Talking to GM Yuan, Australia’s new #1

Early this year Zhao became part of the history of chess when he won two GM tournaments in a row – the first ones he had played in. Nobody, not Fischer, not Kasparov, not the new Norwegian wonderboy had done that. This is how it started….

If we were going to be technical, I guess we’d call him Zhao Zang-Yuan, but we aren’t. I’ve always thought of him as Yuan because that’s he wanted to be called the first day I met him.

That was in 1999. I was making my yearly pilgrimage to the Australian Masters, which used to be held at The Treasury on Collins St – a wonderful venue for a great tournament. One of the competitors was Yuan, then, I believe 12 years old. He was on the road, coming to Melbourne from another tournament and he was well, if not out of his depth, certainly out of his comfort zone.

It is one thing playing a Swiss – however tough it may be at the top, if you lose for long enough you end up at your level, amongst other demoralised souls and you can put the boot in. But the Masters is a strong, invitational round robin. Designed to give top Australians a chance to get norms, and always with some strong o/s guests, there are no easy games.

On top of this he was staying a long way from town and he wasn’t exactly being cared for where he was billeted. As I watched Yuan lose game after game (with a draw or two thrown in) I decided it was time to take on new role for me – mother. My brother was organising the event and I told him that I’d look after Yuan for the rest of it. I was living close to the city, I was going to come in every day to watch, I would cook him Chinese food and, I hoped, he’d start winning some games. My partner kindly agreed to play the father role if need be. Mostly he expected to get good Chinese food too.

So Yuan came around to stay and well, I’d thought the first thing he’d want to do was tuck into some noodles. But there was something even more important than that. First I had to play him chess. I guess I lost maybe 20 games of blitz in a row – ‘…enough Yuan?’ I asked, hoping for the best. ‘No. We start again’ he ordered. Eventually he had won enough. I could stop. This may have been good for Yuan’s career…but I have to say it was the last chess I’ve played!!

What a diligent young man he was. Iin the morning there’d be a phone call to Manuel Weeks who was helping him from Sydney. He’d play his game, come home, analyse and prepare for the next day. With my famous (well, it is now…) soya sauce chicken under his belt and clean socks to wear he did pick up a few wins after that. But although he was definitely a little boy and loved fun, you could see how important the chess was.

I could drive that point home by telling the story of what happened at the Victory dinner which ended the event. Naturally we adults we looking forward to a night of letting our hair down, having a bit of fun and staying up late. But Yuan had other ideas. He had to be in bed, he told us, by 9pm as he had to get up the next morning to go to his third tournie in a row, this time in Sydney. Fortunately Yuan didn’t wear a watch. And here is a confession which I hope Yuan will forgive – certainly it doesn’t appear to have done long term damage to his chess career – we figured we’d tell him it was 8.30 when we thought it was time to go home. ‘No, not yet Yuan, not quite’. I don’t think it even bothered him that if he left at 8.30 he would have missed the Chinese banquet. You see he was at that age where airplane food is actually exciting. Sleeping through b/fast on the plane the next day, now that WOULD have been tragic.

I suspect any number of kids have the talent at that age – but the hard work, the discipline, the ability to take the knocks when they came – those are rare traits and are 99% of what make a top player of any sport, let alone something as painful as chess can be. And Yuan had that in spades, so to speak.

So, I’ve been expecting something special from him ever since and, although he’s been getting better all the time, this year he has finally produced what I’d always thought he was capable of. I guess the question now is what next? Can he keep improving? And at what cost?

I asked Yuan some questions about his chess and his future. Here are his answers.

Am I right in thinking that chess is not going to be your main pursuit in life, that you are going to make a sensible living doing other things and playing chess as it fits in?
To be honest, I am not too sure yet what I mainly want to pursue as a career. I just graduated in pharmacy and I have found a graduate pharmacist position for 2009 so I will be definitely working next year. I have been offered a place at USYD graduate medicine in 2010 but I have yet to decide for sure to take this up as four more years of further study seems a bit daunting at the moment although I would like to pratice medicine rather than pharmacy. It may yet be that chess will be a significant part of my professional life i.e. one possibility being working part time in a pharmacy and part time chess. I think I will know better at the end of next year.

What do you think the best you can do is, at least while you are studying, working and so on. Do you feel like you are at the best point already, or that we can expect even greater things?
If I pursue work and study I think I will peak at around 2600 (so yeah, pretty much at my peak already). If I take up chess part time, I think a 2650 peak is conceivable. If I give up everything for chess (rather unlikely) perhaps I can reach around 2700 but I don’t know exactly. I think chess is very fair, what you give up you gain, if you don’t give anything then you can’t get anything. To be very honest, I am astounded at my own progress in the last year, something just “clicked” for me in chess.

To your fans, of course, your performance in Dresden looks great, but what did you think of it. I very much enjoyed watching your last game. But what happened in round 2, if you will forgive me asking. I suppose this is a game you would have ‘expected’ to win.
Halfway through the tournament, despite my win against Korchnoi I was quite unhappy with my performance. I think it’s fair to say that Korchnoi clearly played below par and I took no great pleasure in beating a man whom I hold in such high esteem. The loss against Topalov was pretty devastating for me since I played awfully (I believe someone commented that it was like watching an Australian weekender rd 1 game, where the 1800 is geting butchered by an IM except that in this case I was clearly the weakling). Of course deep down I found it hard to believe I could hold Topalov with black but the game really wakened me. Also Topalov has a magic aura around him, an air of confidence and invincibility, this rubbed off on me even though I lost against him. I think in round 2 I was far too optimistic, I followed with interest the play of Hector Leyva later on and I think he is quite a bit stronger than his humble 2400 rating. I remember 2 other quite good GM’s also lost to him later on in the tournament. I think I came in with the wrong attitude, I should have simply played solidly and looked for chances but I was too optimistic and was duly punished. I think all credit goes to my opponent. Nevertheless, towards the end I managed to steady the boat and reeled in some catches, finishing with 3.5/4 is always reassuring!

What’s next on the chess front for you?
I’m actually in China playing some club matches in the Chinese League. My team is from Jiangsu and the games should start in 2 days time. However, I believe the games are not transmitted and that the website is only in chinese. In general terms, I always aims to bring a higher level of harmony to my chess play, somehow in chess I see many similarities with say yoga or Tai Chi, whether in attack or defence everything should be done in harmony. I know it sounds a bit abstract but anyway…

Postscript:
A note from Ian: Yuan won his first game in China yesterday too, beating GM Li Shilong, so his great run is continuing.

Dresden Chess Olympiad 2008…I ask Ian Rogers some questions.

(Tomorrow, by the way, I will talk to Australia’s Number one board, Zhao, so do drop by for that.)

My brother, Chris Depasquale, who has played in a couple of Olympiads, pointed out to me when I asked him what he thought of the new scoring changes, that it did provide some dramatic differences from the old method:

I guess for us old fuddy-duddies, at least Armenia won the thing whichever scoring method you use, but Bulgaria were bronze medallists under the old system and they finished 14th, while Canada actually scored more points than anybody except Armenia, but they finished 28th!!! Of course, if the scoring was under the old system the pairings would have been different and Canada would have had a tougher field…. Because they lost matches 2.5-1.5 to India, Scotland and Iraq in the first half of the event they only played one team that finished in the top 50!

Gaining nothing of consequence for a 4-0 victory – ie the same 2 points as achieved for 2.5-1.5 win – had a detrimental effect for Australia at least once, when they achieved the blitz and then had to play another team of the same ilk for the same result. I am pretty sure everybody would have preferred a challenge.

I wanted to know what Ian Rogers GM thought about various aspects of the Olympiad and Australia in the world of chess. As it happens he is eternally in my debt and could not say no.

Ian Rogers, GM, What do you think of the new scoring method (a) in general (b) from Australia’s point of view?

Awful – there are simply too many teams and not enough score groups with match points. (This could have been predicted, but FIDE admitted that they did no simulations before changing the system. (See Shaun Press’ blog), Also, it discourages fighting in all games since 2.5-1.5 is almost as good as 4-0.

For Australia it could have been great had our open team won our last match and moved into the top 20, since the yoyo effect is exaggerated. But overall the new system is worse for the middle teams who are all crowded around 50% and could finish anywhere.

At least under the old system you needed to lose 0-4 in the last round to drop dramatically – now a narrow 1.5-2.5 loss is enough to see you plummeting down the standings.

Is Australia standing still or dropping back in relation to the rest of the world?

The rest of the world is constantly improving. Our Open team is keeping up, barely, thanks to Zhao and Smerdon, but our women’s team without Irina really struggled (e.g. 0-4 v Venezuela).

Has the requirement for becoming a GM been lowered or do we have more GMs now because we have more players of a standard that that hasn’t dropped?

There may be more good players but certainly the standard required to get a GM title has been lowered because of many incremental factors plus the elephant in the room, rating inflation.

Given that Yuan goes from strength to strength, could you speculate on the difference it would have made to our team if you had been playing? What position might we have reasonably hoped for (ie with the usual some out of form players)? And, again on Yuan, it seems to me his solid performance on Board one was important in confirming his remarkable GM tournament victories early this year. Is that true, or were they proof enough on their own? Do you have hopes/expectations for Yuan and if so, what are they? What, if anything, is going to stop him achievement them?

Had I been playing I would probably have been selected on board two and it probably would have helped, but how much is anyone’s guess – it’s just speculation.

In Dresden Yuan scored his 6th GM in his last 7 events where it was possible. I don’t think he had anything to prove – he’s the real deal. How far he goes is dependent on his pharmacy and then perhaps medical studies. He has already been forced due to his pharmacy registration employer to pull out of Queenstown, which is not a good sign.

It seems to me that there are some players who rise to the occasion when playing for their country…and that such players might be considered for selection even if they are not in form at home. Do you agree with this notion, and if so, is there anybody you would have included in this team, and at whose expense? Ian read my mind on this one and mentioned two players I was wondering about.

No. Alex Wohl failed for years and then given a new chance was brilliant in Torino 2006. Terry Shaw, a dual medallist, failed in his final two Olympiads. Arianne was hopeless in her first two Olympiads for Australia. You have to select on current form and hope for the best.

I watched Australia’s board one woman play the Australian Masters some years ago and was astonished at her result (minor placing). Since then she has not nearly lived up to the expectations I set for her. Was that result an accident? Does she have the talent but not the will?

The result was not an accident – she had the talent but not the will. Since the Aus. Masters result, Arianne barely studied chess, concentrating on study and dancing.

Fortunately in 2008, Arianne was so stung by criticism of her play and Olympiad results that she put in some real work and played many games at close to her old strength. Going out with Aronian can’t hurt but it also cost Australia about 30 places when she spent the final round concentrating on Armenia’s fight for gold and lost her game without a fight.

What do you think about the other major change in the Olympiad, the board numbers for the Open and Women’s?

NO strong opinion, although from Australia’s point of view the change tends to expose our lack of depth in women’s chess – our lower two boards really struggled in Dresden, although Biljana pulled off some ridiculous swindles to finish with an OK score. But both she and Shannon were just outplayed in many games.

Were you asked to be Captain of the Open team?

Yes. I am glad I said no – it was hard enough to resist the temptation to sit in Yuan’s chair at the start of each round!

Round one Dresden 2008

For those who didn’t know, there have been several major changes to the format this year. The Open have only 4 boards and now instead of winning on points it is a team victory: 1, .5 or 0. I guess that is good news for Australia who got only half a point against Czech Republic (a draw by Yuan), but perhaps a little disappointing for Switzerland who got 1.5 against Russia, a pleasing result not exactly reflected in a big fat zero.

Meanwhile the Aussie women had a great start drawing with the much higher seeded Belarus.

Round 1 on 2008/11/13 at 15:00
Bo. 54 AUS Australia (AUS) Rtg - 26 BLR Belarus (BLR) Rtg 2 : 2
26.1 WIM Caoili Arianne 2170 - WGM Sharevich Anna 2322 1 – 0
26.2 Nguyen Thu Giang 2101 - WIM Popova Natalija 2264 ½ – ½
26.3 WIM Moylan Laura 2114 - WIM Azarova Nadezhda 2308 ½ – ½
26.4 WIM Dekic Biljana N 2103 - WIM Berlin Tatiana 2218 0 – 1

Well done, girls!

The other change you might have noticed from above, is that although the Open teams have been cut down to 4, the Women’s has been increased to 4!!!! I quite like Chessninja’s comments on this move by FIDE:

The main change this year is cutting the Open teams down to five players (four boards, one reserve) and adding a board to the Women’s event so that’s also five players. This way the strong players will be more tired and play worse, but in compensation we’ll get a few hundred more games between unrated women. Good job, Dresden. If you want to make a stand for equal rights, abolish the Women’s event entirely. No, I’m not really in favor of that. Now don’t get me wrong. I’m all for Title IX and making sure women have equal access and protection against discrimination in sports. But as is made clear by the women playing in the Open section — in 2006 I believe there were seven — access isn’t the issue. It’s a culture thing. And I’m fine with affirmative action in general. We need to find ways to encourage more women to take up and stay with the sport, absolutely. But doing it this way, swapping 2500-players for 2000-players even up and bringing in dozens of players who are practically beginners, it looks silly.

Okay, enough on that. We won’t really notice it once things get going and I’m sure ChessBase will be delighted to have dozens more just-happy-to-be-here young women to photograph for their in-depth chess coverage.

The favorites in the main event are, as usual, the Russians. Kramnik is back on board one in an attempt to recover from 2006, when he led the top seeds to a miserable sixth-place finish in Turin. Kramnik himself actually had the best performance rating of the event, but Svidler was off and Rublevsky a disaster. This time they have the highest-rated team ever, a 2756 average, with Kramnik, Morozevich, Svidler, Grischuk, and Jakovenko. The loss of the second reserve board cost Alekseev a spot. But I’m sure there’s a spunky reserve Women’s player from, say, Korea who just learned to play on the flight to Dresden who appreciates the change.

Having been one of them myself (you can see my Olympiad games here), the spunky chancer who shouldn’t be there, I have to say YOU ARE RIGHT, Chessninja. On the other hand, I must assure you, nobody minded me being there. And there was actually some chance at the time that I’d turn into a chess player.

Dresden 2008 Chess Olympiad

Where to go to watch the Olympiad:

Chess Olympiad TV is something you can download. I can’t comment on whether it is worth doing so.

The official Olympiad site looks a shambolic mess.

Chessdom looks a more useful site and it will be frequently updated every day along with links to live games etc.

Chessninja could also be a handy site to visit.

With the Olympiad just hours away from starting, what are the chances for our teams? What a disappointment that Australia’s number one female player, Feldman, is not available. Caoili takes her place as first board and one can only hope she is able to produce her best. I watched her phenomenal performance in the Australian Masters some years ago – it promised much for the future – but so far she’s failed to deliver. It would be great to see Dekic perform well. She’s a real worker at the table so let’s hope that translates into points.

As for the Open team, it is hard to believe we are sending a team without Ian Rogers in it. I happened to be in the team in 1976, the year of his Olympiad debut. I can’t help recalling not only is Rogers no longer playing, but two of the 1976 team are dead: Terrey Shaw was hit by a ferocious prostate cancer that killed him at age 51. And just a few weeks ago Serge Rubinraut died.

The biggest excitement for our team is Australia’s new GM on board 1, Yuan. The story of how I more or less singlehandedly take responsibility for the dazzling career of this young man can wait for another time.

For now I will simply remind you all that he not only got his title earlier this year, but broke a world record in the process. NOBODY, not Fischer, not Kasparov, not any of the other bright young things that are around these days has done what Yuan did. He won the first two GM tournaments he played in. It was in such fine style that he qualified for his title. Here’s hoping he can pull something special out of his bag of tricks over the next couple of weeks.

Our teams:

52. AUS (RtgAvg:2488, Captain:Weeks, Manuel)
Bo. Name Rtg FED
1 GM Zhao Zong-Yuan 2567 AUS
2 IM Smerdon David 2470 AUS
3 IM Solomon Stephen J 2470 AUS
4 GM Johansen Darryl K 2446 AUS
5 IM Xie George Wendi 2403 AUS

54. AUS (RtgAvg:2122, Captain:Andras, Toth)
Bo. Name Rtg FED
1 WIM Caoili Arianne 2170 AUS
2 Nguyen Thu Giang 2101 AUS
3 WIM Moylan Laura 2114 AUS
4 WIM Dekic Biljana N 2103 AUS
5 WFM Oliver Shannon 1942 AUS

Go teams, go!!!