After spending a few days in Hungary, I am happy to say that chess is still a very important part of the culture in my native country. I have spent the last 5 years helping chess in America. Now, my effort will reach out wider. At least with the modern Internet technology, things will be a little easier.
I must also say that I am so proud of my baby sister Judit and I very much admire her. I saw with my own eyes how she functions day to day. She is a wonderful and devoted mother to her two children, a loving wife and she still finds the time to be a professional chess player.
It is not by luck that she is who she is on the chess board. She works HARD with her chess. She gives 150% of herself on the board as well as in training. She does not care to be a Kournikova wannabe like others. She does not care to be the most glamorous or most photographed female player. She just wants to be Judit Polgar. She wants to be the best in chess.
As hard as you see me work in promoting chess as well as taking care of my children, she works just as hard. Sofia is the same way with her family and her artistic love. That is the Polgar way. We only comprehend hard work and giving our all.
So long Budapest and hello New York City. I will bring you many more stories about Budapest as well as its unique chess programs later today. I will also discuss in more details about the Kramnik versus Fritz match so be sure to check back later today. My next blog will be from New York as I am about to board the plane. Thanks everyone for many nice comments about my native country!
Update: Please do not put words in my mouth by mentioning a specific player. What I referred to is at least 7 women that I know of have been mentioned as the Kournikova of chess and 2 of them are rated less than 2000. The Kournikova of chess term has been used frequently by the media and Judit does NOT want to be one of them. She just wants to be Judit Polgar.
Budapest is also the home of Vas Rejlich and Rybka.
So true about Judit. It is evident in everything she does.
Have a safe trip home Susan….. im sure the marshall would love to see u tomorrow new york knights vs san francisco final match :). well anyway, hope u get some rest.
Have a good flight Susan, we missed you already! ; )
GO SAN FRAN!!! We will whip you silly marshall hockey pucks!
I wonder, if Sofia is willing to write an article about chess and art, and aesthetics in chess. I believe it would be extremely interesting. To define “beautiful” connected to chess – and of course with some diagrams. It is said that “the beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, so since Sofia is an artistic soul – it would be very valuable if we can look to the aesthetics of chess game from her angle of view – through eyes of an art lover. No need to mention, if you Susan feel like writing about aesthetics of chess some day, I believe it would be great post, and personally I would be very happy to read something like that. Can you people imagine for example the post with top list of ten most beautiful chess moves (or combinations) of all times on this blog? That would be marvellous!
Thank you Susan for all your selfless efforts in writing this blog. Is there any other world champion who is writing blog for promoting positive values of his/her sport? You are excellent example! Humble pioneer in chess-joy-distribution. Million times thanks. You are doing great work!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This game between the program and kramnik reminds me of something i once experienced. Now I am not making any accusations here, but simply stating that it is very like an experience. I once had a friend who passed away a few years ago, who had just bought a novag diamond tabletop computer. I was at his house one day and he matched me up against this computer which I believe as estimated to having a uscf playing strength of 2383 if i can recall. He set me up a board with pieces which to play on and relayed the moved from the computer to the board. He saw a line of analysis in its display and liked it and immediately played the move on the board…..to his astonishment I forked its queen and king and he suddenly wondered what happened. The computer would calculate its moves showing a series of moves that it was examining on the display. Well he just happened to make the 3rd move in its calculation line instead of the first move 🙂
susan, i like what you do for the chess and community as a whole and they benefit greatly from your work. i know this is your blog and a forum for impartial thoughts and i know that your sister judit is great. but i thought you are being biased at some point and make unnecessary judgements just because other people have a way of doing things differently the way you prefer. just a fan sharing some thoughts.
CHESSFAN WROTE: “susan, i like what you do for the chess and community as a whole and they benefit greatly from your work. i know this is your blog and a forum for impartial thoughts and i know that your sister judit is great. but i thought you are being biased at some point and make unnecessary judgements just because other people have a way of doing things differently the way you prefer. just a fan sharing some thoughts. “
Like what?? why don’t you be more specific? I haven’t seen any bias here at all!
to anonymous, read b/w these lines : “She does not care to be a Kournikova wannabe like others. She does not care to be the most glamorous or most photographed female player. She just wants to be Judit Polgar. She wants to be the best in chess.” its one thing to make a statement on your sister, its another to make a subtle criticism on another individual. i know its her opinion and its her right and that its her blog.
I think Kournikova probably WANTED to be the best tennis player in the world while she was growing up. She worked very hard, from a very young age. There is alot of sweat and work that goes into Tennis. There are pictures of her playing tennis at a very young age.
However, once she became a young lady, due to her good looks, the media and the public turned her into a princess and didn’t care that she was a tennis player.
“Like what?? why don’t you be more specific? I haven’t seen any bias here at all! “
There is bias. Just to give an example : It’s a known fact that Susan removes the comments that she does not like. And there are lots of comments where the world chess champion Kramnik is being accused of cheating in his match against Topalov without any evidence. And she does not remove any of them. That is a bias. According to her, these baseless accusations are simply “free speech” :-)And she supports free speech only if it serves her purpose. Hypocrisy is everywhere.
Have you ever given thought that Susan is not the only one monitoring these sites for content (some of which may be construed as offensive ), or posting comments and content in her name? She is quite a busy woman, and she does have a couple of business associates that may be responsible for maintaining information here when she is extended.
I certainly do NOT project my own subtext on her comments like “fan”. I think its an honest answer. There is no room for sexism in chess…and the Polgars have experienced, seen, and suffered for plenty of that.
Different strokes for different folks. Different ways of promoting chess.
http://www.kramnik.com/default.aspx
http://www.morozevich.com/
http://www.lekochess.com/
http://www.mauriceashley.com
http://www.kosteniuk.com/
http://www.kosteniuk.com/podcast/
http://www.kosteniuk.com/podcast/ChessIsCool01.mp3
Like Kramnik, a russian chess player
🙂
The latter also promotes chess – but in a different way. Eveybody earns a living/pays the bills in their own inimitable way. Would be boring if we were all the same. Is there any ONE way to promote chess? Demure? Stately? Matronly? Gentlemanly? In ties and tux?
Wacky? Zany? Loudly? In t-shirt and jeans?
Similarly, there can be only one world champion…some reach a height then can’t be bothered with the push for the top…read something by Gormally about the single-mindedness that others have to reach it and it wasn’t for him. Morozevich is a great talent but says he’s not that keen on the striving to be there.
Hard work yes…certainly to get to be GM they all have…but, then what? Some end up trying stocks and shares or poker?!
—————
“You are considered as one of the most creative and unpredictable players on the circuit. You bring creative chaos onto the chessboard…
Everybody can define me in a different way. I have more confidence in myself than in books or in computer-based preparations. This allows me to find new ideas sometimes. However, I lack stability, I can often line up good and bad results. This is my weakness. This is what also made a difference with great players.
What do you mean?
Most top-ten players are more professional in their approach to chess. They devote most of their time to it. Anand, Leko or Topalov do not necessarily play better than I do, but they are more serious in their work, in their regularity. I can beat any player in a game, I can get ahead in a tournament, but they logically defeat me on the whole. I consider myself partly amateur. Chess remains my greatest passion, of course, but I can do other things for months, before getting back to it. I have other centers of interest; I have friends outside of the chess world. This is my way of life and it suits me.
This is not enough in order to aim for a world title, for example?
Indeed. I am not the kind of person who makes big announcements, who argues that I want to be world champion. I am not ready to sacrifice everything in order to achieve this. From this point of view, my fourth place at the last world championship in San Luis in 2005, with 50 percent of the points, suits me very well. I only started serious preparation three weeks earlier. Only during the tournament did Alexander Beljavsky and Vladimir Barsky (MI) come and support me.
Will you stick to this philosophy in the future?
It is not easy to modify one’s style completely.
You are 29, what are your goals?
I like to play a creative chess. It is understood that I will pursue my career. However, with my current point of view, I try not to become too dependent on the results because they can vary a lot.”
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3279
“How do you personally feel about the admiration of your talent?
The concept of “talent” is formed under completely abstract criteria, having nothing in common with reality. But the reality is such that I don’t understand chess as a whole. But then again no one understands chess in its entirety. Perhaps talent is something else, in chess it is conditionality.
And it is ungrateful in terms of time consumption and energy…
When you are fascinated by the game and achieve certain success it is too late to change anything. However, it is clear that in chess the expenditure of energy is absolutely disproportionate to the reward or to material compensation. The relationship between expenditure and earning is absolutely unbalanced.
Is the game promising, does it have a future?
Chess has no image. It is necessary to regretfully admit that chess is not an Olympic sport, and will not see TV prime time, just as one cannot see one’s own ears. Nor will it see major sponsorship. Also the abundance of draws scares people away. Football (soccer) yes, it’s a show. The main thing is one doesn’t have to understand it, it is sufficient to simply experience the emotional output. But it’s another thing entirely to try to sort out what is going on the chessboard…
Who is the strongest player in the world right now? Perhaps it is still Kasparov, despite having recently left the stage?
There is no such a thing as the “stronger player”. No one understands chess as it is, there is simply a will to reach the highest possible result. Actually, Kasparov doesn’t understand anything in chess. And personally I don’t care what he is occupied with, he only exists on tournament score sheets. His other endeavors do not interest me.”
——-
“How do you see your future in chess?
At 25, I have understood that chess is not my calling, but only a temporary occupation, one of the methods to develop my intellect. I don’t know what I will take up in the future, but I know for sure that I will not play chess all my life. My education qualifies me to teach Physical Education in schools, but this too, somehow, doesn’t appeal to me.
It sounds like a requiem…
No, I am not expressing emotions, just establishing facts. I will try to continue to earn money by the means of chess, to support the material component of life. I will not burn bridges, nor will I throw chess out of the window. This will not happen, but there will be a change of priorities.”
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2874
the issue was susan making comparisons at the expense of her sister. i think shes got an issue to whoever shes pointing at and theres no need for it. her sisters achievements alone is good enough inspiration to chess and non chess individuals.
“She does not care to be a Kournikova wannabe like others. She does not care to be the most glamorous or most photographed female player.”
different strokes for different folks; we live in a media age..if one’s got an asset a la Kosteniuk or the former Mrs. Lautier, why not…they promote chess (the former with website/podcast on how to play/visualization technique etc, playing against Karpov/Korchnoi, blitz etc…the latter writing in chessjournals, chessbase etc, about visits around the world, e.g. China to play/promote chess)
If you’ve got it flaunt it 🙂
If you haven’t…don’t
Kournikova acheived a higher tennis ranking than judit did in chess. Tennis is a million times more competitive than chess. She probably worked very very very hard on her game.
There is no reason to belittle others while praising your own.
– Vinay
“Free speech” is a right that exists in the public realm. This is a person’s private weblog and she has a right to permit or prohibit what she wants.
Everyone has bias. In fact, we can call just about anything “biased,” since most everything is viewed and interpreted subjectively.
I find it interesting that some anonymous posters here spend inordinate amounts of time trying to impose their particular biases about free speech and bias on the owner of this weblog and others who post here. One might call that “hypocrisy.” Oh, yes, everyone has an opinion.
Funny how the invitation for a short comment here on susan’s blog often turns into some long diatribe and lecture by some narcissic vanity knutS!
Susan,
I think your reference to Anna Kournikova is unfortunate.
To the best of my knowledge she approached her game with the same professionalism and hard work as you claim for you and your sisters. She did very well in doubles games – I saw some of them, and she seemed to enjoy them very much. Like her beauty, her genes for having an aptitude for tennis are not under her control. Not all talented chess players become world champions, although they try very hard. It is the same for her in her sport.
If she knew about your reference to her in the context you placed it, she would be hurt very much, since her attitude and approach to her sport is the same as yours – professionalism and hard work. That she did not make it in singles tennis is not her fault.
That she capitalized on her beauty to earn some money is not dishonest or wrong in my view. I could be wrong, but as far as I know she did not appear in any seedy photographs for money. The Bible tells us not to hide our talents. So why use her as an example in such a negative way?
With much respect for what you and your sisters are doing for chess.
Susan,
How did you spend your long flight?
Did you buy that Sony SUPER PORTABLE
computer you told us about?
“She does not care to be a Kournikova wannabe like others. She does not care to be the most glamorous or most photographed female player.”
Rather funny that the one person that is commonly refered to as the Kournikova of chess is actually the 3rd highest rated women in FIDE and only 11 points shy of Humpy Koneru’s rating. Koneru being a person that gets vast praise from Susan….
“Rather funny that the one person that is commonly refered to as the Kournikova of chess is actually the 3rd highest rated women in FIDE and only 11 points shy of Humpy Koneru’s rating. Koneru being a person that gets vast praise from Susan….”
You forgot that she is also beating Pia Cramling’s rating currently too!
Original blog entry said:
{
[Judit] works HARD with her chess. … She does not care to be a Kournikova wannabe like others. She does not care to be the most glamorous or most photographed female player.
}
‘anonymous’ wrote (Tuesday, November 28, 2006 2:48:34 PM)
{
i think shes got an issue to whoever shes pointing at and theres no need for it.
}
I presume the statement about “most photographed” implicitly means Alexandra Kosteniuk.
Alexandra’s glamourous photos raise concern in some people, because the photos promote chess instead of hair products.
I think Alexandra’s photos are nice, and certainly tasteful. I see in her photos nothing harmful to chess; EXCEPT almost one time…
Torino Photos, Women
Torino, by Country
Torino, Cute Cultural Combination
Alexandra’s talented photographer Pufichek took photos of numerous female chess masters competing at the Torino Olympiad 2006. These excellent photos constitute a snapshot of the world wide face of womens’ chess in the current era. These photos were posted on a web page, one smiling attractive face after another and another and another.
The group’s style is a striking contrast to the earlier days of black and white Soviet photos of Miya Ch. and Vera M..
However, next to each photo was a viewer rating number on how pretty each photo was. This could have been unpleasant if some photos had been tagged with an unfavorable rating. It could have hurt people’s feelings.
The website was lucky to have dodged that bullet: as it happened no photo got a bad rating.
That group of photos should be an advertiser’s dream. A recent topic posted by Susan on her blog (“Interesting Debate”, 2006/11/24) asked “name the top 3 chess players you would choose to represent your company”. Before making an informed decision, it would be wise to look at Pufichek’s set of photos.
Gene Milener
http://CastleLong.com/
Susan, I don’t think we will ever see a woman play chess as strong as your sister, Judit, in our life-time since all the other women are so inferior compared to her. Hope she still improves makes it to number one!
Jose from Hammond, IN, USA
There simply is no Anna Kournikova
in the game of chess according to
this hastely compiled Google Image
Search World Ranking:
Anna Kournikova 18700 pictures
Alexandra Kosteniuk 10200 pictures
Susan+Zsuzsa Polgar 943 pictures
Zhu Chen 743 pictures
Xie Jun 684 pictures
Antoaneta Stefanova 288 pictures
Humpy Koneru 238 pictures
Pia Cramling 202 pictures
Judith Polgar 160 pictures
Nadezhda Kosintseva 112 pictures
Marie Sebag 111 pictures
Alisa Galliamova 89 pictures
Hoang Thanh Trang 79 pictures
Vera Menchik 78 pictures
Maia Chiburdanidze 73 pictures
Monika Socko 62 pictures
Yifan Hou 48 pictures
Ludmilla Rudenko 6 pictures
Elisabeth Bykova 6 pictures
Nona Gaprindaschwili 4 pictures
P.S.
A long time ago I used to read
Pravda. The tiny paper had a nice
chess column every day. I’m sorry to
say that nowadays they have more bikini problems than chess problems on their website. And personally I
think that Mr Putin is to blame for
pictures like this:
http://www.outofrange.net/wp-content/uploads/2006/01/anna-kournikova.jpg
vinay said: “Kournikova acheived a higher tennis ranking than judit did in chess. Tennis is a million times more competitive than chess. She probably worked very very very hard on her game.
There is no reason to belittle others while praising your own.”
I agree with your last point and the point about Kournikova probably working very hard but the first two points are wrong.
Judit is more accomplished in chess than Kournikova is in tennis because Kournikova achieved her highest ranking playing only women while Judit achieved her ranking by playing both women and men.
And of course that tennis is a million more times more competitive than chess is a ridiculous exaggeration. I don’t even agree that tennis is more competitive than chess. Professionals in both sports work very hard.
Susan, I hope you had a good trip home:)
Susan,
To say we are putting words in your mouth, is untrue in this case. You did use the term, and the fact that it was first used by the media does not make the analogy true.
By using the same term as the media, you are perpetuating the fallacy, which is unfair to Anna Kournikova.
Best state your case positively, without derogative reference to others.
“Free speech” is a right that exists in the public realm. This is a person’s private weblog and she has a right to permit or prohibit what she wants.”
And she uses that right according to her agenda by not removing those obnoxious posts about Kramnik cheating against Topalov. That is a bias.
I’m not sure I understood your reasoning about me being biased. I did not say that this is not Susan’s private weblog. I did not say that there should be free speech here. All I said was that she was biased against Kramnik, and gave evidence for that.
For evidence of Kramnik cheating, go to this link:
http://www.trud.bg/Default.asp?statid=39851&rubr=0&izd=2&fsize
There you can see the photo of the internet (UTP-5) in Kramnik’s bathroom, made on October 1. There is also official protocol of this finding, complete with signatures, in the newspaper “Trud”. Not a fake, like the letter of support for Kramnik in ChessBase.
And, please, Susan, delete the above obnoxious and libellous post.
If Susan is to be accused of bias, it is not against Kramnik, but against Topalov, because the only genuine letter in support of Kramnik in the ChessBase is hers. However, even in this act Susan was honest, expressing her true opinion and not expecting any reward from Kramnik’s paymasters.
>> And she uses that right according to her agenda by not removing those obnoxious posts about Kramnik cheating against Topalov. That is a bias.
No, bias is exactly the opposite – removing views and opinions that do not suit you.
“For evidence of Kramnik cheating, go to this link:
http://www.trud.bg/Default.asp?statid=39851&rubr=0&izd=2&fsize
There you can see the photo of the internet (UTP-5) in Kramnik’s bathroom, made on October 1.”
This photograph shows NO evidence at all. It is published in a Bulgarian newspaper. It is not known where it was taken. Even though it was Kramnik’s toilet, it is not known when it was taken. Both parties (Topalov side and Kramnik side) inspected the toilets meticulously and found nothing like this. This is FALSE evidence and this is at least your second reference to false evidence.
“No, bias is exactly the opposite – removing views and opinions that do not suit you.”
That’s wrong. There might be 3 types of views :
1) neutral
2) support your side
3) support the other side
If you remove views which are support the other side and do not remove views which support your side, then you are biased.
Susan Polgar is letting those insulting accusations to stay in her weblog, therefore she is biased.
>>It is not known where it was taken. Even though it was Kramnik’s toilet, it is not known when it was taken.
It is not known where it was taken, even though it was Kramnik’s toilet …
Every evidence presented to you will be false because you are biased to such an extent that you do not believe your senses.
>>Both parties (Topalov side and Kramnik side) inspected the toilets meticulously and found nothing like this.
The official protocol, signed by organisers and representatives of both parties mentions specifically this cable. Sorry, but you just told a lie.
>>If you remove views which are support the other side and do not remove views which support your side, then you are biased.
That is exactly the thing that you propose Susan should do – remove posts that support Topalov and do not remove posts that support Kramnik.
“That is exactly the thing that you propose Susan should do – remove posts that support Topalov and do not remove posts that support Kramnik.”
They do not support Topalov, they accuse and insult Kramnik.
“The official protocol, signed by organisers and representatives of both parties mentions specifically this cable. Sorry, but you just told a lie.”
I have not seen any document mentioning this “cable”.
Let’s assume that there was a cable. Can you tell me how Kramnik utilized this cable ? Where did he plug that cable ? Remember that there were metal detectors and both players were analyzed meticulously before each game and they were not allowed to leave the match venue during games.
You call me a liar. You are either plain stupid if you believe these unfounded “cable” accusations, or you have some other purpose (which I can not figure out) so that you will benefit from these accusations. I cannot see any benefit, therefore you should be plain stupid.
>> I have not seen any document mentioning this “cable”.
The fact that you have not seen it doesn’t mean that it does not exist.
Stating uninformed opinion to the public is a lie too.
>>You call me a liar. You are either plain stupid if you believe these unfounded “cable” accusations, or you have some other purpose
You continue to speak about “unfounded” accusation even after seeing the evidence. This makes you a proven, deliberate LIAR.
“You continue to speak about “unfounded” accusation even after seeing the evidence. This makes you a proven, deliberate LIAR.”
There is NO evidence. You show us some weird photograph from an obscure newspaper which we can not understand. I could have taken a similar one at my place. Try this at a court and see where the judge will send you.
“The fact that you have not seen it doesn’t mean that it does not exist.
Stating uninformed opinion to the public is a lie too.”
As long as someone proves that there is a document like this, it does not exist. Very simple rule : One is assumed to be innocent if there is no contrary evidence. Your weird photograph is NOT an evidence.
You are an absurd cry baby. Kramnik beat Topalov big time in rapid games where they did not leave the board.
trefor,
I meant considering the competition. womens chess is still growing. Womens tennis is definitely well penetrated and highly competitive. So consider the fact that kournikova has ranked higher in womens tennis and reached higher ranking in prestigeous tournaments than Judit.
Please dont use this as a criticism against judit. Her achievements speak for themselves. I am saying that kournikova should under no circumstances be called someone who didnt work just as hard or harder.
Anyway, dont wanna start a internet war. Have a nice day 🙂
– Vinay
If someone can read in Spanish please check http://www.amigosdelcavp.blogspot.com there we put our little “homenaje” to Polgar’s family.
Vinay,
Have a great day too.
I have just started a 10 hour shift at work! hope my online chess opponents move tonight!
Like you I am a big fan of Judit and was a big fan of Anna when she played(Although my all time favourite tennis player is the great Steffi Graf)
Hope to keep reading your valuable contributions to Susan’s tremendous blog
Trefor
“Please do not put words in my mouth by mentioning a specific player. What I referred to is at least 7 women that I know of have been mentioned as the Kournikova of chess and 2 of them are rated less than 2000. The Kournikova of chess term has been used frequently by the media and Judit does NOT want to be one of them. She just wants to be Judit Polgar.”
====
Good for her…
So this doesn’t refer to Kramnik’s countrywoman, Alexandra Kosteniuk? Good.
..for those less talented/ “rated less than 2000” nothing wrong with being photographed…really not sure what’s wrong with that…how many people earn a good living from pure chess? Haven’t seen a chess lass in Playboy recently so not sure what the pooh-poohing fuss is all about…
Still, good that people free to go their own way…sad it gets so negative if we don’t all follow the same path…
Chess is a nice pastime, but looking at some of Morozevich’s comments have to agree…chess commissar or no…it’s got lots of clever people involved, but they’re probably too clever?!
Good luck to everyone…whether following the ascetic/frowning/”no photos, please” path or the paparazzi??? path
chill…
>> There is NO evidence. You show us some weird photograph from an obscure newspaper which we can not understand. I could have taken a similar one at my place. Try this at a court and see where the judge will send you.
Now you wade very deeply in the legal bog. I have no doubt that you can produce a fake photo. You are just such kind of person to do this.
But this photo was published in the most central Bulgarian paper “Trud” by a journalist bound with an ethics oath and liable to a legal suit against him. To say that the newspaper is “obscure” is a pure lie (not surprising for you). It was published together with a photo of a protocol signed by officials which stated in Russian and English that this is a UTP-5 cable found in Kramnik’s bathroom on Oct 1, 2006. If you doubt this evidence, take the journalist to court. I don’t think you will do this, however. You are just content to tell lies to the public and order Susan what she must do and what she must not do.