Torre: "Chess at that time was a mystery"

by Sagar Shah
7/16/2018 – An interview with a living legend! IM SAGAR SHAH spoke with GM Eugenio Torre who reminisces about the years of his prime, talks about his struggles and reasons his failures. He also talks about the advents of Vishy Anand and Wesley So, his love for Chess960 and suggests an interesting scoring system to reduce the rampant draws in top level chess. | Photo: David Llada

Komodo 12 Komodo 12

In computer chess there is no getting past Komodo, a two-time ICGA Computer World Chess Champion. Find out how Komodo can take your game to the next level!

More...

Interview with Eugenio Torre

Eugenio Torre is best known for being the first grandmaster from Asia. In his prime, he achieved marvellous feats that included beating the then World Champ Anatoly Karpov, being a world championship candidate himself and seconding Bobby Fischer in his 1992 match against Boris Spassky.

IM Sagar Shah interviews GM Eugene Torre in Manila | Photo: Amruta Mokal

SS: How did you start playing chess?

ET: I came from a chess playing family. I was the seventh of my ten siblings. It so happened that my elder brothers were good players. So I got my practice from them. My parents, especially my father was very supportive and he wanted us to be involved in chess rather than other things. (laughs)

SS: But Philippines had no chess culture back then. How did your father choose the game of chess for you?

ET: I think it helped a lot that at that time the late Florencio Campomanes was very active. But as you rightly pointed out there was no culture or support, not only in the Philippines but also in Asia. Even at the world level, there was very little awareness about chess. It was important that we, in the Philippines, had someone like Florencio who not only spread chess but knew how to bring in sponsors to the game. (laughs)

Torre with Campomanes

Torre hands FIDE Honorary President Florencio Campomanes a slice of cake on his 77th birthday, February 22nd 2004, flanked by Joey Antonio and Bong Villamayor and FIDE Rating Administrator Casto Abundo | Photo: FIDE

SS: Who was your first trainer?

ET: It’s not a part of our chess system in the Philippines to have a trainer. Unlike the Soviet Union or Eastern European countries, we had no trainers in general.

SS: How does one get better at chess without a trainer?

ET: Books! My father loved reading chess books. He bought a lot of them. I tried to upgrade my level of chess with the help of these books.

SS: Was it not very difficult to get chess books back then?

ET: Yes, it was very difficult. We must thank Informator which was the main source for checking latest and annotated games. Like we have the computers now, back then it was the Informator. I studied the openings from the modern chess openings. We were on our own. As compared to the current generation you can say that our prep was lacking. But on the other hand, there was an abundance of mystery in chess. There was a lot that remained to be discovered. It was wonderful that chess at that time was a mystery… like a woman, you know. It was intriguing! (smiles)

Torre was in his element as he opened up in the interview | Photo: Amruta Mokal

SS: When you play now what do you feel? All worked out or is there still the mystery element?

ET:  It's becoming difficult. The mystery is reducing each day! That's why I was very glad when Bobby Fischer suggested Chess 960 or Fischer Random Chess and tried to promote it. I think eventually we have to welcome this development if we want to have creativity from the very first moves. I know this will happen in the future. I just don't know when. I hope I will be around to see it. FIDE should welcome Chess 960 and give an option to organisers whether they want to hold a Chess 960 tournament or not.

One way to promote Chess 960 would be to have its own rating. It's like having a rapid and blitz rating which was a very good move by FIDE. Now we have three kinds of ratings and organisers have the option to choose which format of the tournaments they would like to hold. Including chess 960 would increase the options further. This will boost the popularity of chess and is the need of the hour especially because we are relying too much on computers.

SS: So you think Chess 960 is the future of chess?

ET: Chess 960 along with standard chess is the future of chess. Classical chess has been with us for hundreds of years. We have an emotional attachment to classical chess and organisers will hold standard events. But we have to get ready for the future also and one way is by supporting Chess 960.

Change has been seen in other sports also. So, why not in chess?  You know, in Basketball, they did not have three-point shots before. But now, if you score from a bit farther, you can score three points. Also, the dribbling rules were changed for the betterment of the sport. So we have to go with the demand of the modern time and embrace Chess 960.  

Also, I have always suggested changing the points system in tournaments. These days you see a lot of organisers exasperated due to the high number of draws. Stalemate, for example, can be changed to a minor victory or defeat. So let’s say we assign four points for a win, two for a draw and zero for a loss. In case of a stalemate, the side that cannot move will be awarded one point while the stronger side will be awarded three. So, if a player ends up stalemating his opponent in a king and pawn endgame, he still gets three points, which is better than a draw. With this scoring system, many games will be played till the end. Many players will push for a stalemate; many would try to avoid it. And in amid this cat and mouse, maybe the game would be decided. This would make the game more exciting. I think it’s time to bring about some changes.

I also understand that people are too attached to the traditional chess but this change in the scoring system wouldn’t change much in terms of the game itself. Some have argued saying there are many beautiful combinations that lead to stalemate and that it would be a pity if a draw isn’t awarded for such a stalemate. To answer this, well, it’s not that the side that finds the stalemating combination has no incentive; you do get one point. What do you prefer, 0 or 1?

And this also reflects life in a better manner. A minor loss only gets the king imprisoned while in case of a checkmate, the king is executed.

Torre portrait

Torre in 2018 | Photo: David Llada

SS: Do you think that the game of chess will be fully solved?

ET: Oh no. If we start making changes, it won’t be solved anytime soon.

SS: But what if we don’t make changes? Do you think the game will be solved then?

ET: No, because humans have limitations when it comes to memory. Also, at the top level, this isn’t something that is encouraged. It’s still necessary to rely on principles and the logic of the game. The proper implementation of these principles is what makes a player strong. Today’s top players are forced to use computer assistance and memorise because they would risk being outprepared. This is because computers have penetrated deep into traditional chess. Therefore, to sidestep all of this, Chess 960 is a necessary change. Also, once computer assistance and theory is out of the picture, chess professionals and their seconds could have more sleep and relax. Preparation, then, would be limited to studying the style of a player, not tons and tons of opening theory. This will also allow players to be creative in the opening phase.

SS: Who was your favourite player in your formative years? 

ET: The name of Bobby Fischer comes to mind right away. At that time, the Russians dominated world chess. And Bobby demolished them on his own. He did not get much support from the US chess federation or the US government. Even from the private sector, he had little support. Perhaps, a part of the reason was that Bobby was tough to deal with.

Torre at Fischer's grave in Iceland | Photo: Lennart Ootes 

SS: But I think you were a good friend of his and you even helped him in his 1992 match against Spassky. Could you tell us something about this episode?

ET: Well, I was surprised when I received this call from FIDE. They asked me if I would like to be the second of Bobby Fischer. What kind of a question is that! (laughs)

I revered Bobby. To be a part of his life, therefore, was like a dream. So I asked them if they were joking. It was a very pleasant and a very rewarding surprise. I accepted the offer immediately.

I think, whatever humble contribution I made as a part of his team was as a friend, as someone he could talk to. More than coming up with chess ideas for him, my job was to help him be motivated. When he was down or after he had lost, I would say to him “It’s OK, Bobby. Father time is a great hero” and he would answer with a “yeah”.

SS: But do you think that in ‘92 when he played against Spassky, he was at par with the top players of that time like Karpov or Kasparov?

ET: It’s a very difficult question to answer. And I think it’s unfair to judge Bobby like that. I could say, though, that even at his age in 1992, he played tremendous chess — very high standard — especially in the first game. Had he played more chess after that, who knows what might have happened! The younger champions definitely have an advantage because of age but Bobby had a great will to win and very strong nerves. So, you never know! But definitely, Bobby was one of the greatest — if not the greatest — champions of the world.

 

Torre 2018

Torre in Platja d'Aro, 2018 | Photo: David Llada

SS: What is your academic background? Had you taken up academics at the time?

ET: Yeah I studied to become an engineer but by the time I reached college, because of chess, I took up commerce. It was so difficult to combine chess and engineering, I took up commerce and decided to do a major in Banking and Finance. But during my third year, I had to decide between completing my degree and playing in Europe to complete the requirements for my Grandmaster title. For that, I had to forgo college. I still had a little over a year to graduate, but I decided to pursue chess. Back then, it was very expensive to play in Europe. It’s the same even now but especially then. So, we decided that after the Olympiad, I will stay in Europe to campaign for my Grandmaster title, making Madrid my base.

Until now, I am still an undergraduate. I did not complete my degree in Banking and Finance due to the demands of professional chess. Especially at the time, I got many invitations as I was the Asian Champion for several years. The European organisers also liked to have someone from Asia and add some colour to the tournament.

SS: You were the first Asian to become a Grandmaster in 1974. How was the feeling? 

ET: Great! I was very proud as a Filipino and an Asian that finally there was a Grandmaster in Asia. I really believed that chess is for all. It was disappointing to see that the level of chess in Asia was not that high. Of course, it was obvious to me that there were several limitations like lack of tournaments and travelling to Europe was both difficult and expensive. That’s why I decided to campaign for the Grandmaster title in Europe for an entire year. This was my dream as well as my mission. But after that one year, I did not get a single norm! I came very close at one point but I missed it. And finally, when I got back to the Philippines, they saw that I had the chance of getting this title. So, I got additional support and got back to Spain.

I think it was in Malaga that I scored my first GM norm. It was not easy; I had to win all of my last five games to secure it. It wasn’t easy to foresee that I would be able to make it but I decided to take it one game at a time. So after I won my first two games, I played against a local player and won rather easily. By this point, I had gained some confidence. I won the fourth game as well but the final game got dramatic. It was very long. It was a tough game, my opponent was defending hard. I think even the award ceremony was delayed. Our game was adjourned and then we had to play again in the morning. At the time, there were adjournments. But eventually, I got it.

And then, I completed the title in the 1974 Chess Olympiad in Nice, France. I had a good result there. Even I was surprised by my result on board 1. It also helped the Filipino team qualify in Group A. At the time, we had these preliminary tournaments in Olympiads. 

SS: During that same period, Vishy Anand was in Manila. Do you have any memories or recollections of him as a player?

ET: No, I didn’t know him. But I had heard that there was this boy from India who was solving chess puzzles on TV. My brother, who organised some tournaments for the TV at that time, told me that he had participated in one of their tournaments. But I had not seen him at the TV station. He was only solving those puzzles over the phone. But his chess achievements, here in the Philippines, have been memorable. It was here that he won the World Juniors in Baguio.

SS: And he was also, I think, the second GM after you in Asia.

ET: Maybe not. I think Balinas [GM Rosendo Balinas Jr] became a Grandmaster in 1976. So, I think he was the third GM from Asia.

SS: Tell us about your rivalry with Karpov. You were a young Grandmaster when you defeated him in Manila. Back in the day, he was very strong and would almost never lose. Can you tell us about your mindset during your game against him? 

ET: There is no rivalry as such. He was really dominating the chess world at the time. He would rarely lose a game. In fact, he would just win tournaments, one after another. Just to play a game against Karpov back then was a great challenge and a great opportunity. 


If you have a ChessBase Premium account you can see Torre's analysis of this amazing game with Karpov for free


SS: Were you nervous before the game? 

ET: Oh yes, of course. But I was nervous in a positive way — I was feeling just enough nervousness.

SS: After you beat him, you were one of the best players in the world. I think your world rank was 19.

ET: Something like that — 17th, 18th or 19th. At that time, my rating was 2580 and it was enough to be in the world’s top 20, unlike now. So yeah, that was my best achievement as a chess player.

SS: But could you tell us why you were not able to take the next leap and win or at least contend for the world title?

ET: Well, I had my chances to qualify for title contention at the Candidates of 1983 against Zoltan Ribli. But I had this problem of looking for the perfect move during the game; I was unable to play pragmatically. I think one of the reasons I lost to Ribli was my bad time management. During the match, I was not able to address this problem. Had I been successful against Ribli, who knows!

Also, I have noticed in me that I am a player who plays extremely well when inspired but I can play badly when dejected. So, I’m kind of erratic as a performer. Take for example my recent tournament in Baku where I played scintillating chess. But then in Vietnam, I played poorly.

That’s not the case, however, with Wesley So. He is very consistent. 

SS: I was just about to come to that. What’s your take on Wesley So? How do you think he developed into such a phenomenal talent?

ET: Since a young age, I remember, he knew how to prepare. Even while playing in the Under-10 category, he knew how to prepare using computers. This was quite unusual for a boy so young. He started early and learned on his own. And somehow he appreciated what a chess program could offer, even back then.

And also, I have noticed that Wesley has this ability to save losing positions. I have seen several of his games where he was in danger of losing but managed to draw or even won. That’s why he now has this long streak of undefeated games.

SS: Assuming that Wesley would have stayed back in the Philippines, do you think Wesley would have been able to reach the world’s elite?

ET: No, I don’t think it would have been the same. The chess atmosphere in America is different. He would not have been able to achieve the same success in the Philippines as he has by moving to the United States. There are so many reasons, you know. Funding is one of the main things. He has been the beneficiary of a lot of support by the foundation. The family that he is with now is nice. He is comfortable with his life.

Also, the level of competition in the United States is very high. There are players like Caruana and Nakamura. With all of this, he has had incredible results recently, he has almost everything. This kind of success is a dream for any player.

SS: You played phenomenally in Baku. Do you still train yourself or how did you manage to play at such a high level?

ET: It’s in the system, you know. We now have to check the computers all the time and fulfil the demands of modern chess. It’s, perhaps, easier for the younger players but for us, it’s difficult for us to adapt. But we don’t really have much of a choice here. We will be at a huge disadvantage if we don’t go with the trend. So yes, I do a little practice here and there, sometimes over the internet. Then I check the variations I intend to play with the computers, with Stockfish or the Komodo. This is very different from what we did in our time.

During my time, I remember, I had to take notes, look at the position, analyse on my own and decide for myself whether or not something was good. Now I just have to press ‘save’ on all the options after letting the computer run for some time.

That’s why I am looking forward to the time when Chess 960 will be embraced by FIDE. If that happens, I will play most of my tournaments in that format.

SS: And do you work on your physical fitness?

ET: Yes, that’s very important. As you get older, being fit becomes even more important — both physically and mentally.

SS: So what do you do to remain fit?

ET: I just go to the gym for some light workouts. I also like to go on walks and I like to sing while walking! That way, I practice my mental faculties while exercising at the same time. The bonus of singing is that I am able to memorise songs. I can even sing a song for you!

SS: Really! Can you do that?

ET: No. (laughs)

SS: What are your future plans right now and what do you do when you’re not playing?

ET: Apart from chess, I was invited by a friend to try my hand at construction. But my presence there is very minimal. That’s it outside of chess.

I spend most of my time on chess. I am very selective with my tournaments now. I would like to focus on helping our young players in their preparations. I have also been designated as the head coach of chess, here in the Philippines. That is where I focus the most currently. I hope I could impart the knowledge and experience that I have gained during my prime in the players, especially the young ones, I teach.  

SS: Any message you would like to give to young players?

ET: The message I always like to give, not only to young players but everyone is that we should use chess to become successful in life. We try to find the best moves in chess; we should try to do the same in life. The same applies to time management and setting priorities.

We have to accept that of all players who take up chess, only a few will go on to pursue chess professionally when they reach their twenties or thirties. For the rest who drift away to careers outside of chess, the game could be used as a tool to become successful.

SS: Thank you so much, Mr Torre. It was a great pleasure chatting with you.

The interviewer Sagar Shah, the interviewee Eugenio Torre, the man who made the interview possible Eliseo Tumbaga and the famous author and writer Jacob Aagaard. This interview was done in 2017 when Aagaard visited Manila for a book tour of Thinking Inside the box and Sagar was his tour manager. | Photo: Amruta Mokal

Special thanks to Aditya Pai for transcribing this interview.


 


Links

 




Sagar is an International Master from India with two GM norms. He is also a chartered accountant and would like to become the first CA+GM of India. He loves to cover chess tournaments, as that helps him understand and improve at the game he loves so much. He is the co-founder of the ChessBase India website.
Discussion and Feedback Join the public discussion or submit your feedback to the editors


Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

amarpan amarpan 7/29/2018 02:18
Niaz Murshed of Bangladesh In 1987 became the first South Asian to earn the Grandmaster title.
fgkdjlkag fgkdjlkag 7/24/2018 11:38
@starkidaway, that's the point, force the game to be played to the end instead of it being a draw.
starkidaway starkidaway 7/24/2018 05:24
@fgkdjlkag: It's very rare to get a win on a game where a king + pawn vs king is played out do to the opposition. Hence, in this system that is being proposed,players will try to reach such position when they can't get a win. Imagine a player is a pawn up in a drawish position and such player will try to force exchanges as fast as he could. The player with a pawn down would try to avoid exchanges and perhaps reach a worse position. It would end up being a cat and mouse game with one sole strategy.
fgkdjlkag fgkdjlkag 7/20/2018 08:29
Great interview! Like the part "I can even sing a song for you." 'Can you'? "No."

@genem and @peterfrost - selecting 1 position from chess960 to be used for a year completely defeats the purpose of chess960 because it allows for extensive opening preparation and memorization. GM Torre repeatedly mentions in the above interview that the idea is to allow creativity and not computer preparation.

Selecting a "sensible setup", positions in which bishops do not start in the corner, or positions "which at least look somewhat like the classical starting position"? Some difficulty getting away from the position you memorized and feel comfortable with, is it? Not ready to use your creativity from move 1?

@starkidaway - king + pawn vs. king results in 4 points for a victory, 3 points if it is a stalemate. Obviously checkmate is better than stalemating the opponent, so I am not sure what you are getting at? Players today aim to get to king + pawn vs. king so that they can get the full point, it's not any different to the proposal.
starkidaway starkidaway 7/19/2018 08:07
Why get one point for for being stalemated when you get two points for a draw? And the person that gives the stalemate gets 3 points! That means that a lot players would try to reach a position of a king + pawn vs king to get three points!

The system is flawed. Chess960 has a better potential.
Pieces in Motion Pieces in Motion 7/18/2018 06:39
Nice interview. Although I disagree on his opinions on how to "improve" the game, his other comments are on the mark. A man who made history and he certainly set the stage for Wesley So.
AlimuzzamanM AlimuzzamanM 7/18/2018 04:06
Excellent article!

However, Vishy was probably the fifth Grandmaster from Asia.

First: Eugenio Torre (Philippines, 1974), Second: Rosendo Carrean Balinas Jr. (Philippines, 1976), Third: Suradiradja (Indonesia, 1978), Fourth: Niaz Murshed (Bangladesh, 1987) and then Fifth: Vishy Anand (India, 1988).
Saldy Lopez Saldy Lopez 7/18/2018 04:36
I think the third Asia's GM was Herman Suradiradja of Indonesia although he acquired his title under "mysterious circumstances". But yes, the advent of Viswanathan Anand was indeed a sensation at that time.
Aighearach Aighearach 7/18/2018 02:07
OTOH, if you visit a local tournament you may find that chess is still largely a mystery to most people still! Myself included.
KevinC KevinC 7/17/2018 02:30
Excellent article. I especially like a few answers like what did he use to get better: "Books". That hits home for me. I stopped at about 2300 (a great pastime, but not the life for me), but that was all I had to use coming up starting in 1979. There was no Chessbase, no engines, and no online clubs. You were really lucky if a 2200 showed up at the local club. I also liked the "mystery" comment because I still recall reading chess magazines, and back then GMs were the gods of chess, and their analysis was definitely mystical to me.

I did find the question about Fischer's strength in 1992 to be silly. Anyone, who has ever gone over those games knows that he had lost A LOT of strength over the years, and was no longer in Kasparov's and Karpov's class. Torre's answer was right on though. If Fischer had started to play more, who knows what he would have achieved.
FiddleSticksNZ FiddleSticksNZ 7/17/2018 02:01
FIDE needs to embrace 960 to keep the game popular across all ages. I’ve stopped playing OTB tournaments in recent years as I dislike the arms race that opening theory has evolved to, also the need to constantly check lines with computers and investing long hours and sleepless nights worrying about what if my opponent plays this line or that line. Would rather have a nice sleep knowing neither me or more importantly my opponent can’t prepare for me. The new scoring system sounds like it could work and can’t really fault it. The only bad thing is that some opening lines go so deep that drawn endgames are reached that make use of the stalemate rule so you would have to re-evaluate those lines if you want more than 1 point. It would make tournaments more interesting to follow.
eric b eric b 7/17/2018 06:54
He sounds like a very nice man. Also, I love those black and white photos of him, especially his expression in the one at the top of the article.
peterfrost peterfrost 7/17/2018 06:47
Lovely interview. Very wise comments about how computers have taken the "mystery" out of the game. What a difference to go into a top level game with "your own judgement" as to the assessment of a position arising out of an opening, as opposed to "knowing" that it's +0.37 in White's favour. Chess was better back then for this element of "mystery".
As one of those "attached" to classical chess, it is with a heavy heart and real reluctance that I concede GM Torre may be right about the need to move to Fischer Random. However, I don't think we need 960 positions, most of which distort opening play as we know it too much, to achieve the goal of minimising the impact of theory. Twenty or thirty possible starting positions which at least look somewhat like the classical starting position would surely suffice to deal with the problem. Or alternatively, as @genem suggests, selecting just one position, which is used for, say, one year, and then switch to another to (hopefully) keep ahead of the theory hounds.
I would like GM Torre to know that the Informators he relied upon so heavily in his playing days at the elite level still play a role in preserving his legacy today. He was a regular contributor, and those of us who enjoy grabbing an old Informator and playing over the games, with notes which have the added delight of reflecting the player's understanding of the game at that time, without computer verification, and therefore contain errors which show these legends to have been quite human after all, are treated to many masterpieces which reveal what a creative and energetic player GM Torre was. For those wishing to complement the article with a satisfying lesser known Torre game, I recommend Skembris-Torre from the Lucerne Olympiad 1982, (17...Ba3! 37...Nxe3!) which I discovered in this manner.
His scoring system also seems interesting and worthy of serious consideration. Much better than the alternative suggestion sometimes put forward of eliminating stalemate altogether, which would rob the game of one of its most elegant components.
genem genem 7/17/2018 05:23
Torre said: "[Chess960] will also allow players to be creative in the opening phase.".
I think this claim is incorrect. However, chess960-FRC can spawn great creativity if, but only if, we-
"Discard the 'Random' from Fischer Random Chess!"
.
That means selecting one of the more sensible 959 alternative start setups, and then sticking with that setup for years, until its opening moves are somewhat deeply documented and understood by humanity.
Then add another sensible setup (which has no bishops starting on any corner square).
reddawg07 reddawg07 7/17/2018 01:25
It's amazing that Eugene Torre reached the level he has without the support system that Russia and Europe has for its chess players. For Karpov or Kasparov, their government and their chess environment helped them developed their talents and become what they are. The American Fischer on the other hand who is 'a genius who is good at chess', his words, and ferociously independent could only thrive and succeed in an environment and culture like the US.
gcmortal gcmortal 7/17/2018 01:08
Niaz Murshed earned the GM title a year before Anand.
1