Kasparov as Carlsens second?

I heard in a recent interview (conducted just after the recent World championship) that Kasparov had been in contact with Peter H Nielsen to give advice about openings. I wonder what people think of this?

Personally, i don't feel comfortable with an ex-champion seconding a current player. Has this happened before? How would Kasparov have faired against Karpov, if, for example, he had Fischer as his second? (As unlikely as that would be...)

We all know that Carlsen had some training under Kasparov as a junior (if he ever was considered 'just' a junior!) but should Kasparov be able to get involved in this way? I don't think Kasparov and Anand have great love for each other. Kasparov has been rather outspoken with regards to Anand as World champion, it really feels that Kasparov is, in a way, playing favourites.

No rule has been broken here, but i feel a certain professional etiquette hasn't really been respected somehow. What are peoples thoughts?

Originally posted by Marinkatomb
I heard in a recent interview (conducted just after the recent World championship) that Kasparov had been in contact with Peter H Nielsen to give advice about openings. I wonder what people think of this?

Personally, i don't feel comfortable with an ex-champion seconding a current player. Has this happened before? How would Kasparov have faired agains ...[text shortened]... certain professional etiquette hasn't really been respected somehow. What are peoples thoughts?

What exactly is your problem? Kasparov was a world champion and one should expect his coaching to have effect. But if he would still be world champion material he wouldn't coach another player would he?

Originally posted by Ponderable
What exactly is your problem? Kasparov was a world champion and one should expect his coaching to have effect. But if he would still be world champion material he wouldn't coach another player would he?

It just doesn't feel right to me somehow, that's all. Was Kasparov helping Carlsen, or taking a shot at Anand?

I understand your concern....but at the WC level I guess all is fair. The seconds Anand had were all no-name, generic GMs.

An alleged quote from Korchnoi when he was asked to be Petrosian's second in his 1971 Candidates' match against Fischer (Petrosian had just beaten Korchnoi in the previous round by winning one game and drawing the other nine!):

Now how the hell can I be Petrosian's second if it makes me sick to watch how he plays?

Sometimes I wonder whether Korchnoi could have derailed Fischer in the Candidates' if he'd managed to get past Petrosian. Probably just as well that we didn't find out as the chess world would have been a great deal poorer if Fischer hadn't become World Champion in 1972, due to the huge surge of interest in chess that it generated.

Originally posted by Data Fly
An alleged quote from Korchnoi when he was asked to be Petrosian's second in his 1971 Candidates' match against Fischer (Petrosian had just beaten Korchnoi in the previous round by winning one game and drawing the other nine!):

Now how the hell can I be Petrosian's second if it makes me sick to watch how he plays?

Sometimes I wonder whether K ...[text shortened]... n't become World Champion in 1972, due to the huge surge of interest in chess that it generated.

I honestly don't think anyone could touch Fischer that year. You could have given Spassky every player on the planet as a second, but he would still have gotten thumped. Same goes for Korchnoi or anyone else..

Well, before it happened: Tal was Karpov's second in 2 matches against Kortchnoi: 1978 and 1981. And he even co-authored the books about those matches.

Kortchnoi - who used to defeat Tal as his most difficult opponent - resented that very much:: "...it doesn't become an ex-champion to be a 'page' for other champion..."

Originally posted by Data Fly
An alleged quote from Korchnoi when he was asked to be Petrosian's second in his 1971 Candidates' match against Fischer (Petrosian had just beaten Korchnoi in the previous round by winning one game and drawing the other nine!):

Now how the hell can I be Petrosian's second if it makes me sick to watch how he plays?

Sometimes I wonder whether K ...[text shortened]... n't become World Champion in 1972, due to the huge surge of interest in chess that it generated.

Kortchnoi has stated in an interview - when asked to predict possible score in his possible match against Fischer - that he would lose and I don't remeber which result he mentioned, there are two versions, one from seventies and from 1980.
Karpov - Kortchnoi's enemy at the time - commented on this: "Why then to play if you think you are going to lose?"
There is an apocryphal answer by Kortchnoi - regarded a macth in 1980 after Fischer's rules /10 wins etc./:: "But I would make at least 25 draws, and who ever made so many draws against Fischer?!"

Originally posted by vandervelde
"...it doesn't become an ex-champion to be a 'page' for other champion..."

Yes i tend to agree. I have to say that Tal was an interesting choice given his abysmal score against Korchnoi..

This is ridiculous. In every other sport ex-champions go on to be coaches. Gymnastics, tennis, skiing, auto racing, baseball, hockey... I cannot think of a sport I've watched where ex-champions were NOT coaches. Why wouldn't the same hold true in chess?

"...it doesn't become an ex-champion to be a 'page' for other champion..."?

Please.

There are B-I-G egos involved....

Don't forget that Korchnoi was "persona non grata" during those years.

Hi Marinkatomb,

Apparently Anand did not support Kasparov's push to be president of FIDE.
I say apparently because I never bother with chess politics and I am repeating
something I read on another thread.

No problem with what help any player recieves and who he recieves it from.

On the flip side an idea from another source may throw a player off balance
as he gets more and more conflitcing ideas for different players.

In Game one of the Fischer - Petrosian match, Petrosian came to the board
armed with a TN. The story from where it came from could fill a decent book.

So far it runs:

It was sent to the Central Club in an envelope marked
"To the winner of the Petrosian-Korchnoi match."

Taimanov discovered it when he was 4-0 down and told
not to use it as the match was lost and it would be wasted.

The TN was offered to Petrosian during his preparations, a month before
the start of the match, by the Moldavian Candidate Master Chebonenko.

The Riga magazine Shakhmaty stated 11...d5 as a move deserving
consideration by the Latvian Master Vitolinsh.

11...d5 was thought up by Suetin and Averbakh.

This one continues with, Petrosian's wife was so mad at Averbakh for
mesing up her husband with his stupid line that she hit him with her handbag.
(Why she never clobbered Suetin is never mentioned.)

You could pad out the rest of the book with:

'It came to Petrosian in a dream' (a Bronstein trick.)

'Petrosian got the idea at the breakfast table.' (Bronstein again.)

'Petrosian got the idea Over The Board, (Just about every GM who ever
played a home-cooked TN has used this one.)

'It was a mistake, a finger slip, a blunder. It was not until Petrosian noticed
how long Fischer was taking to make his reply he noticed how good it was.'

Anyway, no matter where the move came from,
Petrosian built up a winning position and blew it.

Fischer vs Petrosian, Candidate 1971 (Game One)

Regarding that 1st game of Fischer - Petrossian match, I would just add another juicy detail. (By the way I read all about this in one of my first chess books ever, written by Dimitrije Bjelica "Fischer against Petrossian and Spassky". That part gp qouted was written by Suetin, Petrossian´s second at the time.

Well, "why did Petrossian ruined his theoretical surprise", asks Suetin rhetorically... "first, he is always shy at the beginning of the match/tournament..." and
and .... "the power went out... but Fischer, who was always so fussy about the light, agreed that referee starts his clock again and he was thinking over the table almost in complete darkness..."

I agree with Korthcnoi by-the-way, veterans /top sportsmen/ always was trainers and coaches, all right, but how many champions did you see to cool another sportsman with a towel?

Champion isn't just a veteran. Once a champion always a champion it's like being a general.

It's a matter of taste and opinion, of course.

I agree with Korthcnoi by-the-way, veterans /top sportsmen/ always was trainers and coaches, all right, but how many champions did you see to cool another sportsman with a towel?

Bart Conner, Nadia Comaneci, John McEnroe, Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, Barry Bonds, Mario Lemieux, Bart Starr, Phil and Steve Maher, just off the top of my head. I'm certain there are many more.