I also follow chess on the Internet, where Kasparov's site is very interesting.

Nowadays there is more dynamism in chess, modern players like to take the initiative. Usually they are poor defenders though.

I also follow chess on the Internet, where Kasparov's site is very interesting.

For example, computer defends well, but for humans its is harder to defend than attack, particularly with the modern time control.

Nowadays the dynamic element is more important in chess - players more often sacrifice material to obtain dynamic compensation.

I try to help developing junior chess. When I lived in USSR, I got a lot of free help from very good coaches - now I am trying to repay that debt.

When I am in form, my style is a little bit stubborn, almost brutal. Sometimes I feel a great spirit of fight which drives me on.

In my country, at that time, being a champion of chess was like being a King. At that time I was a King - and when you are King you feel a lot of responsibility, but there is nobody there to help you.

The Soviet Union was an exception, but even there chess players were not rich. Only Fischer changed that.

When I played Bobby Fischer, my opponent fought against organizations - the television producers and the match organizers. But he never fought against me personally. I lost to Bobby before the match because he was already stronger than I. He won normally.

We can compare classical chess and rapid chess with theatre and cinema - some actors don't like the latter and prefer to work in the theatre.

Nowadays young people have great choice of occupations, hobbies, etc, so chess is experiencing difficulties because of the high competition. Now it's hard to make living in chess, so our profession does attract young people.

Bobby Fischer has an enormous knowledge of chess and his familiarity with the chess literature of the USSR is immense.

Time control directly influences the quality of play.

I don't play in tournaments, but I follow some.

I think that the World Champion should try to defend the quality of play more than anyone else.

When you play Bobby, it is not a question if you win or lose. It is a question if you survive.

Nowadays it would be reasonable to have an annual world championship.

Recently I saw Kasparov and he looked to me as still young and potent champion.

I don't want ever to be champion again.

The place of chess in the society is closely related to the attitude of young people towards our game.

We were like bishops of opposite color.

On the other hand, chess is a mass sport now and for chess organisers shorter time control is obviously more attractive. But I think that this control does not suit World Championship matches.

Theses officers were good friends, so it must have been a terrible argument, because the one who played chess with my father was so angry that he walked over to the dentist's house and got the dentist out of bed and shot him.

Nowadays there is more dynamism in chess, modern players like to take the initiative. Usually they are poor defenders though.

Life's too short for chess.

I believe every chess player senses beauty, when he succeeds in creating situations, which contradict the expectations and the rules, and he succeeds in mastering this situation.

Chess is intellectual gymnastics.

I play chess badly and I've been beaten by my 10-year old son.

I'm like Bush, I see the world more like checkers than chess.

Far be it from me to force anyone into either chess or dressage, but if you choose to do so yourself, in my opinion there is only one way: follow the rules.

I also follow chess on the Internet, where Kasparov's site is very interesting.

Whoever sees no other aim in the game than that of giving checkmate to one's opponent will never become a good Chess player.

No, no, it is obvious that the ECU should act as a close alliance for the benefit of chess.

A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.

Nowadays the dynamic element is more important in chess - players more often sacrifice material to obtain dynamic compensation.

She felt like a chess player who, by the clever handling of his pieces, sees the game taking the course intended. Her eyes were bright and tender with a smile as they glanced up into his; and her lips looked hungry for the kiss which they invited.

I try to help developing junior chess. When I lived in USSR, I got a lot of free help from very good coaches - now I am trying to repay that debt.

The human element, the human flaw and the human nobility - those are the reasons that chess matches are won or lost.

My dad sacrificed many things in life for me. He abandoned a very promising and lucrative career of an army officer just so that he could continue helping me with my chess and accompanying me to tournaments.

There was one point in high school actually when I was on the chess team, marching band, model United Nations and debate club all at the same time. And I would spend time with the computer club after school. And I had just quit pottery club, which I was in junior high, but I let that go.

Chess is a sport. The main object in the game of chess remains the achievement of victory.

When I speak of the beauty of a game of chess, then naturally this is subjective. Beauty can be found in a very technical, mathematical game for example. That is the beauty of clarity.

In my country, at that time, being a champion of chess was like being a King. At that time I was a King - and when you are King you feel a lot of responsibility, but there is nobody there to help you.

The Soviet Union was an exception, but even there chess players were not rich. Only Fischer changed that.

Chess is life.

I think that by and large chess players have been very kind. Like I said there have been a few incidents, but they certainly didn't serve to bring me down any.

Every time I win a tournament I have to think that there is something wrong with modern chess.

I still love to play chess. So I do not even spend a minute on the possibility to step back.