural talent, because even with individual coaches for all players, the ultimate coach is the chess program. They listen to it and trust it one hundred percent. The relationship with an individual coach may change but not that with these engines.

    Of the players with whom I have encountered, I would single out three of them; Tal Karpov and Anand. And of the very modern – Carlsen.

    Surov – What do you see as the future of professional chess?

    Tukmakov – Due to the ever increasing impact of the computer, chess at the highest level is becoming an increasingly drawn game. Cancel the classic time control or have one hour per game. Let there be rapid chess. I do not like a control with the addition of time. In the classical, a half minute is added for each minute. The old classical time control was two or two and a half hours for forty moves without any additions. It seems to me that the most interesting tournament was the Candidates of 2013 when they played without adding time, but it was the drama that attracted the audience.

    Another solution to increasing the popularity of chess and lessening the computer influence is Fischer chess.

    Surov – And you are not worried about your coaching career if everyone switches to Fischer chess?

    Tukmakov – I am not worried for many reasons. First of all I am no longer young, and my coaching career will not last forever, as well as my life. Secondly, you asked me about the future of chess, but it does not mean that changes will take place quickly. It will not happen that tomorrow chess will be cancelled and the day after Fischer chess will be instituted, Thirdly, for me as a coach I am not a fan of the openings. I am aware of the current trends, but I am not interested enough to get into the computer jungle. So when I work with strong players, we decide what to play against a particular opponent, choose the best opening and so on. But in just polishing up various openings, I am not interested. So, in that sense I have already entered Fischer chess.

    Surov – Five years ago, you said you did not believe in the potential of Sergey Karjakin. Has your opinion changed?

    Tukmakov – Yes, it has changed. Formally, of course, I can say that I was right – he did not become a world champion but I did not believe that he would ever have a match for the world championship.

    If we talk about Sergey, I knew him from the age of fourteen. At that age he had already made the team of Ukraine, the team that became Olympic champions in 2004 in Calvia. Then, in 2009 he moved to Russia. In general, I think he made the right move. And then, it was not of such an extreme nature – it was like a grandmaster in one of the provinces of the Soviet Union going to Moscow as Efim Geller, my countryman did, receiving an offer from Moscow.

    Sergey is incredibly psychologically stable, cold blooded and has a quality that not everyone has – he is lucky. To understand what I mean, look at this final game with Svidler at the World Cup, when he lost a match of four games with a score of 2:0 and then won the match.

    He is sincere and loves authority. In terms of survival it is an extremely useful quality to have – a sincere love of authority.

    Surov – What are the chances of Aronian and So to win the Candidates?

    Tukmakov - Previously, particularly for Soviet chess players (although now perhaps we’re getting lost in history), the Candidates Tournaments were absolutely special events. If you, as a Soviet chess player, got into the Candidates Tournament, then that put you in a completely different weight category from the point of view of chess politics as well. Nowadays the Candidates Tournaments are, essentially, just another supertournament.

    (to be concluded)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Tukmakov Interview

      The Tukmakov Interview (concluded)

      May 22, 2018

      Tukmakov - Therefore – take my word for it! – not all eight of the chess players got into the Candidates Tournament in order to fight for first place. They got in – and that’s great! That’s a line on their chess biography, that’s good prizes and the chance, if things work out, to fight for first place. But among the eight there are people who, from my point of view, approach it with the normal (in quotes or without) position, that first place is a special place. If you divide the candidates according to that principle, then that correctly focused group includes: Vladimir Kramnik, Shakhriyar Mamedyarov, Levon Aronian and, perhaps – although it’s hard to be 100% sure – Fabiano Caruana. The remaining four, from my point of view, don’t set themselves the goal: whatever happens, at any cost, to achieve first place - any place other than first is a catastrophe, a tragedy for me, and so on.

      But such an approach to the tournament also gives birth to other tournament tactics. Naturally the people for whom only first place exists and who are focused on the fight only for that, will take more risks. Among those four there are two clearly defined, to use (Russian) snooker terminology, serial players. A serial player isn’t simply a player who plays for a win in matches, but one who’s capable of potting a lot of balls in a row i.e. making a precise series – and does that exceptionally. So there are at least two such serial players – Levon Aronian and Shakhriyar Mamedyarov.

      Surov - You mean that by analogy they can win a few games in a row?

      Tukmakov - Yes. If they’re in the mood, if it turns out that they came to the start of the tournament in optimum form, then they can set the pattern of the tournament, give it a special mood. For instance, if one of the grandmasters scores 3.5/4, then that will completely alter the course of the tournament.

      On the other hand, these so-called serial players, if they’re off their game, can easily end up as outsiders.

      On yet another hand, if there’s a tight, tense struggle and a big group of players reaches the finish line together, then the chances for those players not focused on first place will grow. Sergey Karjakin, for instance. So if with two rounds to go everyone will be in the same group, on +1 or +2, then his chances will, of course, be pretty high.

      Surov - Given that chess players from that first group will start to take risks.

      Tukmakov - Not only because of that. Here his cold-bloodedness, his calm and his pragmatism will have much greater significance at the finish in the situation we’re discussing than in the situation where one or two people break clear from the very beginning. In that case the chances of So and even Ding Liren will also dramatically increase i.e. an awful lot depends on how the tournament begins, the character of the tournament and, correspondingly, the favourite. But in principle the tournament is very, very balanced.

      Surov – What do you think about Anish Giri’s last tournament, his chess development and prospects?

      Tukmakov - Anish Giri was the third chess player in the world on rating. He participated in the Candidates Tournament. However, all fourteen games finished in a draw. But he played very well. If only he had used more of his chances! I mean not some illusory or random chance. He had two totally won positions - with Caruana and Nakamura and one position with a good margin - with Topalov. If he had won two out of three of these positions, he would have a real chance to win the tournament. Despite the fact that he didn’t win, he never stood worse.

      And after Candidates Tournament he began a long decline, which actually lasted until this tournament in Wijk aan Zee, where he played very well.

      Surov – What has been your personal relationship with Valery Salov? And do you share the opinion of Mikhalchishin who said that Valery Borisovich is one of the most tragic figures in chess?

      Tukmakov – I did not have a relationship with Valery Salov, although we played in some tournaments and a few games together. I think in the mid 80s and early 90s he was in the top five in the world. But is he a tragic figure? What is tragic? In my opinion, he is fine living in Spain. He no longer plays chess. It is his free choice, not to play chess. I have not spoken to him since he disappeared from the chess horizon but as far as I understand, he now does what he likes.
      __________

      Wikipedia - In a long May 2015 interview with Chess-News (currently only available in Russian), Salov touched on a number of subjects, in particular, how for various reasons he was forced out of competitive chess (due to a lack of invitations), that the Kasparov-Karpov matches were a Kabbalistic "ritual" of Freemasonry, that the Kasparov-Anand match at the World Trade Center was related to the September 11th terrorist attacks in the United States, and other sundry theories. He is currently involved with political economy at universities near Madrid.
      _______

      Surov – What do you think of Vassily Ivanchuk as a chessplayer and as a person?

      Tukmakov – Vassily is a great chessplayer. He has the talent and creativity to become world champion. But his constitution has drawbacks.

      When he was at the zenith, then all his wonderful qualities, fantastic talent, memory, learning - in general, the creative component, - all these could be described only in superlatives. But for all that he was too emotional, mentally unstable and very prone to mood. And that prevented him from becoming world champion.

      I spoke with Vassily very closely when he was in my Ukrainian team. He played a key role in both our league competitions - and in 2004, and in the year 2010. Both times he played quite brilliantly. And if he had not, we would not have titles.

      I really empathized and rooted for him in a match with Ponomariov, when Ponomariov became the world champion. Actually, I didn’t root for him – that would be wrong; I just thought that they were chess players on a completely different scale, of a different class. I have absolutely no doubt the result of the match. But it turned out differently. And I think that this match has played a bad joke with both. Not only with Vassily, for which it was, of course, a tremendous shock - when he beat Anand, he believed that has already become a world champion.

      Similarly, do not forget about Anand, who became world champion and by knockout too. Ivanchuk’s championship claims were unmistakable, and no one doubted them. So that if he won the match against Ponomariov, it all would have taken a real world champion.

      But this game has played a bad joke and in relation to Ruslan. Because he is also a great natural talent, but in fact only on the rise, he immediately got everything one can aspire to. Here is an unexpected championship title stripped of its motivation. Well, then another, and a failed match with Kasparov ... In general, he did not take his place as a great chess player. 
Returning to Ivanchuk. If you remember (and if you do not remember, I will remind you), that then, after all the previous rounds before the final match was a long pause. And I think it played a decisive role. Since it was obvious that Ivanchuk did not take Ruslan as a serious opponent. And by winning the match against Anand, he believed that everything he did would be successful. And if the final match with Ponomariov began the next day or two, he would have won by inertia. And so - he came to the city almost a world champion (as he himself perceived). And then it just is not able to or do not have time (most likely failed) to reboot. I really wish that Vassily would be among the world champions. He deserves this.

      http://chess-news.ru/node/24382

      _______

      Recall that in the World Championship knockout of 2002, Ivanchuk met Anand in the Semifinals and won 2.5 to 1.5. Ponomariov met Svidler and similarly won 2.5 to 1.5. In the final, Ponomariov beat Ivanchuk 4.5 to 2.5 and became FIDE World Champion.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Tukmakov Interview

        The Tukmakov Interview

        May 27, 2018

        The new Tukmakov book is now in pre-order. These are the details:

        Author: Tukmakov, Vladimir
        Title: Shakhmatnye zvezdy i sosvezdia. Zapiski trenera i kapitana

        Pre-order, expected in June-July 2018. (Chess Stars and Constellations. Trainer and Captain's Notes). The author writes about his work with top chess players. The book includes many annotated games and game fragments. GM Vladimir Tukmakov was one of the world's best chess players and is currently considered one of the best coaches. He was trainer of many strong players, including Anatoly Karpov, Viktor Korchnoi, Yefim Geller, Vladimir Tseskkovsky, but also Pavel Eljanov, Anish Giri and Wesley So. Under Tukmakov's leadership, Ukraine won the Chess Olympiad in 2004 and 2010, and the Azerbaijan chess club Socer won twice the European team championship. He also trained chess teams of Azerbaijan and Netherlands.

        Place of publication: Moskva
        Publisher: Biblioteka Rossiyskoy shakhmatnoy federatsii
        Year of publication: 2018
        Edition: 1st edition
        Pages: 272p. 500 grams
        Binding: Hardcover
        Language: Russian + Figurine notation
        Diagrams: many
        Book size: 8vo (20-23 cm)
        Price: USD 21 + shipping

        Of course, there is no telling when an English edition will appear

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Tukmakov Interview

          Originally posted by Wayne Komer View Post
          The Tukmakov Interview
          The new Tukmakov book is now in pre-order.
          Actually, the book is already available in bookstores. An excerpt (contains preface, ToC and a big chunk of a chapter dedicated to Wesley So) is available for free download from the RCF site - click on the last sentence on the page before the image of front and back covers.

          Originally posted by Wayne Komer View Post
          The Tukmakov Interview
          Of course, there is no telling when an English edition will appear
          The English edition by Thinkers Publishing is scheduled to be available by fall 2018. The body text translation is finished, it is a matter of typesetting diagrams / translating text comments now.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Tukmakov Interview

            ...and the Azerbaijan chess club Socer won twice the European team championship.
            Er... Not sure who wrote this Internet blurb but the club name is SOCAR. ;-)

            He also trained chess teams of Azerbaijan and Netherlands.
            At present, coaches Belarus for the 43rd Chess Olympiad.
            Last edited by Vadim Tsypin; Tuesday, 29th May, 2018, 02:18 PM. Reason: Added details.

            Comment

            Working...
            X