Showing posts with label Cathy Forbes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cathy Forbes. Show all posts

Saturday, April 11, 2009

Blast from the Past: Susan Polgar and Chess

The following is excerpted from Cathy Forbes' The Polgar Sisters - Training or Genius?, published in 1992, ISBN 0-8050-2426-3, by Henry Holt and Company, Inc., New York, NY. It is from Chapter 7 in the paperback edition I own entitled "Grounded!"
Because it was written so close to the time during which these events occurred, by a woman who participated in the international chess circuit as a tournament player and had some acquaintance with the characters involved, I believe it embodies more palpably than anything I could ever write what the atmosphere was at the time, and starkly lays out the incredible obstacles that GM Susan Polgar faced, and overcame, in order to earn her GM title.
I think we should never forget this.
In the July 1984 FIDE rating list, fifteen-year-old Susan Polgar appeared as the world's top rated female player with 2405, ahead of Women's World Champion Maya Chiburdanidze on 2375. Two more tournaments in Bulgaria in 1984 were sufficient to furnish Susan Polgar with the two further norms she needed for the title of International Master: she came third at Varna, and equal first at the Alen-Mak International Open. She was awarded the title at the age of fifteen, at the 55th FIDE congress at the Thessaloniki Olympiad in November 1984. "Susan Polgar makes history!" exclaimed the caption to her photograph in Magyar Sakkelet. In this picture, her Star of David pendant is clearly visible outside her striped sweater; and her hair has been cut short. What was not mentioned was Susan Polgar's non-participation in the 1984 Women's Olympiad, and the reason for it: neither her father nor her mother were permitted by the Hungarian Chess Federation to travel with her. Thus the Hungarian women's team, minus its highest rated player, finished sixth. (Emphasis added). To shed a little light on the divisions Susan Polgar's career progress caused in the Hungarian chess establishment it's worth taking time out to consider a few personalities involved. Until 1989, the President of the Hungarian Chess Federation was Sandor Szerenyi, an orthodox communist of the old school. He also was no feminist: "Mr. Polgar only wants his girls to play with the boys!" complained Szerenyi in comically broken English at the FIDE Congress in Manila in 1983. Whether as a result of the ensuing mirth or from common sense the FIDE delegates fortunately defeated Szerenyi's proposal that FIDE ban or othewise punish the Polgars for refusing to conform. From 1929 until 1931 Szerenyi was, in fact, general Secretary of the Hungarian Communist Party. Thus it will be appreciated that in Hungary, as in other eastern Bloc countries and the Soviet Union, sport and politics were (and, despite recent political upheavals, still are) closely intertwined. Chess in these countries is unquestionably classified as a professional sport, unlike the prevailing attitude of leisured, amiable amateurishness that has traditionally characterised the competitive chess activity of the West. For Hungary's chess masters, male and female, chess was a very serious business. They played league chess as salaried sports officials, employed by clubs as players and coaches. Their livelihoods depended, not just on their chess reputations, but on keeping on the right side of the authorities. Thus it is not surprising that certain players found it advantageous to cultivate personal links with powerful people like Szerenyi, who was a personal friend of the Premier, Janos Kadar. Hungarian GM Gyula Sax wrote a letter to New in Chess in 1990, after the retirement of Szerenyi. In it he alleged close links between GM Portisch, Szerenyi and Kadar. Implicit, also, was the suggestion that Portisch's assumed position as Hungarian No. 1 owed much to these links and the denial of playing opportunities to his rivals. Another player of the 'old guard' reputedly close to Szerenyi was the veteran woman player, Zsusza Veroci. The jealously, fear for livelihood etc., felt by her and other Hungarian woman players in the wake of Susan Polgar's meteoric ascent may safely be deduced. Imagine the wrath, then, when Susan Polgar declined to compete in the 'Super-Hungarian Women's Championship' that had been designed to give Veroci the chance to challenge the supremacy of the upstart Polgar! Professional jealousy apart, there was strong resentment from players accustomed to toeing the line that the rule-breaking Polgars should receive any 'special treatment'. If any other player, it was reasoned, broke the rules, declined the 'correct' tournament invitations etc., that player would expect to be penalized. Why should Susan Polgar be a special case? On the other hand, it is reasonable to assume that the attitude of the Hungarian establishment, as distinct from Hungary's established players, was more ambivalent. An outstanding sportsperson, however 'troublesome,' has public relations and propaganda uses - as indeed the Polgar sisters, in the fullness of time, proved. Such international successes as the Polgars, for instance, might be used by a repressive regime to provide nationalistic headlines in times of domestic crisis. It is against this background that we can understand, not only Susan Polgar's 'punishment', i.e her three-year 'grounding' inside the Eastern Block between 1982 and 1985, but the fact, seeming inexplicable at the time, that she was let out again.

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Typical Research Project

Before I run to the supermarket and then cut the grass (it's overdue for a trim), I thought I'd share a bit about one of my current "research projects." I've just finished reading Cathy Forbes' 1992 book "The Polgar Sisters - Training or Genius?" (I highly recommend it - I believe she was unfairly vilified for writing this book, and I find that many of her insights into the Polgar sisters have proven to be true) and later this afternoon I'll settle down on the deck, a tall ice-filled glass of cheap vino at hand under the shade of a 7 foot umbrella (it's supposed to get up to 80 and I don't want to get sunburnt) and start reading Susan Polgar's latest book "Breaking Through," which will, presumably, cover much of the same territory that Forbes covered in her 1992 book. Of course, though, from an entirely different perspective. After that, "Chess Bitch" by IM Jennifer Shahade is on the list. The object of this burst of reading about female chessplayers is to fill in background information for two articles I'm working on for Goddesschess - one inspired by David Shenk's latest research project into whether geniuses are born or created - well, that's not an exact description of what he's working on, that's my paraphrase of how I understand his research at the present time. Shenk wrote a book last year that I'm also reading (in between all the other reading projects I'm juggling) - "The Immortal Game - A History of Chess" and I think he did an excellent job of capturing the mystique and allure of chess. Oh yes - he also provided a ton of fascinating information about the game I love - and hate. Chess is a black hole that sucks you in - whether as a player or as an historian, which, I guess, is my avocation - chess historian. But not your average historian, because for the most part I could care less about who played who with what opening when; nope, I and my cohorts in chess history apostacy are interested in the really ancient stuff, the stuff that lead to the invention of such games as senet, twenty squares (the Royal Game of Ur), mehen, backgammon, chess, liubo, xiang qi, etc. And I've gotten totally off subject, lol! Once my research is done, one article will be about sexual discrimination in chess; the second article will be an examination of Shenk's intriguing research, but only in connection with chessplayers (i.e., are they "born" or "made?") I hope to have them both written soon; I've got bits and pieces saved on the computer already, but it's always a struggle to pull everything together and try to make a cohesive, understandable whole. I enjoy writing; I consider myself rather good at it (ahem). Still, it's MUCH easier to just continue to do research - one then never has to commit anything into final form for death by a thousand pinpricks and slurs of the critics...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...