ARE NIGERIANS NOT SMART ENOUGH TO BE CHESS GRANDMASTERS?

Before I delve into the crux of the matter, it is important that I state here that my deposition is based purely on observation, and educated inferences gotten from my experiences and interaction with Nigerian chessplayers, rather than on a properly conducted study or comprehensive research. However, I have done some research, but not extensive enough to draw ironclad inferences from.

That being said, the points I am about to raise are within the ambits of common sense acceptance and will probably be upheld by the global chess hive mind.

I am not one to make sweeping statements. Furthermore, after the achievements of the Chinese, Vietnamese, Indians, and more recently the Kazakhs and Iranians in the chess world, I definitely do not have the leisure of apportioning stereotypes, labels or any form of branding for that matter. But it must be said that Africans have not achieved much in chess.

At the risk of digressing, let's put this in some perspective. Ladies are generally considered, by many, to be inferior to men at chess for varied reasons. This has precipitated countless debates, some very toxic and heated. Some would say, it's debatable, fallacious or hard to prove. I say it's harder to prove the contrary. And please don't tell me about the Polgars or Hou Yifan. They are the exceptions, not the rule!

Robert Howard stated the following in an article published by chessbase on 19th June, 2014:- "There are two theories to explain male predominance at the apex of intellectual achievement: some attribute it to some innate evolutionary ability differences, others to social factors of present day society." He stated further, "The male predominance in chess parralels that in domains such as Mathematics, Physics and Engineering, which may tap some similar abilities and propensities."

This may or may not sit well with the reader, depending on which way you sway. But there are stats and 'hard evidence' that back these arguments. Don't take my word for it; ask Google. The fact that there is a pronounced male dominance in chess, like in a lot of other grey matter matters isn't eye-popping or alarming by any stretch. But you might want to sit or even lay down somewhere comfy before reading the next sentence. As much as the lady folk have been maligned for their perceived chess ineptitude, they boast of more Chess Grandmasters that the 56 countries of the continent of Africa combined. You can throw in PONTUS Carlsson and MAURICE Ashley if you like (it would be akin to giving Dangote $2billion so he could measure up with Bill Gates; an exercise in futility). The number of female Grandmaster more than doubles that of African Chess Grandmasters by a mile. There are about 40 of them; Africa has 14, Sub-Saharan Africa has just 2 out of that number. What's worse is, out of that 2, just like Maurice Ashley, Amon Simotowe has long retired. Leave matter jare! Let's face Nigeria.
It's troubling to put it mildly.

What are we doing wrong? Or, what are we not doing?

Let's not make assumptions.
Below is a list of 18 questions, which I'd love the reader to make into a questionnaire.  Pass it to  the Nigerian chessplayers you know.
1. How often do you play chess?
2. What time controls do you play with predominantly?
3. Do you consider yourself a chess addict?
4. What exactly about/in chess are you addicted to?
5. Do you consider yourself a professional chessplayers?
6. Would you consider playing chess full time?
7. Do you think one can make a living by being a chess professional in Nigeria?
8. How many chess books have you read in part or fully?
9. Do you consider most chess books to be predominantly reference material, or do you strive to read them from start to finish going through every single analysis?
10. Do you study chess?
11. What's the frequency of your chess study?
12. If daily, how many hours do you put into your chess study per day?
13. Do you have a trainer!
14. Is your study planned, and do you have targets and/or goals.
15. Would you fancy becoming a Chess Grandmaster?
16. Do you believe you could ever become a Grandmaster?
17. If "yes" to (16), do you think the requisite effort and sacrifices would be worth it?
18. In percentage (%), how would you rate your chances of becoming a Grandmaster in Nigeria?

Please note that a professional chessplayer is different from a chess professional. A professional chessplayer is one who is generally reliant on prize funds and appearance fees from tournaments as opposed to a chess professional, which extends to include Trainers, Coaches, Seconds, Officials, Tournament Organisers, etc.

I had to state everything above before stating what I think the problem is.

Firstly, we love to play chess; as a matter of fact, most of us are actually mildly addicted to playing chess. And when we play, it is mostly blitz games (which is another anchor in itself). But we don't like to study. And when we study, our efforts are mostly wasted as we lack the guidance and direction of seasoned trainers. And in the remote possibility that we are studying the right thing and in the right direction, most of us lack the requisite work ethic to make any meaningful progress. Garry Kasparov once stated that he studied chess an average of 16hours daily. Parham Maghsoodloo, one of the Iranian rising stars, already in the top 100 stated that he studies between 12 to 15 hours daily, and would still study at least for 10hours on his "bad days".

The second debilitating factor is DOUBT. It took Anand to become a Grandmaster for Indians to see that it was possible.Now they have 64 Grandmasters!  Most Nigerian chessplayers don't believe it's possible. And those that remotely believe think it's a waste of time.

Then there are the social constraints, erroded institutions, financial wahala and other yamayama every average Nigerian has to grapple with. To worsen matters, the game is not a spectator sports, so chessplayers have to double as chess fans. So the star status is diminished, and along with it, the resultant motivation.

Lastly, we don't have quality trainers. Despite the world becoming a global village, most of us consider the fees charged by online trainers to be either exorbitant or just unaffordable.
However, chess history is littered with self-taught and self-made Grandmasters like Paul Morphy, Bobby Fischer, Yasser Seirawan, and Malik Mir Sultan Khan (1905 –1966) who won the British Championship three times (1929, 1932, 1933), in only four attempts!

Garry Kasparov rightly noted that Hardwork is a talent.

Use your tongue to count your teeth.

Challenges of the Nigerian Chess Coach

The challenges of the Nigerian Chess Coach is multi-faceted. Top of the list would be competence and technical ability. Chess is one sport where you have to be relatively good to qualify to effectively Coach or tutor others. Every good Chess Coach has to be a decent player himself. A cursory look at the FIDE Nigerian rankings list exposes the problem. With our very top players struggling to cross the 2300 Elo barrier, it's clear that Nigerian players, most likely don't have what it takes to be quality coaches. Mediocrity breeds mediocrity. The current crop of top players got little or no professional training, and gleaned the little they have in their arsenal from reading books and playing thousands of games. Most lack the fundamentals. Knowledge of the basics is what separates chess players into their various categories. Second on the list would be the obvious - inadequate funds. You could watch football or basketball, understand and enjoy it without having ever touched a ball. Not so for chess. Chess spectators have to be chess players themselves inorder to understand what's going on during a game, let alone enjoy it. Bottomline? Chess is not a spectator sport and this translates to difficulty in getting sponsors of any sort. With a dearth of funds, the Chess Coach won't be able to procure resources like books, or gadgets necessary for chess development. He won't be able to research trending training techniques or go for courses to acquire the requisite information for upgrading himself, which would translate into upgrading his wards. Third would be the hostile chess environment. Chess tournaments in Nigeria are far and in between. Tournaments are the best platforms for testing the students to find out if they are grasping what's being taught, where shoring up is needed and where weeding should be carried out. And where there are tournaments, prizes are abysmal. Those for children are alot worse; organisers seem to feel they are doing them a favour, so a pittance is all that's left on the plate. Thus, coaches aren't able to properly weigh the effects of their methods properly or regularly. With little or no hope of any financial gain, the Nigerian Chess Coach has to be selfless and willing to sacrifice alot to give his wards the best training possible under the harsh conditions of the Nigerian Chess terrain. He has to glean knowledge whenever and wherever, research training methods, psychology (sports psychology), and do whatever he can to improve the students. Just like the proverbial teacher, he has to await his reward in heaven.

Random Chess Nuggets

1. When _defending_ in the endgame, exchange pawns, but *not* pieces.

2. In endgames, in order to have a choice between moving one or two squares when a critical situation arises, it is often useful to keep pawns on their initial position. ( *The Steinitz Rule* )

3. Always have a plan.

4. You *MUST* attack when you are better, improve your position when equal and be ready to make concessions & defend when you are worse off.

4. Exchange off your bad pieces; keep the good ones.

5. Look for your worsed-placed piece, then strive to improve it's position.

6. Always think hard and thoroughly before making a move; use your time on the clock _(you can't sell it after the game_ )

7. Strive to seize the initiative; be energetic and forceful.

8. In chess, you are only as strong as what you know.

9. Do not interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake😁

10. Superior play almost always leads to Superior positions

THE BOOGIEMAN ON THE CHESS BOARD

It will be entirely impossible to divorce psychology from chess as long as the game lingers. Oftentimes, in tense positions, when playing against an evenly matched opponent, the pressure from one’s opponent is palpable over the board, almost in a curious spiritual way. This is usually more pronounced against a player with whom you share a history (positive or negative); the confidence or fear generated, as the case may be, will definitely sway the game. This also holds true for players whom you have never played but have heard a lot about or observed. It is difficult, probably impossible, to get this completely off one’s mind. All tournament chess players will agree with me that when pairings are put up for the next round during a tournament, there is uncontrollable excitement, which will only be heightened when you see your opponent’s name and/or rating.   

Psychology is the most important factor in chess.

---Alexander Alekhine

The 13^th World Chess Champion, who most believed to be the best ever player of the game before the annoying interference of Magnus Carlsen (there was Fischer on the side too, but I doubt that’ll hold much water), Garry Kasparov, once said, “You cannot overestimate the importance of psychology in chess, and as much as some players try to downplay it, I believe that winning requires a constant and strong psychology not just at the board, but in every aspect of your life”. Judit Polgar, the undisputed best female ever to play the game, for now at least (till Hou Yifan proves this fact wrong), said, “Chess is 30% 0r 40% psychology. You don’t have this when you play a computer. I can’t confuse it.”

Your reputation is bound to win or lose some games for you. You are also bound to underrate or overate opponents, at least occasionally. As if the above stated fact isn’t enough to worry about, there is the added distraction of having to contend with scary positions and overestimated ones. I even have a position where I was overconfident and scared at the same time. Yeah, some of you will doubt that that is a possibility, so I will give the game here so you can judge.

[Event "Lagos Classics"][Site "Lagos"][Date "2014.10.21"]

[Round "1"]

[White "Degondo Simplice Armel"]

[Black "Eluekezi Phoenix Chukwuikeh"]

[Result "1/2-1/2"]

[ECO "C18"]

[WhiteElo "2191"]

[EventDate "2014.10.21"][SourceDate "2014.10.21"]

[PlyCount "82"]

[EventType "swiss"]

[EventRounds "7"]

[EventCountry "NGR"]

(I was Black in the game and played my usual French Defence) 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 Ne7 7. Qg4 O-O 8. Bd3 c4 9. Bg5 (9.Bg5, effectively sacrificing his d3 Bishop, is probably dubious. I was genuinely spooked because I saw the intended threat: he was going for a mating attack. However, I had played this position numerous times and even gone through some literature without ever seeing this move. So I applied my ‘guilty until proven innocent’ slogan and captured it. Though I did so only after spending close to 25minutes analysing the possibilities and convincing myself I had enough resources to hold the position.) The game continued 9…cxd3 10. Bf6 g6 11. Qg5 (I spent about 20minutes at this point too [the time control was 90mins for the first 40moves + 30mins for the rest of the game +30secs after each move from move 1] I had used up almost 60minutes of my 90 and was still at move 12!)

 

 Black to play

 

11…Qc7 12. g4 (to prepare Qh6 by eliminating the option of…Nf5) Qxc3+ 13. Kf1 Qxa1+ 14. Kg2 Qxd4 (at this point, I was confident I would coast to victory. I was a full Rook and Bishop to the good. I would appeal to the reader to subject this game to computer engine analysis and see how inconsistently it evaluates this game. The mix of material imbalance coupled with White’s mate threat makes it very challenging to evaluate, so you can only imagine what I was going through)

 White to play

15. h3??(the idea behind 15.h3 makes perfect sense, but Nf3!! would do so and more. 15.h3 is aimed at preventing Qxg4+ which would free up the f5 square for my knight. At this point, I was only a couple of minutes to the time control with 25moves to go!) …Nd7 16. Nf3 Qc3 (with the intention of 17…Nxf6 18.exf6 Qxf6 in the event of my opponent playing 17.Qh6) 17. cxd3? (My nerves were wracked, but with the benefit of hindsight my opponent wasn’t faring any better. 17.cxd3 completely let me off the hook, but I couldn’t seize the moment to play 17…Nxf6 18.exf6 followed by 18…Nc6 or 18…h6!) 17…Nc6 18. Rc1

 

Black to play

 

Qxc1 (Sacrificing my queen for some respite. I just couldn’t take anymore. I was still winning, but the will wasn’t there as much as it was just a few moves earlier. The siege laid on my king was unbearable) 19. Qxc1 Ncxe5 20. Bxe5 Nxe5 21. Nxe5 f6 22. Nf3 Bd7 23. Qc7 Bc6. 24. d4 g5 25. h4 h6 26. hxg5 hxg5 27. Nh2 Rf7 28. Qd6 Re8 29. Nf1 Rd7 30. Qc5 e5 31. Ng3 exd4 32. Qxd4 Kf7 33. Nh5 Rd6 34.f3 a6 35. Ng3 Rde6 36. Nf5 Rh8 37. Qb6 Rc8 38. Kg3 Kg8 39. Qc5 Rd8 40. Qb6 Rd7 41. Qa7 Rd8 (the game eventually fizzled out into a tame draw) 1/2-1/2

Aron Nimzowitsch aptly said, “The threat is greater than it’s execution.” Despite doing my best to live by and teach the principle of ‘play the position, not the man’, I have to admit that understanding and applying chess psychology will win you many games. There are many instances where one side keeps attacking and the other defending, going on and on, till the attacker makes a heinous blunder that loses the game due to the defender’s stubborn defence. A lot of players also make horrible concessions that lose offhand because of a perceived threat. 

Subject every move to objective analysis. Try not to get spooked by the opponent’s reputation or that of the position. Be objective!