This was first published in my www.ChessCafe.com column in May 2003
My Top 10 Most Memorable Moments in Chess (Part 3)
I have experienced hundreds if not thousands of exciting, wonderful and memorable moments during my chess career, a career that has spanned almost 30 years. It was not easy, but I have narrowed these moments down to the top 10. This is a short preview of the book I am working on right now titled My Top 10 Most Memorable Moments in Chess. This is part of the new chess book series of the same name. I hope you enjoy it. David Letterman, the top 10 countdown is in your honor.
10. Meeting Bobby Fischer
9. Scoring 10-0 at the 1973 Budapest Championship for girls under 11 at the age of 4!
8. Winning 1981 World Junior Championship for girls under 16
7. Winning the gold medal at the 1990 Olympiad
6. Becoming the first woman ever to break the gender barrier, qualifying for the Men’s World Championship Zonal Tournament.
5. Becoming the #1 ranked woman player in the world at age 15
4. Winning the 1992 Women’s World Blitz and Rapid Championship
3. Winning the 1996 Women’s World Chess Championship
2. Winning the gold medal at the 1988 Olympiad
1. Becoming the first woman ever to break the gender barrier, earning the Grandmaster title
3. Winning the 1996 Women’s World Chess Championship
Winning the 1996 Women’s World Championship is one of the special highlights of my career. This title gave me the triple crown in chess (Rapid, Blitz and Conventional Time Control). It erased the bad memory of losing the candidate’s match to Ioseliani in 1993 by a coin toss even though I had never trailed at any point in the match. This victory quieted all the doubters who said the Polgar sisters could not play against women, only against men.
The final score was a lopsided 8½- 4½. It seemed to be an easy victory. But such was not the case. I won the match despite facing many personal problems that I have never talked about before. After two games, the score was 1½-½ for my formidable opponent. I opened the third game, for the first time in serious competition, with 1. e4!? This was a shock for my opponent. I obtained a slight advantage but since I was in time pressure already, I decided to offer a draw to my opponent and she accepted the offer. My main strategy was to conserve energy and to recuperate.
This is when things started to go wrong. I had a team that had been with me a long time: my mother, my sister Judit and my trainer GM Lev Psakhis. These are the people I trust and who have known me best in my career. My soon-to-be ex-husband decided to invite his parents from Israel to the match. I repeatedly objected but it did not help. I did not want to have any distractions, especially from the in-laws. He did not care and they arrived on February 1.
To make matters worst, upon arriving back from dinner following the third game, I received news that Mr. Rentero, the match organizer, had fined both my opponent and me $25,000 each for a quick draw in game 3. His decision was absolutely illegal and the tone of his letter was rude and obnoxious. It severely affected me both emotionally and psychologically. I am sure it also affected my opponent as well.
The Chinese delegation was ready to pack up and leave. Both sides were very upset and insulted. After consulting with my trainer, my sister Judit, and my parents, I decided to try to put aside the problem with Mr. Rentero and the in-law situation and played on. At the time, I felt that my decision was right. But there was no guarantee. Chess players react differently when dealing with crises. I felt I got stronger and more focused. I went on to score 4½ points in the next 5 games. The rest is history.
I am still hopeful that maybe one day in the future, the great Women’s World Champion Xie Jun of China and I will have a chance to play another match. Now that I live in and play for the United States, a match like this can only create more excitement and help popularize chess a lot more in both countries.
2. Winning the gold medal at the 1988 Olympiad
This was simply and incredible moment in my life as well as in the lives of my sisters. As a matter of fact, it was a big moment for Hungary. There were many meaningful storylines for the Polgar sisters at the 1988 Olympiad.
* This was the first time ever that a non-Soviet team had won the gold medal, ending its dominance of women’s chess.
* This was the first time that 3 sisters had played on the same gold medal winning team.
* We had a very young team with members of the team ranging from 12-19 years of age.
* We went from being the main controversy of the game because of our approach to chess to being loved, admired and adored by millions in Hungary and worldwide.
* This was the first time that the Polgar sisters had competed in the world stage against other women players.
* It also put to rest the ridiculous accusation that the Polgar sisters could not compete against other women players and somehow it is easier to play against men.
My sister Judit won an individual gold medal with the amazing score of 12½/13. She had missed a win against Levitina which would have given her a perfect 13/13 score.
I got an individual bronze on board 1 with the score of 10½/14. We also had strong contributions from my other sister Sophia Polgar and from Ildiko Madl.
We narrowly edged out the Soviet team by the score of 33 to 32½, outdistancing the Yugoslavian team that had finished with 28. Prior to coming to this Olympiad, very few people believed that we could win. After all, Soviet teams have dominated the Women’s Olympiad since its inception. Most people/experts, and even some of our coaches would have been happy with the silver medal.
The three sisters and our parents were the only one who believed we could win. We worked as a team. We cheered each other on. Even though the Soviet team was much stronger than we on paper, this clearly showed what teamwork and confidence could do for the underdog.
I truly hope that our 2004 US Women’s Olympiad Team can follow along the same path. Camaraderie and teamwork can sometimes make up for ELO points. Winning the team gold in 1988 is something I will treasure for the rest of my life. Now that my sisters and I are living on separate continents, we will probably never play on the same Olympiad team together again. But the great memories will live on forever.
1. Becoming the first woman ever to break the gender barrier, earning the Grandmaster title
When I was growing up, Vera Menchik, Lyudmila Rudenko, Yelizavyeta Bykova, Olga Rubtsova, Nona Gaprindashvili, and Maia Chiburdanidze were the names of Women’s World Champions. They were at the top of Women’s Chess in their respective eras. But none of them was able to earn the grandmaster title the traditional way with norm qualifications as their male counterparts had done. Both Gaprindashvili (2 GM norms) and Chiburdanidze (1 GM norm) had some wonderful results against men in their careers; they simply were not able to surpass that threshold.
Gaprindashvili and Chiburdanidze were awarded the grandmaster title for winning the Women’s World Championship although they had never actually fulfilled the qualifications to become grandmasters. I find it interesting that FIDE never went back and awarded the title to the previous four women’s world champions, Vera Menchik, Lyudmila Rudenko, Yelizavyeta Bykova, and Olga Rubtsova.
Most people did not believe that women could compete against men on the same level. Most people could not imagine that a woman could actually be good enough to “earn” the grandmaster title the same way as men do. Since I was brought up differently, it was very important for me to prove otherwise. I believe men and women can compete at the same level in any given tournament even though women’s professional chess careers are usually shorter due to many factors, as I have mentioned in earlier ChessCafe.com articles.
I earned my first grandmaster norm at Royan, France in June/July1988, finishing second in the tournament behind Victor Korchnoi. My second grandmaster norm came in June 1989 when I tied for first with GM J. Pinter at a tournament in Leon, Spain. My third and final grandmaster norm was at Pamplona, Spain between December 1990 to early January 1991 when I took third place behind GM Yudasin and Korchnoi.
Even though I had become the youngest women’s grandmaster in history at that time at the age of 12, my sight was set on the overall grandmaster title. I believe this accomplishment made a very big impact on women’s chess. Someone had finally broken through this gigantic gender barrier. About a year later, my sister Judit became the second woman to “earn” the Grandmaster title and became the world’s youngest grandmaster in history, breaking Bobby Fischer’s record. In 1992, my good friend Pia Cramling of Sweden became the third woman in history to do the same.
Now, it is no longer uncommon for a woman to become a grandmaster. The future generations of women’s players now know that it is possible to do so. I believe that this is one of the biggest accomplishments in women’s chess and therefore this is my number one most memorable moment in my professional chess career, to have become the first woman ever to “earn” the overall grandmaster title.
Zsuzsa Polgar – Jonathan Speelman
Brussels, 1985
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 c5 5. Bxb4 cxb4 6. g3 b6 7. Bg2 Bb7 8. 0–0 0–0 9. Nbd2 d6 10. Re1 Nbd7 11. Qb3 a5 12. e4 e5 13. Qd3 Re8 14. Nh4 Nf8 15. Nf5 g6 16. Ne3 Ne6 17. dxe5 Nc5 18. Qxd6 Nfd7 19. f4 Re6 20. Qd4 Nxe5 21. Qxd8+ Rxd8 22. Nd5 Ned3 23. Reb1 Na4 24. a3 b3 25. Nxb3 Ndxb2 26. Nd4 Ree8 27. e5 Kf8 28. Rc1 Nc5 29. Nb5 Nb3 30. Nd6 Rxd6 31. exd6 Bxd5 32. Bxd5 Nxa1 33. Rxa1 Rd8 34. Rb1 Na4 35. Bc6 Nc3 36. Rxb6 Rxd6 37. Rb8+ Kg7 38. Bf3 Rd3 39. Kg2 Rd2+ 40. Kf1 Na4 41. Rb5 Rc2 42. Rxa5 Rxc4 43. Ra7 Nc3 44. Kf2 Rd4 45. Ke3 Rd8 46. a4 Nd1+ 47. Ke2 Nc3+ 48. Kf1 Rd3 49. Bc6 Rd1+ 50. Kf2 Rd2+ 51. Ke3 Rd6 52. Rc7 Kh6 53. a5 f5 54. a6 Nd1+ 55. Ke2 Nc3+ 56. Kf2 1–0
Zsuzsa Polgar – Murray Chandler
Biel, 1987
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. Bf4 c5 4. e3 Qb6 5. Nc3 Na6 6. a3 Be7 7. Ne5 cxd4 8. exd4 Qd8 9. Bxa6 bxa6 10. Qf3 d5 11. Nc6 Qb6 12. Nxe7 Kxe7 13. 0–0–0 Qc6 14. Qg3 Rg8 15. Bg5 Bd7 16. Rhe1 h6 17. Bxf6+ gxf6 18. Qf3 Rac8 19. Nxd5+ Kf8 20. Ne3 Qxf3 21. gxf3 Rg5 22. h4 Rh5 23. Rh1 Bc6 24. Rh3 Ke7 25. f4 Be4 26. b3 Rb5 27. Kb2 a5 28. a4 Rb4 29. Rd2 Kf8 30. Rg3 h5 31. Ka3 Rc3 32. Kb2 Rc8 33. Rg1 Rc7 34. Re1 Rc8 35. Rc1 Rc7 36. Ka2 Rc3 37. Re1 Rc7 38. Ka3 Rc3 39. Rg1 Bh7 40. Kb2 Rc8 41. f5 Bxf5 42. Nxf5 exf5 43. Rg3 Rd8 44. c3 Rb7 45. Rf3 Rdb8 46. c4 Rb4 47. Kc2 Kg7 48. Rdd3 Kg6 49. Rg3+ Kh6 50. Rdf3 Rd8 51. d5 Re8 52. Rxf5 Re2+ 53. Kd3 Rb2 54. Rxf6+ Kh7 55. Rxf7+ Kh6 56. Rf6+ Kh7 57. Kd4 1–0
Stuart Conquest – Zsuzsa Polgar
London, 1989
1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 c5 4. d5 e6 5. Nc3 Nf6 6. e4 exd5 7. e5 Nfd7 8. Bg5 Be7 9. Bxe7 Qxe7 10. Nxd5 Qd8 11. Bxc4 (Today, 11. Qc2 is considered more accurate) 11…Nc6 12. 0–0 0–0 13. Re1 Nb6 14. Nxb6 axb6 15. h3 Qe7 16. Qc2 Be6 17. a3 h6 18. Rad1 Rfd8 19. Bxe6 Qxe6 20. Rd3 Rxd3 21. Qxd3 21…Rd8 22. Qe4 b5 23. Kh2 c4 24. Qh4 Re8 25. Nd4 Qd5 26. Nf3 b4 27. Re3 c3 28. bxc3 bxa3 29. Qa4 Qa5 30. Qxa5 Nxa5 31. Re4 b5 32. Re2 Nb3 33. Ra2 Ra8 34. Kg3 Nc1 35. Ra1 Ne2+ 36. Kh2 Nxc3 37. Nd4 b4 38. f4 a2 39. f5 Rd8 40. Nb3 Rd5 41. e6 fxe6 42. fxe6 Re5 43. Kg3 Rxe6 44. Kf3 Ra6 45. Ke3 Ra3 46. Nd2 b3 47. Nc4 Ra8 48. Nb2 Na4 0–1
Very impressive!
>>
But none of them was able to earn the grandmaster title the traditional way with norm qualifications as their male counterparts had done. Both Gaprindashvili (2 GM norms) and Chiburdanidze (1 GM norm) had some wonderful results against men in their careers; they simply were not able to surpass that threshold.
>>
I thought I heard years back (I may be completely off base on this), that Nona had virtually earned the title. That she had fulfilled the norms, but was a game or two short in total games played, so they gave it to her anyway. I was told that it was not unknown to do this, and that Edmar Mednis had gotten his title in a similiar way.
It wasn’t always done this way. I know for a fact that in the 50’s, all Frank Anderson had to do was just show up for his final game in an Olympiad to earn the GM title. Even if he lost the game, he’d still have had the norm. But he was taken ill, couldn’t play, missed qualifying by virtue of not having enough total games in his norms, and never became a GM. They probably loosened things up a bit after that, and got more forgiving about the 24 game requirement.
Not sure if this story is correct or not. There’s almost no information about Gaprindashvili’s norms online, and most sources say she got the title for being Women’s World Champion. That may be true, (though it may also be that her near miss is what motivated them to give her the title another way.)
In any case, there’s something about this that just doesn’t sit quite right. The whole question of who “earned” their GM titles and who didn’t seems a good topic to avoid. “1. Becoming the first woman ever to break the gender barrier, earning the Grandmaster title”. It makes it sound like Nona didn’t exist or didn’t earn it.
Of course if you read the accompanying explanation, it clarifies this by saying the first to earn it the “traditional” way through the norm system, which may be true. It’s just that the whole idea that some GM titles are better than others is somewhere that we probably shouldn’t go.
The Norm system is called the “traditional” way, and, by implication, the best way, but is it really? How did the World Champions get their titles? Botvinnik and Smyslov (as well as all the other original GM’s) simply had the title handed to them for prior career achievements. Petrosian and Fischer got theirs by qualifying for the Candidates. Not sure about Spassky. He got his either by qualifying for the Candidates or from becoming World Junior Champion (he did both of those things in the same year). Not sure about Karpov and Kasparov. Did they get theirs from being World Junior Champion, or other ways?
Tal was the oddest case. He got his by winning the Soviet Championship. Since when does that make one a GM, one might ask? It didn’t normally, but his Federation was so impressed with his victory that they petitioned for him to be named a GM on the spot. Folke Rogard agreed, but in the interest of East/West balance, gave the title to the US Champion, Bisguier, as well. Do we really want to argue now whether Tal earned his title, or whether his GM title was as good as Petrosian’s? Let’s not. Even Smyslov, who had the title “given” to him, really earned it, albeit not in as structured a way as Polgar earned hers. First woman to become a GM would be a great achievement. First woman to become a GM in a certain sort of way seems like less of one.
Not saying I wouldn’t include this achievement, but if I were making this list on Susan’s behalf, I would probably put it lower down on the list than the #1 spot. And I’d state very clearly in the list itself, rather than in the accompanying explanation. Cause the way it’s written now, it runs the risk of the superficial reader thinking and spreading the word that Susan claimed she was the first female GM, which she didn’t.
>>
But none of them was able to earn the grandmaster title the traditional way with norm qualifications as their male counterparts had done. Both Gaprindashvili (2 GM norms) and Chiburdanidze (1 GM norm) had some wonderful results against men in their careers; they simply were not able to surpass that threshold.
>>
I thought I heard years back (I may be completely off base on this), that Nona had virtually earned the title. That she had fulfilled the norms, but was a game or two short in total games played, so they gave it to her anyway. I was told that it was not unknown to do this, and that Edmar Mednis had gotten his title in a similiar way.
It wasn’t always done this way. I know for a fact that in the 50’s, all Frank Anderson had to do was just show up for his final game in an Olympiad to earn the GM title. Even if he lost the game, he’d still have had the norm. But he was taken ill, couldn’t play, missed qualifying by virtue of not having enough total games in his norms, and never became a GM. They probably loosened things up a bit after that, and got more forgiving about the 24 game requirement.
Not sure if this story is correct or not. There’s almost no information about Gaprindashvili’s norms online, and most sources say she got the title for being Women’s World Champion. That may be true, (though it may also be that her near miss is what motivated them to give her the title another way.)
In any case, there’s something about this that just doesn’t sit quite right. The whole question of who “earned” their GM titles and who didn’t seems a good topic to avoid. “1. Becoming the first woman ever to break the gender barrier, earning the Grandmaster title”. It makes it sound like Nona didn’t exist or didn’t earn it.
Of course if you read the accompanying explanation, it clarifies this by saying the first to earn it the “traditional” way through the norm system, which may be true. It’s just that the whole idea that some GM titles are better than others is somewhere that we probably shouldn’t go.
The Norm system is called the “traditional” way, and, by implication, the best way, but is it really? How did the World Champions get their titles? Botvinnik and Smyslov (as well as all the other original GM’s) simply had the title handed to them for prior career achievements. Petrosian and Fischer got theirs by qualifying for the Candidates. Not sure about Spassky. He got his either by qualifying for the Candidates or from becoming World Junior Champion (he did both of those things in the same year). Not sure about Karpov and Kasparov. Did they get theirs from being World Junior Champion, or other ways?
Tal was the oddest case. He got his by winning the Soviet Championship. Since when does that make one a GM, one might ask? It didn’t normally, but his Federation was so impressed with his victory that they petitioned for him to be named a GM on the spot. Folke Rogard agreed, but in the interest of East/West balance, gave the title to the US Champion, Bisguier, as well. Do we really want to argue now whether Tal earned his title, or whether his GM title was as good as Petrosian’s? Let’s not. Even Smyslov, who had the title “given” to him, really earned it, albeit not in as structured a way as Polgar earned hers. First woman to become a GM would be a great achievement. First woman to become a GM in a certain sort of way seems like less of one.
Not saying I wouldn’t include this achievement, but if I were making this list on Susan’s behalf, I would probably put it lower down on the list than the #1 spot. And I’d state very clearly in the list itself, rather than in the accompanying explanation. Cause the way it’s written now, it runs the risk of the superficial reader thinking and spreading the word that Susan claimed she was the first female GM, which she didn’t.
graeme,
You’re incorrect. Nona never got close to 2500 which is a requirement to be a GM. There are 2 women right now who have 3 norms but can’t get the title because they are not 2500, even within 10-15 points from 2500.
I have no problem if FIDE award all women’s world champions the GM title. They’re not. They didn’t even award to Vera Menchik.
Nona is great. But the GM title was a Soviet political move, just as they gave every female 100 points but Susan.
I also view this as the biggest accomplishment for women’s chess. Susan is right on in this matter.
graeme,
You’re incorrect. Nona never got close to 2500 which is a requirement to be a GM. There are 2 women right now who have 3 norms but can’t get the title because they are not 2500, even within 10-15 points from 2500.
>>
I have to claim ignorance there. I believe you’re right on the rating question. The highest rating I can find for Nona from that time is 2430.
But they didn’t always have the 2500 requirement (partially because for years they had no rating list at all). I don’t think they had it in the 70’s, but I couldn’t swear to that.
>>
I have no problem if FIDE award all women’s world champions the GM title. They’re not. They didn’t even award to Vera Menchik.
>>
She was dead in 1950. They didn’t give the title to Alekhine, Capablanca or Lasker either, for the same reason. They did give it to several living people who were long since retired, and would obviously never play again, like Bora Kostich and Akiba Rubinstein.
Not sure about the other early women’s world champions. I tried looking them up on chessmetrics, and found no information. For Menchik, they have a peak rating of 2535, and for Gaprindashvili 2614 (keeping in mind that chessmetrics ratings aren’t exactly the same as FIDE ones).
>>
Nona is great. But the GM title was a Soviet political move, just as they gave every female 100 points but Susan.
I also view this as the biggest accomplishment for women’s chess. Susan is right on in this matter.
>>
It depends what you mean. If you’re saying that Susan is a better player than Nona, I’d agree. If you’re saying that Nona wasn’t really good enough to be considered a GM, and her title was a piece of undeserved charity, I’d disagree. She competed successfully alongside men, in some ways more successfully than Menchik, winning a Hastings and a Lone Pine. She’s had and has quite an outstanding career. Not a Polgar maybe, but a GM? Sure.
graeme, GM Gaprindashvili is a legend and she has accomplished so much. But earning the GM title with a 2500 rating and 3 norms was not one of it. I know about this issue quite well.
When the title was awarded, 2500 rating was a requirement. Do you know why they gave it to Nona? Chibu was the rising star. She defeated Nona. Everyone thought she will be a GM. The Soviet and the Georgian until today do not view Chibu the same way as Nona. Nona was always their girl. So they decided to go “BACK” and award Nona the GM title. This took place when Chibu was the reigning champion so they can say Nona was the first to be GM. Then they had to do it for Chibu as well after. This was a Soviet political move.
The same happened when Zsuzsa was at 2490! They knew she would be the first to break 2500. So they decided to award every woman 100 points, making Chibu 2500+ and #1 on the list so a Hungarian can’t get this honor.
In spite of all the old Soviet tricks, they couldn’t stop Zsuzsa and Judit to become the first 2 to earn the GM titles with 3 norms and 2500 rating.
>>
Chess historian said…
graeme, GM Gaprindashvili is a legend and she has accomplished so much. But earning the GM title with a 2500 rating and 3 norms was not one of it. I know about this issue quite well.
>>
I’m sure you’re right, I just don’t know when 2500 became a requirement. Was it one in 1978?
I don’t think we’re disagreeing on the facts. One way or the other it seems clear that Nona didn’t earn it through the norm system. How close she came to doing that is a separate question.
The part I have trouble with is the implication that Nona’s title is a joke and she doesn’t really deserve it. I’m aware of the “100 rating point” issue that’s been mentioned, and I’d interpret that pretty much the same way you would; simply as a gift to Chiburdanidze to keep her from losing the #1 spot to Susan.
But Nona’s GM title doesn’t seem to be the same kind of thing. It wasn’t directed against anyone. A political move? Yes, perhaps, just as Tal and Bisguier’s titles were. But I doubt it was unpopular even outside the Soviet Union to have a woman GM.
I mean look at it this way. Here’s Nona, who had won 5 Women’s Championship matches, won a Hastings, won a Lone Pine. Looks like somebody who would amost surely be a GM if there had been more norm opportunitities available to women in those days. Given that GM titles were sometimes handed out on the basis of great achievements, and that even world champions like Botvinnik, Smyslov and Tal got their titles this way, who but a real chauvinist would turn around and say that no woman could ever get a title this same way. That men could get the title through career achievement, but women had to stick to every jot and tittle of the norm system with absolutely no leeway being shown. That’s not fair.
Again, I’m not comparing Susan and Nona. I’m quite willing to admit that Susan is a greater overall player than Nona is. I’m just saying I think Nona’s GM title is fair, earned, and every bit as legit as Bisguier’s is.
Nona Gaprindashvili is a chess legend. She has done a lot for chess, especially for the Soviet Union at that time and Georgia today. I am not taking any credit away from her. I have always listed her as one of the greatest.
However, earning the GM title the traditional way was something that no woman has ever done before. When I talked about this title as a young girl, people used to laugh at me and telling me that I was crazy.
Many people at that time doubted that a woman could achieve the Grandmaster title. This clearly made an incredible impact for women’s chess. Even after I have done it, very few women have repeated since.
3 norms and 2500:
– SP
– Judit
– Pia Cramling
– Stefanova
– Zhu Chen
– Humpy Koneru
WC:
– Nona Gaprindashvili
– Maia Chiburdanidze
– Xie Jun
Other method:
– Kosteniuk and Peng
The latest one is the Vietnamese / Hungarian Hoang but I am not sure how she got her title as her rating is under 2500.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
All that is true – but the word ‘earn’ is not a good choice.
I like the word “awarded” for Nona and Maia and “earned” for Susan, Judit, Antoaneta, Zhu and Humpy.
It’s strange to put Kosteniuk in the “other method/didn’t *earn* it” category. Her subsequent results (after the European championship win) have garned three norms and she has consistently maintained a 2500+ rating.
Does getting a title through winning a European/World championship mean you permanently didn’t earn it? By now, she would have it anyway. That’s punishing someone for a good result.
Therefore, it’s meaningless to attempt to differentiate between how people achieve their title. As long as they didn’t put $100 under the table, they EARNED it for sure.
Clearly, Susan has accomplished a lot. But nitpicking colleagues’ careers comes across as demeaning their achievements instead of highlighting one’s own. Unintentionally, I’m sure.
Plus, it confuses journalists – I’ve seen a lot of articles where they simply stated that Susan is the “first female grandmaster in the history of chess”. Nona and Maya deserve better.
A less confusing and classier list would be:
Women who have achieved the GM title
Nona Gaprindashvili
Maia Chiburdanidze
Susan Polgar
Judit Polgar
Pia Cramling
Xie Jun
Zhu Chen
Humpy Koneru
Antoaneta Stefanova
Alexandra Kosteniuk
Peng Zhaoqin
Bull! So are you telling me that Kasimdzhanov and Ponomariov should be listed alongside with Kasparov, Karpov and Fischer since they are all World Champions? What a bunch of bull. Even until now, Kosteniuk still didn’t have 3 norms. What a bunch of crock!
I also agree. Susan correctly listed 3 ways how 12 women got their GM titles:
6 with 3 norms and 2500
3 with WWC titles
2 with European Championship titles
1 unclear
If you want to lump them together then lump all World Champions including Khalifman, Anand, Ponomariov, Kasimdzhanov and Topalov with all the other World Champions.
DS
I’m sad to see people attacking Susan’s accomplishment. Rules are rules and the rules for everyone are 3 norms (24 games) and 2500 rating to get the GM title.
She’s the first to get it. End of story. What can Susan do about FIDE giving other women 100 free points? She earned this honor in spite of the corrupt FIDE politics. That makes her accomplishments bigger in my eyes.
Just my 2 cents.
>>
Many people at that time doubted that a woman could achieve the Grandmaster title. This clearly made an incredible impact for women’s chess. Even after I have done it, very few women have repeated since.
>>
I may not be sensitive enough to this issue. To me it seems clear that chess is a profession, and an essential ingredient in rising to the top is the time put into it. Even Fischer, with all his talent, wouldn’t have been Fischer if he hadn’t worked night and day at the game for years. To me, the lack of women at the top level seems completely explainable by the lack of women unwilling or unable to devote that kind of time. I see no mystery there.
I don’t have any problem with Nona getting the title, because I can see a man in the same position having gotten it. On the other hand, the way she got it is less mathematical and more subjective. I do think Nona “earned” the title, but perhaps not in a way that would be as effective in silencing the doubters as the way you did.
One could almost say that you enhanced the credibility of Nona’s title, rather than took away from it. If there were doubters out there who thought that a woman couldn’t meet a strict mathematical requirement, without being helped by a (possibly biased) subjective judgment, then you proved them wrong. If it wasn’t biologically impossible for you, then it wasn’t for her either. Your proving of this fact may help make the judgment call used in her case seem more reasonable to some people.
>>
If you want to lump them together then lump all World Champions including Khalifman, Anand, Ponomariov, Kasimdzhanov and Topalov with all the other World Champions.
DS
>>
I don’t think it’s the same situation. FIDE doesn’t distinguish between one GM and another. But they DID distinguish between the two separate world titles (mainly by trying to ignore one completely). And yet you say that treating GM’s the way FIDE does somehow obligates us to treat world champions opposite to the FIDE does. That doesn’t seem to follow.
>>
Seattle Rain said…
I’m sad to see people attacking Susan’s accomplishment. Rules are rules and the rules for everyone are 3 norms (24 games) and 2500 rating to get the GM title.
She’s the first to get it. End of story.
>>
I’m sad to see people reacting emotionally rather than thinking things through. Nobody’s attacking her, the norm system isn’t the only way for everybody, she wasn’t the first to get it, and doesn’t even claim to be. You’ve misunderstood the whole thing!
What she claims is that she was the first to earn the GM title in a specific sort of way. Not a more legitimate way, necessarily, I think most reasonable people would agree that Nona earned her title. But Susan’s method of earning it was more effective in silencing unreasonable people.
Her way was historic because of the way it silenced chauvinists. If you’re not a chauvinist yourself, there’s no real need to differentiate between the various methods of becoming a GM, unless you want to try to argue that Tal didn’t earn his title, or that he was less of a GM than Tarjan, or other such absurdities.
It makes me sad that you’d see support for Gaprindashvili and Menchik as an attack on Susan. Judging by her reply, she doesn’t seem to see it that way herself. Neither should you.
Small correction:
… become the youngest women’s grandmaster in history at that time at the age of 12 …
Shouldn’t 12 be 22?
No, I think she became a WGM at 12 and a GM at 22. It should probably be capitalized though, in order to differentiate “Women’s Grandmaster” from “woman Grandmaster”, which are two entirely different things. Clarity is the real issue here, if we want the press to take more notice of chess.
Just for the record, there is a comment given by DS, That is not me.
Don Schultz
Okay, I’ve done a little digging through my magazine collection, and found a pertinent piece that clears up the Nona situation a bit.
From Chess Life & Review, January 1979, page 15, Pal Benko writes:
>>
…Of course [Nona] had earned the “woman grandmaster” title awarded by the International Chess Federation (FIDE), as have some two dozen other women. But she also earned the (men’s) international master title, becoming the first woman ever to have done so (Vera Menchik was probably strong enough to have earned this title, but she died in 1943 [sic], long before the modern title system was adopted), and in Buenos Aires in November 1978 FIDE bestowed upon Nona Gaprindashvili the (men’s) international grandmaster title. Not only is she the only woman ever to have received this title, she is the only woman ever to have deserved it.
It is regrettable, therefore, that she did not actually earn the title in the regular way: FIDE requires that to earn the grandmaster title a player must achieve certain minimum scores in tournaments consisting of at least twenty-four games in aggregate (the description is highly oversimplified, but you get the idea), and Nona was two or three games short. Yet the FIDE Qualifications Commission voted to give her the title. In my opinion, this historic occasion should not have been allowed to carry even this slight tarnish.
>>
Here’s what I draw from this:
1) The idea that she got the GM title just for being Women’s Champ is not correct.
2) The story I’d heard was essentially correct. She basically had the norms, but was a game or two short, and they said “well, that’s close enough.”
3) FIDE’s history in dealing with such things was ambiguous. They did not make this same allowance for Frank Anderson, but they did sometimes make it for other men, such as Mednis.
4) The decision was not without controversy even then. Benko, who clearly has no axe to grind with Nona, was not entirely happy with the situation.
5) Nevertheless, to deny the strongest woman in history an allowance that had been given to other male players, would have looked bad for FIDE, and made it seem that they were holding the women to a higher standard. While seeing Benko’s point, I think they were right to give her the title.
4) No mention of the 2500 Elo requirement. I still believe that it didn’t exist in 1978.
5) To say “Okay, she’s a grandmaster, but she’s not a real grandmaster” is absurd and outrageously catty. Susan hasn’t said that, but some other bloggers have.
6) Nona was the first female GM. She earned her title. Although some discretion was used, the title was not a gift.
7) None of this is to take any historical significance away from what Susan did, by earning the title with no discretion being given whatsoever, and silencing anyone who said that a woman couldn’t do it without help.
Let’s not insult Maia or Nona. They are both legends and they have done a lot for chess in their country. I would also put Xie Jun in the same category as to making big impact for her country.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
for goodness sake! what is so hard to understand? susan put this achievement as her nr. 1 for a reason.
– it showed EVERYONE that a woman could do it. no cutting corners, no room for doubts or speculations (what if…). she did what many had thought impossible. it opened eyes for many female players who were always told it cant be done. she earned her norms, her rating was up, no games short, nothing. nobody can say “well, but…”. no more patronizing for female players. at a tournament one would not lose to a “woman” but to a GM. i think a lot of men used that after a lost game to susan 🙂
I’m afraid I go with graeme on ‘Achievement 1’ here, whatever the details of how these admiral ladies got their unqualified GM title.
SP’s wording lead me to believe that she was the first lady to be awarded the unqualfied GM title: not so – and, given her clean apolitical stance, she shouldn’t be at risk of being seen to claim that.
SP’s wording implies that she was the first woman to ‘break the gender barrier’: not so. There have been lots of gender barriers in lots of areas: women were not allowed to be in the Home Guard in Britain in the 2nd world war – fortunately seen at the time as impractical by the field troops.
SP perhaps is claiming to be the first to earn the [unqualified] GM title. Not so, Nona and Maia earned the title via the commendation of their peers. They earned their titles a different way to SP, but that’s not their fault or to their demerit. They seem to be being penalised by the words of SP for the fact that the ‘male side’ of the chess world wished to applaud the ‘female side’ – an ironic outcome considering Susan ‘pro gal’ stance.
So, let the wording be clearer. unambiguous and less misleading.
[Assuming this is the case], “SP was the first woman to qualify as a GM via the 2500/3-norms route”: an admirable enough achievement.