Dr. Helmut Pfleger, specialist in internal medicine and psychotherapy, is a German Grand Master, chess commentator and writer on chess subjects. During the Chess World Championship his comments on the games will be relayed live from the Bundeskunsthalle. He writes chess columns, among others in the weekly broadsheets ”Die Zeit“ and ”Welt am Sonntag“. Chess aficionados know him well from the many years of chess programmes on WDR (West German Broadcasting Station). According to Pfleger the WDR broadcasts “have, unfortunately, been put to sleep. A resurrection seems uncertain, but perhaps this world championship will do the trick“.  

What fascinates you personally about chess?

Of the four generally listed aspects of chess – game, sport, art, science – the scientific aspect never aroused any enthusiasm in me, the other three all the more. During my active period “chess as a battle“: to hold one’s own and, if possible, come out on top, was particularly close to my heart – probably in the same way Emanuel Lasker saw the game. I am also intrigued that chess is almost 2,000 years old and probably comes from India, Anand’s homeland – a tremendously varied and lively country.

What do you consider to be your greatest success in chess?

Especially important to me are my 12.5 points out of 15 games (of which I played black ten times), by which I contributed considerably to the surprising bronze medal for the German team – all of us amateur players – at my first Chess Olympics in Tel Aviv in 1964.

What do you think: Why is chess so popular and is experiencing a persistent boom world-wide?

Chess is an ancient, at the same time a very versatile game (e.g. distinctly different pieces that originally corresponded to armies – pawns as the infantry, castles as war elephants, etc.), but the rules are comparatively simple. On the other hand, a standard game of 40 moves allegedly offers more possibilities than there are atoms in the universe, so that even the fastest computers will never be able to come even close to mastering the game.

I suppose that aspects of depth psychology are also involved: similar to fairy tales king and queen represent father and mother, so that we may act out a family saga with sometimes oedipal implications – probably it is not a coincidence that many top players grew up without much paternal support.

But I believe this boom is predominantly evident in Asia – and here mainly in India and China. In the West the upswing is no more than marginal.

In your opinion, which was the most interesting game/duel in chess history?

Not without reason the so-called “Match of the Century” Fischer vs. Spassky in Reykjavik in 1972, at the height of the Cold War, aroused most interest, the world-wide chess boom began only then.

However, Karpov – Kortschnoi (1978), Karpov – Kasparov (1984) and Kasparov - Kramnik (2000) were also outstanding matches.

As an individual game Kasparov – Topalov (Wijk aan Zee 1999), when Kasparov made many (correct!) sacrifices and forced the black king into his own camp – is my top favourite.

The match between Kramnik and Anand is not only one of the most outstanding duels in chess history, but also a contest between the two best players of our time. Who will, in your opinion, win, and why?

Any prediction seems to be impossible because both players have been almost unchallenged leaders of the chess world for many years, and despite their different styles of playing they are equally strong. The contest will most likely be decided by psychological factors, as well as by who will have the greater physical reserves in October.

What effect can this contest have on the chess world in future?

A victory by Anand would certainly contribute greatly towards a further boom in his homeland – possibly he would be given not just a house but a veritable palace as a present. On the other hand a victory by Kramnik would certainly have an effect on Russia, where the chess hegenomy as such does not exist anymore. 

However, most important is the abolition of the split within the chess community – I hope for ever – and that the Fide motto "Gens una sumus" (We are one people) may ring more true again.

I am also convinced that this contest will played in a “decent” manner, despite the high stakes and the inevitable rivalry, possibly even relative animosity during the match, because Anand as well as Kramnik have proven their decency and integrity over many years – qualities that were sadly absent in some past contests.  

This match will certainly result in positive effects for German chess, not least because both players have some roots in our country as well: Anand in Mainz, Kramnik in Dortmund. The venue: the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn, is a fortunate choice, it already provided a perfect ambience for the match Kramnik vs. Fritz in 2006.

As far as chess history is concerned, for whom is, in your opinion, this match of greater importance – Anand or Kramnik?

Anand (39) and Kramnik (33) have been proving for many years that the “seniors” are definitely able to withstand the onslaught of the youngsters; at the same time they appear to confirm Botwinnik’s dictum that 30 plus is an ideal age for a chess player. Naturally, both are absolutely dedicated chess players, but it is well possible – even likely – that the loser will afterwards not enter the arena with the same absoluteness and vigour again.