CHENNAI: Peter Heine Nielsen may not be a well-known name for chess fans in the country. Strange, considering he played a significant role in maintaining Viswanathan Anand’s status as the king of chess in the noughties. These days, Nielsen is busy coaching another Mozart, Norwegian Magnus Carlsen.
Before those two once-in-a-lifetime opportunities came along, the Dane was wiping the floor in his home country, winning every title for a number of years. He is also one of the 119 players to have breached the 2700 Elo rating mark. In a first of a two-part interview with this daily, the 46-year-old, who is currently in quarantine with wife Viktorija Cmilyte in Lithuania, spoke about the evolution of modern chess, whether it differs from too much of a safety play and the importance of rapid and blitz formats Excerpts:
How much has chess changed in the last two decades?
A bit like the rest of society, but to a much larger extent. It may be because of computer development. Chess engines calculate billions of moves ahead, meaning we have ‘oracles’ to help us understand the game better and to help us prepare better. With Vishy, we had a three-month camp in 2012 (before the Worlds against Boris Gelfand in Moscow). Recently, AlphaZero (an AI programme) has brought neural networks to our attention, again enriching the understanding of chess. We live in interesting times, where the game evolves and players have to keep in touch to be inspired.
Do you get a sense that there is more emphasis on safety play, even among the elite?
This is a debate that’s coming back. I think even Capablanca (Jose Raul Capablanca, world champion in the 1920s) was accused of it. I think it reflects the fact that chess is followed ‘live’ these days. With spectators, there are always expectations. If you get all tournament results in a magazine, it will feel less disappointing, as you can skip the draws. But, no, statistically I do not think modern chess is ‘safer’ or ‘boring’.
Carlsen, after winning the 2018 Worlds, said more importance should be given to rapid and blitz formats (Carlsen and challenger Fabiano Caruana drew all 12 classical games, a first in the history of the Worlds, before the former triumphed 3-0 in a best of four rapid format). Do you agree?
Chess is ‘entertainment’ and we should give what the public likes. I think there should be a mix. What interests me is the understanding of chess and that development comes from the classical format. So that part I favour. But I do agree with my boss (Carlsen) in the sense that rapid and blitz is a great show and it should be broadcast more widely.
Chess has gained a lot of traction in Scandinavia following Carlsen’s ascent. How was the coverage when you were winning titles in Denmark?
We had (Bent) Larsen, a Dane who played board 1 ahead of (Bobby) Fischer in the Soviet Union vs the World 50 years ago (USSR took on Rest of the World in a first of its kind match-up in Belgrade in 1970). After him, there was a decline, but now there is Carlsen. When he had an exhibition match in Denmark last year, the media coverage was excellent. I will say that chess’ perception as a ‘nerdy game’ has changed. Magnus has also helped changed it because people see him as ‘cool’.
A bit about the future of chess. Do you see it reclaiming its place as the ultimate online sport, especially if there is an emergence of rapid and blitz formats?
I stopped making predictions like that, as they tend to look rather silly later. For example, I stated numerous times that chess is not suitable for television but look at Norway.
[Part 2 will feature Nielsen on coaching Carlsen, his journey with Anand and whether the Norwegian can still improve]